"Spinning drives are actually faster than SSDs for mass media archives"
Is this actually true? Any evidence for this?
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.
Gizmodo: This Is the MacBook Pro Retina Model You Should Buy
- Thread starter 5630745
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"Spinning drives are actually faster than SSDs for mass media archives"
Is this actually true? Any evidence for this?
p.s. you bumped a year-old thread.
- low cost per GB
- overwrite existing data (<---- this is a big one, no SSD can do this)
Advantages of SSDs:
- high environment and shock tolerance
- faster overall disk performance
- very little physical restrictions
If the above sentence says "spinning drives are actually cheaper than SSDs for mass media archives", I'd agree, but faster - er no.
Advantages of HDDs:
- low cost per GB
- overwrite existing data (<---- this is a big one, no SSD can do this)
Advantages of SSDs:
- high environment and shock tolerance
- faster overall disk performance
- very little physical restrictions
If the above sentence says "spinning drives are actually cheaper than SSDs for mass media archives", I'd agree, but faster - er no.
Last edited:
2.4/256/16GB here too.
In hindsight, I wouldve upped the SSD. I find myself archiving quite a bit to my portable 1TB thunderbolt drive (not that painful since it's so much faster than previous transfer rates). I do video editing so you can understand. if there was NO video to speak of, the 256 would be more than enough.
in terms of 16GB Ram:
I am running FCPX, LOGIC PRO, and Motion sometimes at the same time. Oh and I'm running X-Plane while waiting for video (rocks on a rMBP) to render at times too. I've never done a comparison but my gut tells me at 8Ram, this would be a chore - worth the extra $ for at least peace of mind.
In hindsight, I wouldve upped the SSD. I find myself archiving quite a bit to my portable 1TB thunderbolt drive (not that painful since it's so much faster than previous transfer rates). I do video editing so you can understand. if there was NO video to speak of, the 256 would be more than enough.
in terms of 16GB Ram:
I am running FCPX, LOGIC PRO, and Motion sometimes at the same time. Oh and I'm running X-Plane while waiting for video (rocks on a rMBP) to render at times too. I've never done a comparison but my gut tells me at 8Ram, this would be a chore - worth the extra $ for at least peace of mind.
That article was from a year ago. It's still mostly true. I got the 16GB RAM/512GB SSD model last June and am glad I splurged for the extra space on the SSD.
I have a 512GB SSD in my 2010 MBP (120GB for Boot Camp, the rest for OSX). At the moment, the OSX partition has 190GB available. My hypothetical rMBP would definitely have at least 512GB, possibly 768--though that would get expensive quickly. To me, the whole point is portability; I don't want to be bringing an external drive everywhere nor do I want to be dealing with potentially slow/unreliable Internet at the places I hang out.
I have the base model rMBP, and it hasn't missed a single beat for me. I own 3 external drives (well, 3 old internal drives I use with a USB plug) and that gives me about 500GB alone. And knowing me, I will be selling this by this time next year, and getting the new model.
I was getting the base rmbp but then for £400 more I opted for 2.7, 16gb and 512ssd. But I did get interest free finance so it allowed me to pay over 12 months. For to powerful for my needs presently, but then I plan to keep it 3-4 years.
If I'm not mistaken, a few years back SSD access time was the huge advantage over HDD's slow access time. While for sustained transfer rates the HDD's almost levelled performance for some time - thus for servers dealing with large, single files an HDD provided almost equivalent transfer rates at much lower cost. I think that's where that statement comes from. Do correct me if I'm wrong though!
Edit: not anymore, obviously!
My original 15 rMBP came with the 256GB and 16GB RAM I quickly upgrade to 512GB through an OEM SSD bought in Ebay. That one had an LG screen and IR so sold it and eventually bought my current max out rMBP. I could do ok with the 512GB drive, but the extra space (768GB) provides me room to spare without the need to carry an external drive
Ridiculous advertisement/PR release - uh I mean article.
"And $200 for the bump from 8GB to 16 isn't bad at all."
No, it's not bad, it's terrible.
Paying this kind of money for a non-upgradeable laptop is unwise IMO, unless the additional $1000-$2000 over a 2011/2012 uMBP doesn't mean very much to you. It's somewhat akin to paying $1800 or $2500 for the 2008 MBA, or $650 for the first iPhone (which was the last time I'll be Apple's "first-mover" sucker).
___
"And $200 for the bump from 8GB to 16 isn't bad at all."
No, it's not bad, it's terrible.
Paying this kind of money for a non-upgradeable laptop is unwise IMO, unless the additional $1000-$2000 over a 2011/2012 uMBP doesn't mean very much to you. It's somewhat akin to paying $1800 or $2500 for the 2008 MBA, or $650 for the first iPhone (which was the last time I'll be Apple's "first-mover" sucker).
___
Agree, if you're going to have a Windows partition (and play games) 512 GB is the absolute minimum.
Although, I haven't tried running games off of my external Thunderbolt SSD, that might alleviate things a bit.
Agree! You may also get the newest USB 3 pen drives which are insanely fast; I bought a 256GB Patriot and that thing flies, very small and powerfull.