Mac Book Pro HD - 5400 RPM, 4200RPM

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Garden Knowm, Oct 24, 2006.

  1. Garden Knowm macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #1
    Is it even a consideration to get a NEW MBP with a 160GB or 200GB hard drive if ONE's primary use is VIDEO editing?

    MAC GENIUSES have been discouraging even the 5400 RPMon the "old" MBPs..

    what do you all think??
     
  2. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #2
    Err.. IMO... if one's job is primarily VIDEO EDITING, one shouldn't be using a laptop. However, don't you want super fast HD times? Then you should get a 7200RPM.
     
  3. Garden Knowm thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #3
    What if you are traveling to Darfur, Cambodia, Samolia and North Korea.. and you need to do editing on the fly..

    Should I bring my TOWER and 30 inch Cinema Display?

    lol

    iloveyou
     
  4. Garden Knowm thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #4

    The more memory your computer has, the more programs you can run simultaneously, and the better performance you get from your computer. Increasing the amount of memory in your MacBook Pro is an easy way to improve performance.

    How much memory is right for you?
    Select the standard 2GB option if you plan to use your system regularly for sound design, video editing, DVD authoring, animation, and other intensive tasks.
    Max out your MacBook Pro with 3GB of memory to enjoy the greatest possible performance for all your computing tasks.

    The MacBook Pro uses one of the fastest memory technologies available today—667 MHz, double data rate (DDR2), synchronous dynamic random-access memory (SDRAM) — ensuring that the Core 2 Duo processor is constantly fed with data without wasting clock cycles.


    BTW.. don't take things out of context.. please.. especially when you are trying to help somebody

    iloveyou
     
  5. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #5
    Get the 17" and the 7200rpm drive then. You wouldn't want a slower drive.

    And "Samolia" doesn't exist - it's Somalia. ;)
     
  6. kristiano macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    #6

    North Korea definitely doesn't allow Californians, much less those planning to video the situation there in. :p
     
  7. menthol moose macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    #7
    I believe that the slower rotation speed of the 200 GB HDD is negated by the fact that the platters are twice as dense. In most cases the 200 GB HDD will be faster than the 100 GB 7200-rpm HDD.

    To get a better picture of this, just multiply the number of gigabytes by the rotational speed. You'll notice that the 200 GB HDD comes out above the 100 gig.

    At least that's what I was told.
     
  8. Garden Knowm thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #8

    WOW.. very interesting.. THANKS..... I figured (or hoped), there had to be a catch.. especially since the machine is designed for high end work....

    What are the platters?

    thanks : )
     
  9. WorldIRC macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    #9
    Well think of it this way. On a 200gb drive, the data is going to be physically closer to each other, byte by byte, compared to a 100gb drive...therefore, it would make sense that the drive can cover the same amount of data in less spin..and therefore on the slower spin cycle, should still be ok.
     
  10. Garden Knowm thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #10
  11. nevir macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    #11
    From what I've read - the 160GB 5400RPM has very similar performance to the previous 100GB 7200RPM drive (and less power consumption)

    There's a few links in that monolithic front page thread, I'm having trouble digging them up though.

    The 120GB and 200GB are going to be slower than that one.
     
  12. Garden Knowm thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #12
    Thanks NEVIR... I would be very interested to see the comparisons..

    cheers
     
  13. Butthead macrumors 6502

    Butthead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #13
    Well if you are used to running FCP & Motion2 on a G5 dualie, you'll likely be disappointed with any MBP until the Santa Rosa platform MBPs ship later in the spring? of 2007 (Santa Rosa, specifically Crestline mem controller chips supposedly on target for delivery as soon as March). MBP has a much slower/lower performing GPU compared to a desktop pro Mac.

    Even the 160GB perp. recording Seagate Momentus 7200.2 7.2k rpm drive said to ship by Seagate in 1st Q 2007 will be slower than current desktop 7.2k drives (but you could use the Express Card slot on the MBP, and hookup a nice RAID of 2.5in drives for a portable solution if you need STR's to do video editing of multiple streams or higher bandwidth HD source material).

    www.barefeats.com has tested some of the drives in question:

    http://www.barefeats.com/hard80.html



    as has Tom's hardware:

    http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage25.html

    Haven't seen any tests on the new 200GB 4.2k rpm Toshiba 9.5mm which fits the MBP, but I wouldn't expect much out of it.

    Sounds sacrilege but you could remove the optical drive and install a 2nd HD into the MBP. Read about it here, since it is recognized by the OS as another HDD, I would assume you could RAID0 a set of 160GB Seagate 7200.2 (when the come out) for some pretty decent STR's):

    http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/10/17/optibay/index.php
     
  14. MagicBoy macrumors 68040

    MagicBoy

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #14
    Have a look here. I'd take the high capacity 5400rpm in preference.
     
  15. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #15
    Good advice. Not sure how applicable it is. But good advice nonetheless.
     
  16. anthonymoody macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2002
    #16
    Are we sure that any of the 5400 rpm drives in the new mbp use the new perpendicular technology? I *think* the 160 gig drive does, but can anyone confirm? If it does, then its performance should be similar to the prior 7200rpm drives...

    TM
     
  17. Butthead macrumors 6502

    Butthead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #18
    There are no 160GB longitudinal drives (Fujitsu has their 4.2k rpm 200GB, but that's because they use 3 platters instead of the usual 1 or 2, and therefore it's thicker than the required 9.5mm drive height that would fit into a MB/MBP), they are all 2 platter designs using perp. recording tech. Highest capacity 2 platter long. rec. tech in 2 platter design is 120GB. No, 7.2k drives will still 'feel' a little more responsive in general use, but 5.4k perp. drive are close in STR (sustained transfer rates, which are important for video/audio recording).

    Get a 160GB 5.4k rpm drive; Seagate was 1st with these (Hitachi shipped the 1st SATA version however), and now WD has one, Fujitsu has 'announced' one, not sure about Toshiba or Samsung. Then come Spring 2007?, swap out that 5.4k 160GB for a Seagates Momentus 7200.2 7.2k rpm 160GB perp. tech. drive.
     
  18. Infinity macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    #19
    Thanks for clearing that up, Now I can place my order and I'm gonna stick with the 160GB drive.
     

Share This Page