Fusion drive is a total sham

Discussion in 'Wasteland' started by Puevlo, Jan 3, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2011
    #1
    Fusion drive is a complete sham and useless in real life. It looks good in benchmarks because they are just doing little tests that don't fill up the hard drive so of course it will have the same speeds as an SSD. But in reality once you fill up even a small portion of the total space most of your data will be on the normal HDD which by the way is only 5400 rpm anyway.

    It is pure novelty and likely more dangerous because it means if even one drive fails all your data is gone. Twice as likely for disaster. Avoid it at all costs. This is not an opinion it is fact.
     
  2. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    #2
    Thanks for sharing that.
     
  3. macrumors 68000

    Confuzzzed

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #3
    This is neither opinion, nor fact. In fact it's pure BS.
     
  4. macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #4
    1 + 5 = potato.

    This is not opinion it is fact.
     
  5. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #5
    1. The Fusion Drive is used to improve boot times and program startup times, not the speed it takes for you to access your audio/video collection.
    2. After filling the SSD sector, the Fusion Drive then moves data onto the SSD which it thinks you use most, after learning your usage patterns. Therefore, it won't just restore itself to the speed of a regular HDD.
    3. An SSD has a longer life than a HDD. Both are usually the last part to fail in a computer, and when they do, this is frequently due to people dropping their computers. This doesn't happen with a HDD though, unless you frequently rage and push the computer off your desk.

    Thank you for your contribution.
     
  6. macrumors 603

    MacBoobsPro

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #6
    I see your potato and raise you a Remington Ladyshave.
     
  7. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    #7
    Alright, lets go over these statements and shed a bit more light on this fusion drive.

    First off, the SSD is extremely reliant, and probably won't fail you, secondly, the fusion drive is only present in the stationary macs, the mac mini and the iMac, this means the drive usually won't be bumped around a whole lot and probably won't die either, in any case having data in one place is always stupid no matter what drive you use, so I don't see how your statement about disaster is relevant or even accurate.

    then there's the question about how fast it is. In fact, the fusion drive works like this: first it fills up the 128GB SSD, so the 1TB spinning hard drive won't even be used until the SSD is filled up, this means that until that happens, you'll see speeds like in the new all solid state MacBook Pros. When you finally start to get more data than the 128GB, the harddrive is used to store all the data that is rarely used, this means that the SSD will keep a buffer of 4GB free and always use that, so your little test is actually any test that uses less space than 4GB, which by the way is quite a bit, and this is new data we're talking about, if the OS detects that some files are used frequently, for example, the 32gigs of photos and video you just offloaded from your memory card into iPhoto, Aperture or iMovie, then these files will be seamlessly and automatically be put on the SSD and some older and less recently used files will be moved to the hard disk, this means that after a short while when the harddrive and SSD is done sorting files between them (which will likely happen when the computer isn't busy doing other stuff) you'll get the full benefit of the SSD.

    All this said, I still wish I could get a bigger SSD, but I think this solution is both elegant and useful.

    And lastly, even though it doesn't matter unless you access all your data all the time, the drive speed is 5400RPM in the 21" iMac and 7200RPM in the 27" iMac and I cannot remember the mac mini stats off the top of my head.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Location:
    Kyoto, Japan
    #8
    OK I'm in, and I will raise you one opinion on why the GOP lost the election.
    :rolleyes:= Burmashave
     
  9. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    #9
    The fusion drive takes concepts used in enterprise grade storage solutions (storing frequently accessed data on high IO drives, with less frequently accessed data on slower IO drives) and brings it to the consumer market.
    And if you don't have a backup process in place when a drive fails, then just like any other computer, you loose your data, and are a fool.

    This is not an opinion it is fact.
     
  10. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2012
    #10
    The last time I called one of your guys the thing you actually are I got warned on the forums.

    Sio, I'll call you a roll. You know, like the food. No harm in that.

    Oh, and the HDD speed depends on the iMac you have, even for the fusion drive. 5400 in the 21" and 7200 in the 27".

    There have also been extensive tests done by reviewers who did more than just "little tests", but who also copied over more data than the size of the SSD drive, and ran some real world usage tests to see how it performed and they were pleasantly surprised. These reviews are easy to find with something called "Google" - you might have heard of it. You can search for things on the internet with it. Check it out.
     
  11. macrumors 68000

    iMcLovin

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    #11
    what a silly thread. ....most likely just trying to make some noise.

    Fusion is not as great as a pure SSD machine, but its a good way to get a lot of the SSD feel for a low cost. Even when it fills up I assume apples fusion firmware is smart enough to put most of what you do on the SSD....for those that dont move intense amounts of data every day.

    personally I went for the 768 Flash drive though :) ANd don't regret it a second :D
     
  12. macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    #12
    Maybe you should ring up EMC, NetApp, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and Cray, and inform them that the idea behind storage tiering that they base their products on is broken and doesn't work.

    Oh wait, it is how ALL storage systems in computing (be it CPU registers vs. cache memory vs RAM, VRAM vs RAM, RAM vs. disk, or disk vs. network) have been enhanced since the first machine to use RAM as a cache for reading from drum or disk.

    You really don't have any idea how storage systems work, do you?
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #13
    AT LOW COST??? 128 SSD for 250 USD? that really is not low cost:)
     
  14. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2012
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #14
    YOU Mr. Puevlo are a complete sham and a useless person!
    Get a life!
     
  15. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    #15
    Wow, this guy sure has a nice post history... You'd think he was trolling us, but no, he's been on the negativity for months, and even racism and misogyny.. just, wow.
     
  16. macrumors member

    braddicted2mac

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Location:
    Canada
    #16
    Mr. Puevo = Microsoft employee lol
     
  17. macrumors 68000

    Confuzzzed

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #17
    Nah! Just an attention seeking teenager using the lowest common dinominator to get bandwidth. Trolling and controversy.
     
  18. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2009
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #18
    Cool story bro, almost as good as your ram being soldered on story lol :rolleyes:
     
  19. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2012
    #19
    empty vessels make most noise
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page