External flash storage with TB and USB 3.0

[jeutie]

Greetings all.

I am looking for an external storage solution for my macs. (and pc's) I need 256GB but preferably 512GB of flash storage that is accessible via Thunderbolt and USB 3.0. I prefer a bus-powered solution so it is mobile as well. Since I want the SSD for speed I am looking for the fastest solution available. I would not want to spend far above 350€.

Taking all of this in consideration, I found that the LaCie Rugged 256GB SSD Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 Drive fits my needs, but speed-wise it seems a tad slow for an SSD. (380MB/s whilst a good SSD goes up to 500?) Is there any other product I should look into? Am I better off purchasing an enclosure and a SSD apart? I could really use some advice. To add to that, I'd love to see the perfect solution if I WAS NOT on a budget as well.

Your input is appreciated. Thanks already for your replies.

With kind regards,
Jeutie

 

[AlabamaSlammer]

why not get this? http://www.amazon.com/Passport-Port...359106330&sr=8-3&keywords=external+hard+drive

2tb hard drive for much less than what you are wanting to pay

 

[The-Pro]

If you have a computer that does not have an ssd or a sata 2 one, then the 380mb/s of the lacie rugged is unimportant. when copyig files to the external
ssd the read speed of your internal drive is the bottleneck, when copying files to the internal drive then the internal drives write performance is the bottleneck.
Only if you have an internal ssd that is quicker then 380mb/s would it be worth it to get a quicker external ssd then the lacie rugged.
You could have a look at thundebolt and usb 3.0 enclosures and fit a samsung 840 pro inside. then it would be quicker.

why not get this? http://www.amazon.com/Passport-Port...359106330&sr=8-3&keywords=external+hard+drive

2tb hard drive for much less than what you are wanting to pay

hes talking about getting something with more then 380mb/s and you giving him a link to a traditional spinning hard drive? you will get 120mb/s if your lucky from that one. Also, its not thunderbolt which was another requirement.

 

[jeutie]

If you have a computer that does not have an ssd or a sata 2 one, then the 380mb/s of the lacie rugged is unimportant. when copyig files to the external
ssd the read speed of your internal drive is the bottleneck, when copying files to the internal drive then the internal drives write performance is the bottleneck.
Only if you have an internal ssd that is quicker then 380mb/s would it be worth it to get a quicker external ssd then the lacie rugged.
You could have a look at thundebolt and usb 3.0 enclosures and fit a samsung 840 pro inside. then it would be quicker.

My computers all have 128 or 256GB SSD's in them which average at 450 to 480mb/s, but I'd like an external solution to go between them. I'm aware that the USB 3.0 performance will be the bottleneck but I'd mostly be using Thunderbolt. I know the Samsung 840 Pro is one of if not the best SSD currently available on the market, but I don't know if it, together with such an enclosure (Which I cannot seem to find?) would fit in my budget. Thank you very much for your input though!

 

[PastFuture]

If you have a computer that does not have an ssd or a sata 2 one, then the 380mb/s of the lacie rugged is unimportant. when copyig files to the external
ssd the read speed of your internal drive is the bottleneck, when copying files to the internal drive then the internal drives write performance is the bottleneck.
Only if you have an internal ssd that is quicker then 380mb/s would it be worth it to get a quicker external ssd then the lacie rugged.
You could have a look at thundebolt and usb 3.0 enclosures and fit a samsung 840 pro inside. then it would be quicker.

If you are working on files on files straight from the external SSD (i.e. Aperture library on external SSD) via Thunderbolt, the bottlenecks you are talking about wouldn't apply though. Or am I missing something here?

 

[Giuly]

The best solution would be to use USB 3.0 or drop your PCs. Just put a 240GB SanDisk SSD in a USB 3.0 enclosure. As those enclosures operate on SATA-II, the 256GB Samsung 840 Pro would be a waste - unless you replace another SSD in one of your computers with it and use the old one in the enclosure.

Otherwise, you're left with the LaCie Rugged SSD (which is actually slower than a USB 3.0 solution), as the elgato Thunderbolt SSD doesn't have USB 3.0 and the LaCie Little Big Disk blows your budget and doesn't come with USB 3.0 either.

 

[The-Pro]

If you are working on files on files straight from the external SSD (i.e. Aperture library on external SSD) via Thunderbolt, the bottlenecks you are talking about wouldn't apply though. Or am I missing something here?

yes correct but when opening my aperture library (26000pics) the read from my internal ssd doesnt go beyond 110mb/s. so i didnt think its important if u have 380 or 500mb/s read speed. thats just me, might be different for someone else

 

[jeutie]

The best solution would be to use USB 3.0 or drop your PCs. Just put a 240GB SanDisk SSD in a USB 3.0 enclosure. As those enclosures operate on SATA-II, the 256GB Samsung 840 Pro would be a waste - unless you replace another SSD in one of your computers with it and use the old one in the enclosure.

Otherwise, you're left with the LaCie Rugged SSD (which is actually slower than a USB 3.0 solution), as the elgato Thunderbolt SSD doesn't have USB 3.0 and the LaCie Little Big Disk blows your budget and doesn't come with USB 3.0 either.

I simply wanted USB 3.0 to ensure that IF it ever comes to me needing to plug-in the drive to a PC (all my current computers are Macs) I would be able to. If the LaCie Rugged SSD is operating slower than USB 3.0 speeds, it would be a waste. The Elgato solution sounds nice, but then I can't fall back to USB 3.0 though. The Little Big Disk is out of my budget indeed. Thanks a lot for your input. I guess I'll have to look into something else then.

 

[kohlson]

Sounds like the USB3 requirement is a saftey net for a remote possibility. You may want to get a TB enclosure for your SSD solution that you would use every day, and then pick up a cheap USB3 enclosure as prices drop. On the occasion that you need to plug it into your PC, a 5-minute swap will keep you in business.

 

[jeutie]

Sounds like the USB3 requirement is a saftey net for a remote possibility. You may want to get a TB enclosure for your SSD solution that you would use every day, and then pick up a cheap USB3 enclosure as prices drop. On the occasion that you need to plug it into your PC, a 5-minute swap will keep you in business.

That is certainly true, splendid idea! But I think that a decent SSD, a thunderbolt enclosure and an USB 3.0 enclosure won't fit in my budget... Unless you can give me some suggestions?

 

[Giuly]

That is certainly true, splendid idea! But I think that a decent SSD, a thunderbolt enclosure and an USB 3.0 enclosure won't fit in my budget... Unless you can give me some suggestions?

240GB SanDisk SSD+Seagate Thunderbolt Adapter+USB 3.0 enclosure.

Although this works perfectly fine and is rather inexpensive, you don't have an enclosure around the SSD. In that case you would need the complementary Seagate Backup Plus HDD and replace the HDD inside. If you now take the (temporarily) useless USB 3.0 enclosure and install the spare hard drive into it, you have yourself a 1TB backup solution or iTunes drive as well.

 

[jeutie]

240GB SanDisk SSD+Seagate Thunderbolt Adapter+USB 3.0 enclosure.

That looks perfect, but aren't both those interfaces SATA-II instead of SATA-III? I know the USB one is, but that isn't all that important. I can't seem to find official details on the connector for the thunderbolt adapter though. Thank you so much for the suggestion!