Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 9, 2012, 03:53 PM   #26
skottichan
macrumors 6502a
 
skottichan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Send a message via AIM to skottichan Send a message via MSN to skottichan
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattZani View Post
So are you suggesting the 27" iMac isn't targeted at designers and photographers?
The audience that can afford the upgrade.

Also, to correct Mr-Stabby; the 27" defaults with a 7200RPM hard drive. It took about 30 seconds to find that.
skottichan is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 03:53 PM   #27
JAT
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mpls, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-Stabby View Post
While the Fusion Drive is certainly a fast option, i think everybody is forgetting that the iMac and the Mac Mini do not come with this option by default. It is a £200 upgrade. And what's more, the drive that it DOES come with (even the high spec iMacs come with this drive by default) is a pathetically slow (as we can see in the video on this article) 5400rpm drive. Apple should have put a 128gb SSD in the iMacs at least by default, but instead they've actually put in a drive that's a lot slower than the model it replaced. I'm not paying £200 extra on top of the already overpriced iMac to get a drive that performs the way a 2012 iMac should do. Sorry rant over.
So.....you don't like choice? Where am I, is this still MacRumors?
__________________
-- Spiky
JAT is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 03:54 PM   #28
nsfw
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
I don't understand why this is so hard?

lrwxr-xr-x 1 503 20 34 Jul 3 15:44 Pictures -> /Volumes/Mini/Users/m/Pictures/
lrwxr-xr-x 1 503 20 31 Jul 3 15:45 Music -> /Volumes/Mini/Users/m/Music/
lrwxr-xr-x 1 503 20 35 Jul 3 15:46 Downloads -> /Volumes/Mini/Users/m/Downloads/
lrwxr-xr-x 1 503 20 32 Jul 3 15:47 Movies -> /Volumes/Mini/Users/m/Movies/
lrwxr-xr-x 1 503 20 33 Jul 3 15:50 Dropbox -> /Volumes/Mini/Users/m/Dropbox/
lrwxr-xr-x 1 503 20 35 Jul 30 14:33 Documents -> /Volumes/Mini/Users/m/Documents/

Everything else fits fine on a 128GB SSD. The Mini Volume is a 500GB 7200 rpm drive. Music/Photos, etc don't need SSD speeds.
nsfw is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 03:55 PM   #29
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
 
Eidorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cuidad de México
Send a message via AIM to Eidorian
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikhsub1 View Post
Tip: if your password to the tm hard drive is the same as the password to your computer bad things happen if running Mountain Lion.
I am on Snow Leopard here but thanks. I have already tried a disk Repair with no luck. There is plenty of space too.
__________________
Core i5 750 / 16 GB RAM / 500 GB SSD / GTX 970 / Windows 8.1
13" Retina MacBook Pro
Eidorian is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:00 PM   #30
Small White Car
macrumors G4
 
Small White Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Washington DC
Just had a thought, but I'd love to see apps become "Fusion aware" in the future. (Just like how now some apps take more advantage of multiple cores than they otherwise might.)

For example, I'd love to hear that something like Aperture could be made to keep this month's imported photos on the SSD no matter what and then move all others to the HD. Whereas the OS might think "oh, he only edited half of these photos, I'll move the rest to the HD" it would be great if an App could override that and say "nope, he told me keep ALL of this month's photos ready on the SSD for when he needs to work!"
Small White Car is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:07 PM   #31
bushido
macrumors 603
 
bushido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: España y Germany
upgraded my 2009 mbp with an SSD & 8 GB of ram a while ago, it feels like a completely new machine
__________________
¡No hables a menos que puedas mejorar el silencio!
Don't judge me by my user name - I was young and stupid xD
bushido is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:08 PM   #32
Marx55
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Bring the Fusion Drive with SSD & 7200 RPM HD.
Marx55 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:13 PM   #33
Rocketman
macrumors 603
 
Rocketman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Claremont, CA
For a decade now on Mac Rumors (with only occasional banning) I have been saying RAMDISC, RAMDISC, RAMDISC. Fusion drive brings as close of a functionality Apple is likely to mass-produce. A Flash + HDD (both commodities) solution.

Good enough, but it's not a RAMDRIVE!!

