A Tale of Two iMacs...

Discussion in 'iMac' started by MacDarcy, Oct 27, 2013.

  1. MacDarcy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2011
    #1
    I plan to buy an iMac. I'm into video editing my gopro footage, photography, creating southpark style animations, photoshop, illustrator, & indesign.

    I've narrowed it down to two BTO 27" iMacs. Both with the i7 and 2gig VRAM. But I am torn between ordering one with a 3TB fusion drive for $2,394 or one with a 512GB SSD for $2,594.

    Any thoughts? :)
     
  2. McGiord macrumors 601

    McGiord

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Location:
    Dark Castle
    #2
    $200 difference between no regrets and always wondering if it was worth it the extra ~$200.
    As it is not my money I will go with the higher end one.
     
  3. MacDarcy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2011
    #3
    Lol. I hear ya. It's always easier making the decision when it's not your money. :)

    Actually, it's not really a money thing. It's really a size vs speed thing. Would love to go full SSD, I know it'd be faster...but wondering if 512GB would be too limiting size wise.

    The 1TB SSD is just too overpriced for me right now.
     
  4. Bear macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Sol III - Terra
    #4
    A USB 3.0 Hard Drive could be used for stuff that doesn't need to be on an SSD. But some people prefer to keep everything on one disk. Since you're looking at a 3TB Fusion Drive, I doubt 512GB will be enough for you.
     
  5. MacDarcy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2011
    #5
    Actually, I was looking at the 1TB fusion drive, but the 3TB fusion drive was only $100 more.

    I think I could get by with the 512GB SSD...since I plan to get an external thunderbolt drive down the road for editing HD video.

    Was wondering if those who have a full SSD drive on their iMacs can chime in here.
     
  6. Tumbleweed666 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Location:
    Near London, UK.
    #6
    I'm going to go with a 512Gb SSD simply so there are no moving parts inside. Cant decide if I should upgrade to the i7 though :confused:
     
  7. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #7
    SSDs can still die.
     
  8. soomster macrumors regular

    soomster

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
  9. tom vilsack macrumors 68000

    tom vilsack

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Location:
    ladner cdn
    #9
    If you have ever used a computer before and after a ssd install your answer would be so easy!!!

    Get the ssd!
     
  10. Ddyracer macrumors 68000

    Ddyracer

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    #10
    There is a possibility that the 1tb ssd will go down to 500$ like the mbp's. That might be pretty good for speed and storage combo for yah.
     
  11. joema2 macrumors 65816

    joema2

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    #11
    I'd definitely suggest the 3TB Fusion. I edit lots of video from several GoPro Hero3 Black cameras. Using three GoPros for 7 megapixel time lapses and 1080p/60 video, I have shot nearly 100GB in one day. You will blow through 500GB quickly, then have to use external storage. That storage is generally much slower, unless you get an expensive RAID drive.

    The 3TB Fusion drive is an excellent combination of speed and size. I have two iMac 27s with 3TB Fusion drives, and they work very well.
     
  12. Switchfoot macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    #12
    I know it's advice not asked for, but why not go with the 4gb of vram for just $150 more? Seems like a steal, especially considering there's no way to replace it.
     
  13. orangezorki macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    #13
    Not going to happen - the 1TB upgrade is already the same price, as you are comparing the upgrade from 512GB on the Macbook Pro with the 1TB HD to 1TB SSD on the iMac.
     
  14. ckeck macrumors 6502a

    ckeck

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Location:
    Texas
    #14
    My experience is that the Fusion Drive is great for the iMac. I'm on my second iMac with a Fusion drive now and the performance, while not SSD levels, is FAR superior to that of a typical HDD.

    I've had two MacBook Airs and a RMBP now as well with full SSD, two with PCIe flash memory and these are fast but I don't notice the difference much at all when I'm at the desk using my iMac.

    If you are going to be editing HD video footage I would strongly recommend the 3TB fusion drive because that stuff can eat up disk space FAST. That or make sure all your footage goes to an external USB3 drive if you go SSD.

