Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Burning two discs at once with MacPro
- Thread starter csista
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Precisely. The firewire drive is on a totally separate bus which would make it immune to problems.
T
I have 2x the stock sony superdrives in my mac pro, and run them simultaneously.
Either burning or ripping DVDs, using 2 drives is faster than one drive twice with 2 discs - admittedly each drive doesn't rip or burn at max speed compared with just a single drive, but overall its faster than doing it twice.
In finder you can just burn to two discs, but u need 2 copies of toast.app to burn simultaneously.
I just recommend that you have the apps loaded and selecting the correct drive before either of them get started. I have problems when one is running and then you load up another app and it scans all the drives, it interrupts the one that is running.
Either burning or ripping DVDs, using 2 drives is faster than one drive twice with 2 discs - admittedly each drive doesn't rip or burn at max speed compared with just a single drive, but overall its faster than doing it twice.
In finder you can just burn to two discs, but u need 2 copies of toast.app to burn simultaneously.
I just recommend that you have the apps loaded and selecting the correct drive before either of them get started. I have problems when one is running and then you load up another app and it scans all the drives, it interrupts the one that is running.
To timish:
Just out of curiousity... Do the two SATA Plextors that you currently have in your machine respond correctly to the [Eject] key on the keyboard? Also, they bootable?
Thanks for the info.
Just out of curiousity... Do the two SATA Plextors that you currently have in your machine respond correctly to the [Eject] key on the keyboard? Also, they bootable?
Thanks for the info.
The other question is whether Windows will read them at all (reports around here have mentioned an inability of Windows (in boot camp) to recognize hard drives connected to these two SATA ports.
cheers.
Hi, yes both SATA DVD burners respond to both eject commands.
They DO NOT respond to the menu bar optical drive eject menu (which is no big deal anyway)
Yes the Plextors are bootable, and better yet offer native Mac OS X firmware upgrade programs unlike other manufacturers.
T
I can't speak to Boot Camp, but the drives are usable and recognized in Parallels. Only problem is Parallels has a bug where you can't have the application use both drives at the same time.
Yep. Parallels, in theory, should be able to make use of the drives regardless of which bus they are on. I'm not sure why windows directly shouldn't be able to see those two ports, just read that it didn't. weird.
cheers.
no it doesn't, but it enables a feature of OS X that allows you to customize the keys
I just downloaded tinker tool...I can't find what you speak of. Could you please point me to where it is in tinkertool?
Hmm sorry to be a bother but I've spent a good bit of time looking for that feature. Any chance you could write out directions really quickly?
EDIT: Oops, Trainman beat me to it.
Oh I'm so sorry to both of you, I got confused.
Tinkertool allows you to have an eject menu (look under 'applications'), but to modify the eject keys, you need a program called Ardiem (freeware):
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/22815&vid=192068
Really sorry about that.
The moment you stick a second drive in the menu appears you can also add it manually without special programs.
Extra info from wiki
Two devices on one cable - speed impact
There are many debates about how much a slow device can impact the performance of a faster device on the same cable. There is an effect, but the debate is confused by the blurring of two quite different causes, called here "Slowest Speed" and "One Operation at a Time".
[edit] "Slowest speed"
It is a common misconception that, if two devices of different speed capabilities are on the same cable, both devices' data transfers will be constrained to the speed of the slower device.
For all modern ATA host adapters (since, at least, the late Pentium III and AMD K7 era) this is not true, as modern ATA host adapters support independent device timing. This allows each device on the cable to transfer data at its own best speed.
Even with older adapters without independent timing, this effect only impacts the data transfer phase of a read or write operation. This is usually the shortest part of a complete read or write operation (except for burst mode transfers).
[edit] "One operation at a time"
This is a much more important effect. It is caused by the omission of both overlapped and queued feature sets from most parallel ATA products. This means that only one device on a cable can perform a read or write operation at one time. Therefore, a fast device on the same cable as a slow device under heavy use will find that nearly every time it is asked to perform a transfer, it has to wait for the slow device to finish its own ponderous transfer.
