Fusion drive or not?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Fatboy71, Dec 13, 2012.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    Fatboy71

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    I'm going to be ordering the new 27 inch iMac in the next few months. I'm debating whether to go with the Fusion drive option when I do order.

    Boot times won't be an issue has I'll be sleeping the iMac, rather than shutting it down everytime I've finished with it (as I was told on here that's its best to do this the vast amount of the time).

    Main uses for me would be:

    Surfing, emailing, iTunes, burning to cd and DVD with Toast Titanium, bit of photo editing, bit of video converting of AVI to DVD conversion, and also using the Screen Flow application.

    I was wondering if I would see much benefit in having the Fusion drive over just the standard 1TB hard drive?

    Thanks in advance.
     
  2. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Location:
    Newcastle, UK
    #2
    I'm not sure but if it were me, I'd always choose to have SSD in my computers now. I can't go back.
     
  3. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    #3
    I would recommend the same route I will do when I order in January. Buy the non fusion one and see how it works for your daily use and after just use an external usb3/thunderbold SSD (which you buy for less than the fusion option) and set up a fusion drive yourself by joining together the external SSD and the internal drive (it could even give you something like a fusion containing a 256gb SSD and the internal drive). All the fusion magic happens in software so the only thing different you'll have from apple fusion is having the external case connected and probably a larger, better ssd fusion than the apple one.
     
  4. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    #4
    In the search forums bar at the top right of this page type the words "fusion drive" and hit enter. This exact topic has been brought up countless times on this forum
     
  5. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    #5
    One thing that would tip the balance for me, would be if someone would open their non-Fusion 27" iMac and tell everyone if that thing has a connector for an additional internal SSD drive or not.

    I am willing to go third-party to get a Fusion drive cheaper.
     
  6. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Fatboy71

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    I'm aware of that, but I wanted to ask the question based on my uses and Applications I would be using :)
     
  7. macrumors regular

    aerobyravol

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2012
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #7
    I ordered mine with Fusion.
    I also believe no recent computer should be sold without SSD.

    But as SSD is still so expensive, Fusion Drive is just ideal to gain storage.

    I'm even so much convinced that I ordered 3TB Fusion Drive :)
     
  8. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Fatboy71

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    How is it possible to:

    "set up a fusion drive by joining together the external SSD and the internal drive (it could even give you something like a fusion containing a 256gb SSD and the internal drive)"

    Also. The Fusion Drive feature, where it monitors what Applications I use regularly and places them on the Fusion Drive. How would this work if I were using an external SSD drive. And would it still work with an external SSD?

    I've looked on the Apple website and there is this one http://store.apple.com/uk/product/H...-drive?fnode=5f&fs=m.productKind=flash_drives

    It's twice the capacity of the Fusion Drive and is around £50 more expensive that the Fusion Drive.
     
  9. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2012
    #9
    I have a maxed out 27" coming with no fusion drive. My thinking is that I am going to wait about 2 years or until I can get a killer deal on an SSD, and either run it externally or do some tinkering and install it inside (I work with electronics everyday, so cracking it open doesn't scare me).
     
  10. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    #10
    The "fusion drive" name is nothing more than a name. All the logic is in the software, namely OS. In the same way they join the SSD and HDD internally by software, you can join the thunderbolt SSD and the internal HDD into one "fusion" drive which will work just as if the SSD would be inside the iMac. With the provided drive you would end up with twice the SSD capacity fusion drive. Of course you can not disconnect/use the SSD for other things unless you do a separate partition on it before creating the fusion drive (like windows on SSD instead of Apple's fusion drive which puts the windows partition on the HDD)
     
  11. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    #11
    Definetely go for it, the speed increase in everyday use you achieve by using an SSD is incredible.
    Every "basic" task, from mail, to browsing, etc. it's just way, way, way snappier. Once you try an SSD it's really hard to go back.

