Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 28, 2012, 08:48 AM   #1
idutch
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
How fast is the "slow half" from a fusion drive?

Because the SSD option on a 27' mac is a ridiculous $1300 i'm considering a Fusion drive.
I know a Fusion drive puts the stuff you use the most on the 128gb SSD part, But what if you need data from the other half? how fast is the other half?
Is is at fast as a normal 7200-rpm hard drive? or maybe even slower?

In that case i rather have a consistent speed.

I'm also afraid if you use a lot of different files and the Fusion drive is always busy swapping data from the SSD part to the normal part the benefits of the Fusion drive quicky become disadvantages.

Last edited by idutch; Nov 28, 2012 at 03:13 PM.
idutch is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2012, 09:41 AM   #2
JustMartin
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Difficult to say without knowing their caching algorithm. My guess is that accessing a file from the hard disk instead of the SSD would be regular hard disk speed. I suspect a file would have to be accessed a number of times before it was moved onto the SSD and that process would be at an idle moment in the background.

Not sure why consistent access is more important to you than some fast, some not so fast.
JustMartin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2012, 03:20 PM   #3
idutch
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustMartin View Post
Not sure why consistent access is more important to you than some fast, some not so fast.
I mainly gonna use my mac for producing music, and i got a lot more then 128 gb of samples,presets ect. and always use dirfrent ones and i'm constantly searching thru and prelistening te files.
idutch is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2012, 03:32 PM   #4
xgman
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
The 27" version uses 7200 drives.
__________________
{2012 27imac-3.4i7-680mx-32gb ram-768SSD+External TB Samsung840pro ssd + TB velociraptors-UAD Apollo/Marantz/Amphion/Bowers&Wilkins Sound-Impulse 61}
{ipads}{iphones}
xgman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2012, 03:44 PM   #5
rhoydotp
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by idutch View Post
I mainly gonna use my mac for producing music, and i got a lot more then 128 gb of samples,presets ect. and always use dirfrent ones and i'm constantly searching thru and prelistening te files.
what kind of machine did you have before when you were doing this?
__________________
my pc died and i hardly noticed, go figure
rhoydotp is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2012, 03:52 PM   #6
Mac32
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Yep, Apple should have given us a 256gb or 512gb SSD option.
If you use many big samples, get plenty of ram, that should help.
Mac32 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2012, 03:53 PM   #7
idutch
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhoydotp View Post
what kind of machine did you have before when you were doing this?
I now have a late 2007 imac (duall 2.4 ghz , 4gb) that is realy showing its age.
idutch is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


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

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

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