For example, consider an optical device such as a DVD-ROM, and a hard drive on the same parallel ATA cable. With average seek and rotation speeds for such devices, a read operation to the DVD-ROM will take an average of around 100 milliseconds, while a typical fast parallel ATA hard drive can complete a read or write in less than 10 milliseconds. This means that the hard drive, if unencumbered, could perform more than 100 operations per second (and far more than that if only short head movements are involved). But since the devices are on the same cable, once a "read" command is given to the DVD-ROM, the hard drive will be inaccessible (and idle) for as long as it takes the DVD-ROM to complete its readseek time included. Frequent accesses to the DVD-ROM will therefore vastly reduce the maximum throughput available from the hard drive. If the DVD-ROM is kept busy with average-duration requests, and if the host operating system driver sends commands to the two drives in a strict "round robin" fashion, then the hard drive will be limited to about 10 operations per second while the DVD-ROM is in use, even though the burst data transfers to and from the hard drive still happen at the hard drive's usual speed.
The impact of this on a system's performance depends on the application. For example, when copying data from an optical drive to a hard drive (such as during software installation), this effect probably doesn't matter: Such jobs are necessarily limited by the speed of the optical drive no matter where it is. But if the hard drive in question is also expected to provide good throughput for other tasks at the same time, it probably should not be on the same cable as the optical drive.
Remember that this effect occurs only if the slow drive is actually being accessed. The mere presence of an idle drive will not affect the performance of the other device on the cable (for a modern host adapter which supports independent timing).
[edit]
My two cents, i think it will be noticeable in some cases, but all in all ,the new ata standard should work fine, and slow down's should not occur.
Two devices on one cable - speed impact
There are many debates about how much a slow device can impact the performance of a faster device on the same cable. There is an effect, but the debate is confused by the blurring of two quite different causes, called here "Slowest Speed" and "One Operation at a Time".
[edit] "Slowest speed"
It is a common misconception that, if two devices of different speed capabilities are on the same cable, both devices' data transfers will be constrained to the speed of the slower device.
For all modern ATA host adapters (since, at least, the late Pentium III and AMD K7 era) this is not true, as modern ATA host adapters support independent device timing. This allows each device on the cable to transfer data at its own best speed.
Even with older adapters without independent timing, this effect only impacts the data transfer phase of a read or write operation. This is usually the shortest part of a complete read or write operation (except for burst mode transfers).
[edit] "One operation at a time"
This is a much more important effect. It is caused by the omission of both overlapped and queued feature sets from most parallel ATA products. This means that only one device on a cable can perform a read or write operation at one time. Therefore, a fast device on the same cable as a slow device under heavy use will find that nearly every time it is asked to perform a transfer, it has to wait for the slow device to finish its own ponderous transfer.
For example, consider an optical device such as a DVD-ROM, and a hard drive on the same parallel ATA cable. With average seek and rotation speeds for such devices, a read operation to the DVD-ROM will take an average of around 100 milliseconds, while a typical fast parallel ATA hard drive can complete a read or write in less than 10 milliseconds. This means that the hard drive, if unencumbered, could perform more than 100 operations per second (and far more than that if only short head movements are involved). But since the devices are on the same cable, once a "read" command is given to the DVD-ROM, the hard drive will be inaccessible (and idle) for as long as it takes the DVD-ROM to complete its readseek time included. Frequent accesses to the DVD-ROM will therefore vastly reduce the maximum throughput available from the hard drive. If the DVD-ROM is kept busy with average-duration requests, and if the host operating system driver sends commands to the two drives in a strict "round robin" fashion, then the hard drive will be limited to about 10 operations per second while the DVD-ROM is in use, even though the burst data transfers to and from the hard drive still happen at the hard drive's usual speed.
The impact of this on a system's performance depends on the application. For example, when copying data from an optical drive to a hard drive (such as during software installation), this effect probably doesn't matter: Such jobs are necessarily limited by the speed of the optical drive no matter where it is. But if the hard drive in question is also expected to provide good throughput for other tasks at the same time, it probably should not be on the same cable as the optical drive.
Remember that this effect occurs only if the slow drive is actually being accessed. The mere presence of an idle drive will not affect the performance of the other device on the cable (for a modern host adapter which supports independent timing).
[edit]
My two cents, i think it will be noticeable in some cases, but all in all ,the new ata standard should work fine, and slow down's should not occur.
These ones?
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Micro Accessories/SATA18R/
or these ones;
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Micro Accessories/SATA18L/
I know you say right angle, but I'm not sure whether you just meant 90 degree bend or actually a + or - 90 degree bend specifically. Also does that SATA cable supply power to the drive or do I use the original ones or new ones that run form where the SATA plugs in.
Thanks.