    My MB Air, for "common" office tasks, is by far the fastest computer i've ever owned, leaving well behind my (old) MacPro. And it's the SSD that drives all the difference.

    Obviousy it won't count if you start doing video editing, encoding, etc., but for the average user, i think it's a no brainer. 10x more benefit than increasing CPU, Ram, etc.
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    #12
    +1 on this. All of my other devices (including my iPad) are slow compared to my iMac...and yes... Safari actually IS snappier...much snappier. :)
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    #13
    I'm leaning to yes myself.

    I figure the next best (affordable) alternative at this time is the Lacie Rugged Thunderbolt at $199.00.

    So figure another $50.00 to have all the benefits of having it built-in.
     
  14. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Fatboy71

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    That I did not know, thanks so much for the help its much appreciated :)
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    #15
    I would say go for it! Have it in my new iMac and don't know how I lived without it before, its amazingly fast! All the advantages of an SSD with the space of a normal. Don't listen to those who say if one of the drive fails. If you only had one drive and it failed you'd still be screwed anyway. Just back up, that also btw works in exactly the same way as with a normal SSD or HDD ;)
     
  16. macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #16
    Get a normal drive then get a Pegasus j2 external TB SSD
     
  17. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Fatboy71

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    A few other things I've thought about with regards to the Fusion Drive.

    The Fusion Drive is 128gb in size. I was wondering, once the Fusion drive is full, any other Applications I would be installing would then go on the hard drive. So if for example I had an Application on the Fusion Drive that I'd either not used for a while or a newly installed Application that I'd began using more than some other Application that was resident on the Fusion Drive. Would this Application then be transferred to the Fusion Drive, and an older lesser used Application would then be moved to the hard drive?

    Also. I believe the Mac OS is installed on the Fusion Drive, so when I used Time Machine, would this backup the OS, data, applications that were resident on the Fusion Drive or would Time Machine only backup whatever were on the hard drive?


    Thanks everyone for the help.
     
  18. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    #18
    Try not to think of it at the "entire application" level.

    Think about what actually happens when you launch that application - as in what gets accessed and when. File "Blocks" that get accessed most often will be on the SSD - those that don't or are very large in general will be on the HDD.

    for example, itunes itself loads very fast, but large media contained within is accessed from the HDD - same thing for iMovie - maybe the interface is very fast, but the master data itself is on the HDD.

    Probably best to not think too much about it at all and just see how it performs for you in your specific situation. I'm guessing for the 95% it is going to be great.
     
  19. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    #19
    This article pretty much tells you everything you want to know. http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/1...ining-doc-ars-tears-open-apples-fusion-drive/
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    Ice Dragon

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    #20
    You either can go with a Fusion drive or pay the outrageous cost to go full flash if you don't want the conventional hard drive. I wouldn't want it personally so I'd go with the Fusion drive and upgrade the graphics card on the 27" ultimate.
     
  21. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Fatboy71

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    I believe that the Mac OS is installed on the Fusion Drive, so when I used Time Machine, would this backup the OS, data, applications that were resident on the Fusion Drive or would Time Machine only backup whatever were on the hard drive?

    Also. I'm planning on installing Parallels Desktop 8 and Windows 7 64 bit. Would the Fusion Drive give me the same benefits (faster access etc that I would see whilst using the Mac OS side) when I was using Parallels Desktop 8 and Windows 7?
     
  22. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    #22
    I don't think you'll really need it to be honest, I don't think most people do. If you move large amounts of files about or reboot excessively, then you need it.
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    Santabean2000

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    #23
    Sounds like you've never used one. No offence, but I can't disagree more with what you said.

    OP, buy the fusion. You won't regret it.
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    #24
    Exactly. The extra speed is worth the upgrade IMHO.
     
  25. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    #25
    Yup I haven't lol. But I'm pretty sure for what he's doing it isn't worth the price. It's still nice to have though.
     

Share This Page