Misleading, misleading, misleading.A proper SSD will be faster than a hybrid drive as caching takes time, system resources and only affects the reading speed.
I went for 512 SSD so my imac had no moving parts.Is there a marked trade off between having a larger, but slower 1 TB Fusion drive vs. a smaller, but faster 512 GB all flash internal drive?
In other words, will the computer suffer or be lacking for the smaller drive?
It is a very refined implementation of a HDD/SSD hybrid.Misleading, misleading, misleading.
Fusion drive is not a "hybrid" drive.
Corrected.Writing is hugely accelerated. Fusion has a 4 GB write cache, so up to four GB can be written at maximum speed - a normal SSD drive can't do that.
There is still some overhead, and not all of data can be moved on a SSD.Fusion works in the background, when your computer isn't doing anything else, so it doesn't have any noticeable impact on any system resources.
Yeh I thought that as I pressed send and wondered if someone would spot thatYou forgot the fan
The fan spins all the time, and never stops unless your Mac is off or sleeping....
But the fan doesn't seem to operate much so its only got moving parts some of the time
I also edit video for a living. IF you can afford the SSD, go that route. I have the 1TB Fusion Drive, but if I could get the SSD, I would.I understand that SSD is generally faster and that there is the advantage of no moving parts. However it sounds like the advantage to the Fusion drive is it "works in the background, when your computer isn't doing anything else, so it doesn't have any noticeable impact on any system resources." So does this make an SSD a comparatively lesser choice??
I've been told that a 256GB SSD is enough to run general applications, but I don't mind paying a bit more to be on the safe side with a 512GB.
So again, I'm left wondering which is best for a system on which I'll be editing video (again, with all media stored externally): a 1TB Fusion or a 512GB SSD?