Hi there Timish, sorry to dredge up an old thread. Do you mean these cables;
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Micro Accessories/SATA18R/
or these ones;
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Micro Accessories/SATA18L/
I know you say right angle, but I'm not sure whether you just meant 90 degree bend or actually a + or - 90 degree bend specifically. Also does that SATA cable supply power to the drive or do I use the original ones or new ones that run form where the SATA plugs in.
Thanks.
I use one of each of those type of cable to fit my two SATA optical drives.
If you are only fitting one drive then either a + or - 90 degree bend should work fine.
Additionally you may find the 18in cable is rather short, I had to buy a longer cable for mine.
As for power you will need to buy an adapter which converts from the molex power connectors which are already in the optical bay to the SATA one. Something like these ones:
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Micro Accessories/SATAPA/
Hi, either the right or left angled cables will work. the straight ones will not and you will need to dremel the fan assembly if you use the straight cables. Just get the angled ones and you will be fine.
The SATA cable is just data, you will need to get sata power cable adapters or get DVD drives with legacy power connectors.
I have since replaced the Plextor PX-755SA's with Dual Pioneer SATA drives which work perfect!
I'm glad this thread has helped people get the most from their Mac Pro's!
Timish & Dark Dragon, thanks to both of you. I've got the drives and the cables now and they've been fitted. Quite easy it was too.
I've not burned/ripped simultaneously yet but will tomorrow.
I purchased a Samsung SH-S223F, £19.95 and right angled SATA cable and a SATA power adaptor-£2.99 each, I'll keep the stock drive in the machine in case I get any probs then I can be pretty sure I'll have no problems as the system will see what it expects to see when it looks at the hardware.
The drive showed up in the profiler with Generic Burn support and claims to be able to burn every kind of optical media I've heard of, (except Blu Ray and HD-but I don't use these anyway).
My scenario
Hello, I noticed what you said about best performance.. I just got two identical 22x superdrives running on the IDE bus. I did notice the slowdown though not by much. My question:
If I take one of those 22x superdrives out and either get a 22x sata or converter to convert pata-sata, would I notice a much better difference in disc at once burning? In other words, both drives are the same speed(22x), just one would be connected to the ODD_SATA port while the other one would be connected to the IDE. Again, am I losing any performance here?
Also, have you found out whether or not a SATA optical(not HDD) connected to the ODD ports will work in bootcamp and also Parallels 5 or vmware fusion 3?
So here are the facts:
Two drives on one IDE bus = not the optimal config, impossible to read data or write to/from both devices at the same time.
One Drive on IDE, One drive on SATA = Better, allows simultaneous reads/writes to each optical drive
Both drives on SATA = Best performance[/QUOTE]
Hello, I noticed what you said about best performance.. I just got two identical 22x superdrives running on the IDE bus. I did notice the slowdown though not by much. My question:
If I take one of those 22x superdrives out and either get a 22x sata or converter to convert pata-sata, would I notice a much better difference in disc at once burning? In other words, both drives are the same speed(22x), just one would be connected to the ODD_SATA port while the other one would be connected to the IDE. Again, am I losing any performance here?
Also, have you found out whether or not a SATA optical(not HDD) connected to the ODD ports will work in bootcamp and also Parallels 5 or vmware fusion 3?
So here are the facts:
Two drives on one IDE bus = not the optimal config, impossible to read data or write to/from both devices at the same time.
One Drive on IDE, One drive on SATA = Better, allows simultaneous reads/writes to each optical drive
Both drives on SATA = Best performance[/QUOTE]
Yes it is Possible
Hey everyone,
I don't know if anyone still cares, but if you stumbled upon this post and you still don't know, yes it is possible.
Here is what I do.
I export my video and then put it into iDVD
I export is as a Disc Image
After it exports, I open up Disk Utility
Select the drive I want
Select the Disk Image File
And then it burns
I then do burn the same disk image on the second drive. So yes, the Mac Pro can burn 2 discs at once.
Hey everyone,
I don't know if anyone still cares, but if you stumbled upon this post and you still don't know, yes it is possible.
Here is what I do.
I export my video and then put it into iDVD
I export is as a Disc Image
After it exports, I open up Disk Utility
Select the drive I want
Select the Disk Image File
And then it burns
I then do burn the same disk image on the second drive. So yes, the Mac Pro can burn 2 discs at once.
I used to burn 4 cd's at once on my Mac Pro before I got a high speed duplicator. Two LacCie Porshe USB2 with Lite-On 52327s mechanisms, and two in the firewre configuration. I did have to burn at what some would consider a slow speed - around 6x & 8x. But is worked quite well. And yes - four copies of Toast