Rocketman
__________________
Think Different-ly!
All 357 R or D House jobs bills over 4 years died in the D Senate, ordered by the D President. Buy a model rocket here: http://v-serv.com/usr/instaship-visual.htm Thanks.
Rocketman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:13 PM   #34
wlossw
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
For everyone that is complaining about the fusion and 7200rpm HD... I think you guys are missing the point. You won't notice a major difference in this setup. All your writes are going to the ssd buffer first and the files you read regularly like apps, the os and dat files will be on the SSD anyway. Putting a 7200rpm drive would offer little real world performance increase for the average user. If you want faster speeds just buy a bigger SSD and forget about fusion. You can always add a thunderbolt external drive if you need the extra storage anyway.
__________________
rMBP Mid-2012 2.7/16/512, Thunderbolt Display, Iphone 6 128GB, IPAD 4th gen 64GB WiFi, IPAD mini Retina 128GB LTE 6x Apple-Tv 3rd Gen
wlossw is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:14 PM   #35
leo.andres.21
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Centre of the Attention
Send a message via MSN to leo.andres.21 Send a message via Yahoo to leo.andres.21 Send a message via Skype™ to leo.andres.21
Is this possible if I put a new SSD in the OD bay? in a 2011 macbook pro?
__________________
MBP 15" Core i7 2820QM, 8GB 1600MHz RAM, 1GB AMD 6750HD, 250GB Samsung 840 EVO + 750GB HDD Fusion Drive
iPhone 5S, 16GB, Space Grey
leo.andres.21 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:14 PM   #36
kajakfahrer
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Amazing Speed, gorgeous mac. I will order three at one.
kajakfahrer is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:20 PM   #37
Krazy Bill
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Breaking news: SSD's boot faster than conventional drives!
Krazy Bill is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:22 PM   #38
ChrisCW11
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Not worth it

As usually this option is considerably more expensive then necessary, at nearly 1/2 - 1/3 the cost of a Mac Mini, and given what a Mac Mini is usually intended for, the upgrade cost is ridiculous.

Fusion drives may make more sense in the new iMac's and Mac Pro's, but as an upgrade for Mac Mini's they are just not worth it.
ChrisCW11 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:28 PM   #39
rtrueman
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Why no bigger SSD or combo SSD + HDD (non-fusion)

It doesn't seem like this would be a difficult task. Simply charge more for a larger SSD and use it in a Fusion configuration. Does this make sense or is a 128GB ssd big enough? I mean it wasn't that long ago that we only had HDs. It's not like they're super slow.

I do love my SSD + HD in my MBP, although I'm one that doesn't mind the manual moving of files and creating symlinks. All good stuff. It's strange that Apple doesn't offer this configuration. Why not offer Fusions AND an option to have both SSD and HD without Fusion. Doesn't that make sense? Maybe it's a SKU issue. Hopefully, there will be a solution.

Rob
rtrueman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:29 PM   #40
aplnub
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Anyone know how to make one of these yet? Do I just put in an SSD drive with a MacSales second bay option and Raid it?

Is anyone selling these type of drives yet?
aplnub is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:30 PM   #41
ghostface147
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amazing Iceman View Post
SSDs are cheap now, running for about $100 for a 128GB or about $200 for a 250 GB.(
I'm still waiting for an affordable one that's at least 750 gigs.
ghostface147 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:37 PM   #42
iChrist
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 3 countries for tax benefit
and their you have it

.

I think we can now see that the new Fusion Mini is the new Pro machine that Tim was talking about. Well, I mean, it beats the Pro machine they are trying to sell now.


__________________
"We should think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone--an image made by man's design and skill."
iChrist is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:40 PM   #43
Asclepio
macrumors 6502a
 
Asclepio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
wow 5400 vs ssd what a great review!
Asclepio is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:43 PM   #44
scottsjack
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arizona
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post
I'm still waiting for an affordable one that's at least 750 gigs.
Exactly. The 750GB WD Black HDD on my mini typically runs at about 450GB if I don't overload it with pictures and Aperture libraries. A 750GB SSD would be just about right for that file size. The 480GB or 512GB are not big enough.
scottsjack is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:44 PM   #45
SeniorGato1
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottganderson View Post
Any insight into why the Fusion Drive is not available as a BTO option in the low-end 2.5 GHz i5 Mac mini?
Apple Greed. Fusion drive is a software trick.
__________________
-Current Phone: Verizon iPhone 5S 32
-Previous phones: iPhone 2G, 3G, 3GS, 4, 4S, HTC Thunderbolt, Samsung Galaxy Nexus, iPhone 5, S3, S4
-iPad 3 64GB Verizon & iPod Touch 5th Gen
SeniorGato1 is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:44 PM   #46
Tymmz
macrumors 65816
 
Tymmz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
i remember a rumour from a few years back when some guy predicted apple will use 2 HDDs in the future.

