Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Buying Tips and Advice

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 25, 2013, 04:09 AM   #1
jeutie
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Belgium
Send a message via MSN to jeutie
External flash storage with TB and USB 3.0

Greetings all.

I am looking for an external storage solution for my macs. (and pc's) I need 256GB but preferably 512GB of flash storage that is accessible via Thunderbolt and USB 3.0. I prefer a bus-powered solution so it is mobile as well. Since I want the SSD for speed I am looking for the fastest solution available. I would not want to spend far above 350.

Taking all of this in consideration, I found that the LaCie Rugged 256GB SSD Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 Drive fits my needs, but speed-wise it seems a tad slow for an SSD. (380MB/s whilst a good SSD goes up to 500?) Is there any other product I should look into? Am I better off purchasing an enclosure and a SSD apart? I could really use some advice. To add to that, I'd love to see the perfect solution if I WAS NOT on a budget as well.

Your input is appreciated. Thanks already for your replies.

With kind regards,
Jeutie
jeutie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 04:35 AM   #2
AlabamaSlammer
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Alabama
why not get this? http://www.amazon.com/Passport-Porta...nal+hard+drive

2tb hard drive for much less than what you are wanting to pay
__________________
2012 13" RMBP, 8gb ram, 128gb ssd
Verizon iPhone 6 64gb
16gb iPad Mini (stays in car now) & 64gb iPad mini 3
AlabamaSlammer is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 04:40 AM   #3
The-Pro
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Germany
If you have a computer that does not have an ssd or a sata 2 one, then the 380mb/s of the lacie rugged is unimportant. when copyig files to the external
ssd the read speed of your internal drive is the bottleneck, when copying files to the internal drive then the internal drives write performance is the bottleneck.
Only if you have an internal ssd that is quicker then 380mb/s would it be worth it to get a quicker external ssd then the lacie rugged.
You could have a look at thundebolt and usb 3.0 enclosures and fit a samsung 840 pro inside. then it would be quicker.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AlabamaSlammer View Post
why not get this? http://www.amazon.com/Passport-Porta...nal+hard+drive

2tb hard drive for much less than what you are wanting to pay
hes talking about getting something with more then 380mb/s and you giving him a link to a traditional spinning hard drive? you will get 120mb/s if your lucky from that one. Also, its not thunderbolt which was another requirement.
__________________
2012 15" 2.6 i7 AG MBP, 2009 17" AG MBP, 2009 8C 2.26 MP, 2010 4c MP,2010+07 MM, 17" 2007 MBP,20" iMac G5,17" PB G4,4x30"CD,2x23" CD, G3's,G4's, 17"iMac g4,iMac G3 turquoise,macintoshes dating to 1985

Last edited by The-Pro; Jan 25, 2013 at 04:49 AM.
The-Pro is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 06:21 AM   #4
jeutie
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Belgium
Send a message via MSN to jeutie
Quote:
Originally Posted by The-Pro View Post
If you have a computer that does not have an ssd or a sata 2 one, then the 380mb/s of the lacie rugged is unimportant. when copyig files to the external
ssd the read speed of your internal drive is the bottleneck, when copying files to the internal drive then the internal drives write performance is the bottleneck.
Only if you have an internal ssd that is quicker then 380mb/s would it be worth it to get a quicker external ssd then the lacie rugged.
You could have a look at thundebolt and usb 3.0 enclosures and fit a samsung 840 pro inside. then it would be quicker.
My computers all have 128 or 256GB SSD's in them which average at 450 to 480mb/s, but I'd like an external solution to go between them. I'm aware that the USB 3.0 performance will be the bottleneck but I'd mostly be using Thunderbolt. I know the Samsung 840 Pro is one of if not the best SSD currently available on the market, but I don't know if it, together with such an enclosure (Which I cannot seem to find?) would fit in my budget. Thank you very much for your input though!
jeutie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 06:30 AM   #5
PastFuture
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by The-Pro View Post
If you have a computer that does not have an ssd or a sata 2 one, then the 380mb/s of the lacie rugged is unimportant. when copyig files to the external
ssd the read speed of your internal drive is the bottleneck, when copying files to the internal drive then the internal drives write performance is the bottleneck.
Only if you have an internal ssd that is quicker then 380mb/s would it be worth it to get a quicker external ssd then the lacie rugged.
You could have a look at thundebolt and usb 3.0 enclosures and fit a samsung 840 pro inside. then it would be quicker.
If you are working on files on files straight from the external SSD (i.e. Aperture library on external SSD) via Thunderbolt, the bottlenecks you are talking about wouldn't apply though. Or am I missing something here?

Last edited by PastFuture; Jan 25, 2013 at 08:13 AM.
PastFuture is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 06:53 AM   #6
Giuly
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: That depends whether you ask for timezone, state of mind or GPS coordinates.
The best solution would be to use USB 3.0 or drop your PCs. Just put a 240GB SanDisk SSD in a USB 3.0 enclosure. As those enclosures operate on SATA-II, the 256GB Samsung 840 Pro would be a waste - unless you replace another SSD in one of your computers with it and use the old one in the enclosure.

