Fusion Drive (Yes vs No)

Discussion in 'iMac' started by HBen, Nov 29, 2012.

?

Is fusion drive a value option?????

  1. Yes

    76.6%
  2. No

    23.4%
  1. HBen, Nov 29, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2012

    macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    #1
    lots of threads about is it gd is it bad, it's a rip of/ no it's gd value blah blah blah

    In your opinion is it worth the money to upgrade from base to fusion.
    (27" model)
     
  2. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    #2
    This would be really helpfull to a lot of people if we all vote
     
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    #3
    It depends on your use. Personally I prefer all SSD by far. Less noise, less heat, much faster bootcamp.
     
  4. macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #4
    So you have given people less than 20 minutes to "all vote?" Cute.
    I say yes.
     
  5. macrumors 6502a

    Razorhog

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Location:
    Arkansas
    #5
    Therein lies the crux for me. I'd much prefer pure SSD, but the only option is a 768GB $1300 drive. Really really irritating.
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    #6
    Yes, why on earth not offer a 256gb, or at least a 512gb. The most infuriating thing is, I'll probably go for the 768gb SSD option, even though I don't need that much internal storage. This is going to take a toll on my bank account... :eek:
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Razorhog

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Location:
    Arkansas
    #7
    Being $1300 just pisses me off. I would buy it if it was under $1000. Disappointing because I had my heart set on my next iMac being purely SSD.
     
  8. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    #8
    If you are seriously considering to pay $1,300 for 768GB SSD, I might be able to help you with the 512GB.
    I also have a bridge for sale :)
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    #9
    That should be the standard configuration across all Macs. Maybe I'm just spoiled by having used SSDs for a while now. My new MacBook Pro, with a regular HD, felt like it was 3 years old the day I got it. SSD coming soon for that.

    Personally, I think Fusion is a complete rip off. I would never buy a Mac that doesn't offer a customer a reasonable way to upgrade the standard HD to an SSD myself.
     
  10. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    #10
    20minutes if I set that I didn't mean to. Sorry. No need for the rudeness tbh
     
  11. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2012
    #11
    Yeah, I'd prefer an SSD only, but because Fusion is the cheaper option, and because I probably won't go very far over the 128GB SSD portion anyway, it's not a big deal for me.

    I wouldn't be surprised if a hack comes along to separate them, I wouldn't mind trying that after loads of people have tried with no problems.
     
  12. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Location:
    Nottingham, England
    #12
    I think hell to the yes. Before upgrading my 2010 MBP to an SSD I was getting irritated at the time it would take to load things, now it's flying through everything.

    I think I'm used to my iPhone and iPad opening stuff fast and now my computer feels like that. For me an SSD or a fusion drive will be mandatory for my next system.

    Would be nice if they offered fusion drives in the next MBP's!!
     
  13. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    #13
    I'll take the standard HDD.
    Wish there would be a 256gb-SSD-only option like the previous iMac but I will not pay 250€ for 128gb ssd.
    I can wait 10 seconds longer for booting up and I'm not a video/photo editor who needs the speed. HDD is fine.
     
  14. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    #14
    It would be cheaper to put in your own ssd and setup the system yourself.

    Personally I was quite happy to pay apple too much money for 128gig ssd, and just turn my mini on and use it. Having over 1TB that boots like an ssd is awesome.
     
  15. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    #15
    Fusion drive is almost as strong as a ssd. 250$ for about 1300GB, or standard SSD about 800GB for 1300$. I'm sticking with the fusion drive.
     
  16. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    #16
    I would have preferred a 512GB SSD option, but since it's not available and the 768GB SSD is ridiculously priced, I went with the Fusion drive. When I had my 2011 27" iMac with the HDD, it was fast enough, but I did notice the difference when I had the rMBP with the 512GB SSD. The Fusion drive bump in performance over the HDD is worth it to me since the price wasn't outrageous.
     
  17. macrumors regular

    THOPMedia

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2012
    #17
    I did get the fusion on mine but I would have preferred a higher capacity, cheaper SSD option. Oh well, I'm looking into some external SSD at the moment.
     
  18. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Location:
    North Vancouver
    #18
    Yes, but only due to the lack of a wider range of SSD options.
     
  19. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Location:
    The land of the cucumbers
    #19
    My answer: No. I went for a Seagate TB adapter and a 256 gb Samsung 830 series SSD. Same price, upgradability made easy, but some more clutter...
     
  20. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2012
    #20
    will the ssd make exporting video/rendering video speeds faster for video editors? i thought ssd just opens things faster and thats it?
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2012
    #21
    It depends; are you exporting the video to the SSD? If so, yes, it will speed it up. But if it's the SSD with the OS/applications, it's not recommended.
     
  22. macrumors G4

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #22
    Problem is no one knows because its new, but no Apple CTO option is ever a good value, nor should one expect it to be. My issue, and why I voted "no," is reliability is unknown, and that scares me a whole lot.
     
  23. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2012
    #23
    I think the poll asks the wrong questions, and so you are going to get the wrong answers I am afraid. :)

    One might think of opting for a fusion drive because an rpm 5400 drive is such a **** option for a base model in 2013 when apple could have at the cost of the average hardback book added at least 32gb of flash for the os and the apps in the already more expensive by $100 base model, but instead they are ruining the user experience with drive speeds from 2003 on a device for 2013.

    I would suggest, that if you are up for it, to screw them and not pay the extra $450 the are asking you for this benefit and opt for a seagate momentus xt (has if I am remember correctly 16gbs of flash for the 750gb model, but it could be eight), so you get most of the benefits of the "fusion" at a fraction of the cost, and you stick a case to the hd you got out of the mac and you got yourself a portable drive too. Maybe seagate will wise up and come up with a 32gb hybrid drive too, so then there'll be pretty much close to no difference from the fusion, in that you 'd be hard pressed to have more app and os space than 32gb, and playing music off an ssd makes no differerence. In addition and this is a BIG PLUS the momentus xt is not a 5400 rpm drive but a very fast 7200 drive too, so what you might lose from flash size you gain in speed on the hd.

    All, that provided of course apple has not royally screwed us with a custom heat sensor for "apple" drives only, as they did before. (but even so, there's a software hack for that). :):apple:
     
  24. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
    #24
    I ordered it. Here is my thinking.

    It's possibly that the logic board on a non fusion drive would be missing the connection/adapter to hook in a second drive. This is at least the case with the 21.5" version.

    If I want a gaurantee that I can eventually go to a dual SSD setup to run Bootcamp/Win7 and OSX separately, the fusion drive would ensure the connectivity. I would use the 128GB SSD for Bootcamp and eventually a 512GB or 750GB SSD for the OSX install if I wasn't happy with the fusion drive performance but from the likes of early reviews, it looks as though I would probably be happy with the fusion drive (I will be mainly using Aperture and iMovie for non-pro Photo/Video editing).
     
  25. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    #25
    First time Mac owner don't do CPU intense heavy stuff, Fusion Drive it is. :)
     

Share This Page