    I personally would rather just fall in the middle for storage performance and have a lot more space on a desktop machine between video editing, iTunes, iPhoto, etc.

    Not even sure if the latest iMacs have PCIe flash memory. If not, paying that premium right now would also be a bit of a waste, IMO.
     
  15. fa8362 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #15
    Unless you're short of RAM, an SSD isn't going to do you much good, unless you're one of those people who spend hundreds extra just so your programs open faster.

    I don't see why the logic in a 3 TB drive either. Your files should be on external drives, not the internal drive.
     
  16. ckeck macrumors 6502a

    ckeck

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Location:
    Texas
    #16
    Why should they be on external drives unless he is looking to complicate the setup? If you have a large enough internal you should use the space and backup to an external (time machine or otherwise) but what is to be gained from simply dumping them to a single external drive? Failure risk is the same, performance is lower, etc.

    Not sure I understand your perspective there.
     
  17. fa8362 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #17
    Failure risk is not the same. An external drive doesn't get anywhere near as hot as the internal drive.

    Performance is typically irrelevant. Working files should be in RAM.

    Also if the files are on an external, it's easy to work on another computer.
     
  18. Ddyracer macrumors 68000

    Ddyracer

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    #18
    it might
     
  19. ckeck macrumors 6502a

    ckeck

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Location:
    Texas
    #19
    Well you're assuming a lot of things here...

    - that multiple computers are in question which is not common for many, at least with the same files in question

    - that heat is an issue in the first place (this is also not the only cause of drive failure)

    All I'm saying is that using your logic, no computer should have an internal hard drive except to boot the OS and everything should be done externally. You might be a fan of the new MacPro and all the external attachments many will have to use for it :)
     
  20. Mike Oxard, Oct 30, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2013

    Mike Oxard macrumors 6502a

    Mike Oxard

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    #20
    I just did a speed test on my Thunderbolt 8TB G-Raid, 275MB/s read, 285MB/s write. If you don't need huge storage now, big fast storage is available as an add on later.], and it's only going to get cheaper.

    As it's not my money I'd say get the SSD option, then expand later if you need to.

    EDIT:
    This is an older iMac, 3.4Ghz i7 with 256SSD, 2TB HDD, 24GB Crucial RAM and 2GB GPU. The SSD is a lot slower than the ones installed now, but it's still really fast. Use is for pro photography.
     
  21. aznboi91 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2012
    #21
    Everybody likes to drive exotic cars, but the useful,reliable, and comfortable cars are SUV and normal sedans...
     
  22. ckeck, Oct 30, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2013

    ckeck macrumors 6502a

    ckeck

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Location:
    Texas
    #22
    With the 3TB Fusion drive he can not have to worry about dropping anything into external storage later...and TB storage will demand a premium for a while yet.

    Using the Blackmagicdesign Disk Speed Test I recorded these numbers from my 3TB FD on my 2013 iMac:

    1GB Test File
    318 MB/sec Write & 686 MB/sec Read

    5GB Test File
    317 MB/sec Write & 689 MB/sec Read

    While the write speeds are roughly half of what he would see on the SSD the read speeds are pretty darn fast and this is much faster than what you're seeing with the external TB storage.
     
  23. Mike Oxard macrumors 6502a

    Mike Oxard

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    #23
    I see, I'm comparing Fusion with my older iMac that although has an SSD and HDD is pre-fusion. I didn't know it could perform so well.
     
  24. ckeck macrumors 6502a

    ckeck

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Location:
    Texas
    #24
    I actually didn't expect much from the Fusion drive but when buying my last iMac (late-2012) model the highest end configuration in the stores at the time were all 1TB FD models, so I reluctantly picked one up and was very surprised.

    Since that one worked out so well I decided to just stick with the FD in this one, except that it's the 3TB version. Next-gen may be different as flash storage prices drop more but Apple is still charging a hefty premium at this point.
     
  25. StephenCampbell macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2009
    #25
    SSD isn't "higher end." Fusion is for people who need internal storage, SSD is for people who need the best performance possible. Do you need internal storage?
     

Share This Page