I'm pretty sure this technology was in the works for quite some time.

Faith restored!
Tymmz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:47 PM   #47
dashiel
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Small White Car View Post
Just had a thought, but I'd love to see apps become "Fusion aware" in the future. (Just like how now some apps take more advantage of multiple cores than they otherwise might.)

For example, I'd love to hear that something like Aperture could be made to keep this month's imported photos on the SSD no matter what and then move all others to the HD. Whereas the OS might think "oh, he only edited half of these photos, I'll move the rest to the HD" it would be great if an App could override that and say "nope, he told me keep ALL of this month's photos ready on the SSD for when he needs to work!"
According to Lee over at Ars Fusion is a block based tiering set-up, meaning what you are asking for is likely happening. Remember this isn’t a caching scheme, this is two hard drives acting as a single volume. OS X already moves files around on your disk based on how frequently they’re accessed. This takes that concept to the next level.
dashiel is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:57 PM   #48
cycomiko
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashiel View Post
Typically the high-end iMac comes with a 7200RPM drive. I don’t know if the 2012 model will, though with Fusion it seems moot. As far as the cost it seems perfectly reasonable for an enterprise grade tiering solution. Certainly 200 quid is less costly than my time in creating a Fusion Drive.
The cynical side of me would say apple includes godawful 5400rpm drives in its base set of products to drive people up the value chain into higher margin upgrades or products. Like the option for this combo drive in only the core i7 mini.
cycomiko is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 04:59 PM   #49
mslide
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Yes, SSDs are fast. We've known this for years. You don't need a "Fusion Drive" to have fast boot times and application loading.

It's still pathetic that most Apple computers ship with a spinning HD as standard. SSDs should be standard in everything now.
mslide is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2012, 05:05 PM   #50
milbournosphere
macrumors 6502a
 
milbournosphere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Here's some another perspective. Barefeats did some performance testing with the "Mac Pro" fusion drive method that was reported on by MacRumors a while ago. He found that it matched Apple's factory FusionDrive speeds for reads, and soundly beat it for writes:





Quote:
MP Fusion = "home grown" Fusion volume on the 2010 Mac Pro 6-core created using an OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 120GB SSD mounted the Apricorn Velocity x2 PCIe card and a Hitachi 7K3000 2TB HDD connected to the HighPoint RocketCache x8 PCIe card
OWC SSD = OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 240GB SSD (upgrade to 2012 mini sold by OWC)
factory SSD = 2012 Mac mini with the Apple 256GB SSD CTO option
factory Fusion = 2012 Mac mini with the Apple Fusion 1TB drive CTO option
7K HDD = Hitachi 7K3000 7200rpm 2TB HDD connected to a 6Gb/s host adapter (to represent a typical fast 7K Hard Disk Drive)
factory HDD = Apple's factory 'stock' 5400 rpm 1TB HDD for the 2012 Mac mini Core i7
http://www.barefeats.com/hard158.html
__________________
Russian roulette linux style : dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/kmem bs=1 count=1 seek=$RANDOM
milbournosphere is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Possible performance problem with fusion drive Foxandxss Mac mini 1 Oct 7, 2013 11:30 PM
Your 2012 iMac non fusion hard drive, Seagate(faster) vs WD...which do you have? flavr iMac 21 Sep 30, 2013 04:57 PM
Fusion Drive Performance mathman iMac 4 Aug 12, 2013 08:44 AM
Which combination is faster? Latest iMac 27” with fusion drive 3TB OR with SSD and ex yaarus iMac 7 Mar 9, 2013 12:19 AM
Fusion Drive performance: 1 TB vs 3 TB dukee101 iMac 13 Dec 25, 2012 07:24 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:58 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC