Internal/external drives: which uses more power from MBP battery?

[Username02]

Accessing external drives via FireWire or accessing an HDD in an Optibay/Data Doubler?

 

[simsaladimbamba]

Depends on the actual HDD, but an external 2.5" HDD might consume more power due to LED lighting on the enclosure.

 

[Username02]

Thanks for your reply.

If it is really that close of a race between the 2 options, here are more details:

The HDD in question is currently used for iTunes library files.
There is no LED on current enclosure.

If Data Doubler is used, the library will reside on the original 500GB 7200 rpm 2010 15" MBP HDD that was replaced earlier this year.

 

[Lennyvalentin]

External USB enclosures use a USB-to-SATA bridge chip which would consume a comparatively tiny bit of additional power. The USB interface itself is also slower and more processor-intensive than the native, internal SATA ports, meaning somewhat higher power consumption during disk activity. This should also be relatively minor though as you're probably not accessing the drive constantly.

Any single LED on the enclosure would be insignificant as a power drain. If the thing's lit up like a christmas tree it might become noticeable though.

 

[Username02]

External USB enclosures use a USB-to-SATA bridge chip which would consume a comparatively tiny bit of additional power. The USB interface itself is also slower and more processor-intensive than the native, internal SATA ports, meaning somewhat higher power consumption during disk activity. This should also be relatively minor though as you're probably not accessing the drive constantly.

Any single LED on the enclosure would be insignificant as a power drain. If the thing's lit up like a christmas tree it might become noticeable though.

Thanks for your insight. Could the same be true for the FireWire bus?

Also, can I get better real world drive speeds with a 7200 HDD through the internal SATA II port via Data Doubler or through FirWire?