Otherwise, you're left with the LaCie Rugged SSD (which is actually slower than a USB 3.0 solution), as the elgato Thunderbolt SSD doesn't have USB 3.0 and the LaCie Little Big Disk blows your budget and doesn't come with USB 3.0 either.

Thumb resize.Thumb resize.Thumb resize.

Last edited by Giuly; Jan 25, 2013 at 07:08 AM.
Giuly is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 10:07 AM   #7
The-Pro
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastFuture View Post
If you are working on files on files straight from the external SSD (i.e. Aperture library on external SSD) via Thunderbolt, the bottlenecks you are talking about wouldn't apply though. Or am I missing something here?
yes correct but when opening my aperture library (26000pics) the read from my internal ssd doesnt go beyond 110mb/s. so i didnt think its important if u have 380 or 500mb/s read speed. thats just me, might be different for someone else
__________________
2012 15" 2.6 i7 AG MBP, 2009 17" AG MBP, 2009 8C 2.26 MP, 2010 4c MP,2010+07 MM, 17" 2007 MBP,20" iMac G5,17" PB G4,4x30"CD,2x23" CD, G3's,G4's, 17"iMac g4,iMac G3 turquoise,macintoshes dating to 1985
The-Pro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 11:57 AM   #8
jeutie
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Belgium
Send a message via MSN to jeutie
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giuly View Post
The best solution would be to use USB 3.0 or drop your PCs. Just put a 240GB SanDisk SSD in a USB 3.0 enclosure. As those enclosures operate on SATA-II, the 256GB Samsung 840 Pro would be a waste - unless you replace another SSD in one of your computers with it and use the old one in the enclosure.

Otherwise, you're left with the LaCie Rugged SSD (which is actually slower than a USB 3.0 solution), as the elgato Thunderbolt SSD doesn't have USB 3.0 and the LaCie Little Big Disk blows your budget and doesn't come with USB 3.0 either.
I simply wanted USB 3.0 to ensure that IF it ever comes to me needing to plug-in the drive to a PC (all my current computers are Macs) I would be able to. If the LaCie Rugged SSD is operating slower than USB 3.0 speeds, it would be a waste. The Elgato solution sounds nice, but then I can't fall back to USB 3.0 though. The Little Big Disk is out of my budget indeed. Thanks a lot for your input. I guess I'll have to look into something else then.
jeutie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 12:08 PM   #9
kohlson
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Sounds like the USB3 requirement is a saftey net for a remote possibility. You may want to get a TB enclosure for your SSD solution that you would use every day, and then pick up a cheap USB3 enclosure as prices drop. On the occasion that you need to plug it into your PC, a 5-minute swap will keep you in business.
kohlson is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 01:56 PM   #10
jeutie
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Belgium
Send a message via MSN to jeutie
Quote:
Originally Posted by kohlson View Post
Sounds like the USB3 requirement is a saftey net for a remote possibility. You may want to get a TB enclosure for your SSD solution that you would use every day, and then pick up a cheap USB3 enclosure as prices drop. On the occasion that you need to plug it into your PC, a 5-minute swap will keep you in business.
That is certainly true, splendid idea! But I think that a decent SSD, a thunderbolt enclosure and an USB 3.0 enclosure won't fit in my budget... Unless you can give me some suggestions?
jeutie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2013, 08:35 AM   #11
Giuly
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: That depends whether you ask for timezone, state of mind or GPS coordinates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeutie View Post
That is certainly true, splendid idea! But I think that a decent SSD, a thunderbolt enclosure and an USB 3.0 enclosure won't fit in my budget... Unless you can give me some suggestions?
240GB SanDisk SSD+Seagate Thunderbolt Adapter+USB 3.0 enclosure.

Although this works perfectly fine and is rather inexpensive, you don't have an enclosure around the SSD. In that case you would need the complementary Seagate Backup Plus HDD and replace the HDD inside. If you now take the (temporarily) useless USB 3.0 enclosure and install the spare hard drive into it, you have yourself a 1TB backup solution or iTunes drive as well.
Giuly is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2013, 11:55 AM   #12
jeutie
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Belgium
Send a message via MSN to jeutie
That looks perfect, but aren't both those interfaces SATA-II instead of SATA-III? I know the USB one is, but that isn't all that important. I can't seem to find official details on the connector for the thunderbolt adapter though. Thank you so much for the suggestion!
jeutie is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Buying Tips and Advice

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
External storage for iMac USB or TB? MiniD3 iMac 7 May 22, 2014 10:11 PM
nMP - 1Tb Flash or External storage TeaZy Mac Pro 5 Jan 6, 2014 10:19 PM
Adding 256GB of ultra-portable storage - USB Flash or MicroSD? Doctor Mabuse MacBook Air 4 Oct 31, 2013 10:49 AM
iMac with 768 Flash Storage - Which external drive for Lightroom photo storage? pete78 Digital Photography 7 Apr 5, 2013 02:43 AM
Expanding 11" MBA Storage via USB Flash Drive ohla313 MacBook Air 2 Nov 25, 2012 07:57 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:36 PM.

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

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