Is 80GB SSD enough?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by pcconvert, Dec 12, 2009.

  1. pcconvert macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    #1
    As title says, is 80GB SSD (Intel) enough as OS disk in my iMac i7? I have Raid1 2TB WD Mybook via FW800 as the data store. Would be 80GB enough for OS and Apps? PS, FCE, Aperture, Lightroom.... Again - Aperture db would be on external, FCE scratches too etcetc. No gaming.

    I actually bought 160GB which found home in my MBP17 (wow that speed) and originally i bought 2 x 80GB to put them in Raid0 with Patriot convoy. Now I think I'd use 80GB in iMac and put another 80GB into our traveller uMBP13. What do you think?
     
  2. -Ryan- macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #2
    I think it should be plenty if you are using it only for the OS plus Applications. Unless you have an absolutely massive amount of applications (or perhaps lots of games) it should pose no problem.
     
  3. Bennieboy© macrumors 65816

    Bennieboy©

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Location:
    england
    #3
    personally i'd buy bigger, if you can afford it, get a 128Gb or more, how long are you planning on having the HD?
    if more then a few years, you might find programs or such that you want, but not have enough room,
     
  4. 300D macrumors 65816

    300D

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #4
    32gb would be ample for an OS/apps boot drive for most people.
     
  5. googdot macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Location:
    Aotearoa...Land Of The Long White Cloud
    #5
    Agreed. My OS/apps currently take up <15GB of space with CS3, Lightroom, etc. all installed.
     
  6. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #6
    Why? The OP does NOT need a 128GB boot drive.

    OP, that SSD will be fine. Your disk will have ample room to breath too.
     
  7. 3121 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    yep I would say 80gb is sufficient for OS and apps. this is what i have with my curretn mac mini with a 60gb HDD. i keep all other data on an external drive.
     
  8. ma2ha3 macrumors regular

    ma2ha3

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    #8
    sadly no. i have the intel 80gb, i have not enough space to install all my application. i already place all my music in another hd. but application cannot be place in the other hd.

    yes boot up is fast, starting application is fast.
    but application still run like traditional hd.
    now i have to keep moving data around.
    80GB is not enough for desktop.
    sorry to say , 160GB is not enough too.
    stick to good old traditional hd and wait for a few seconds.
     
  9. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #9
    Sorry, but this is just dead wrong. OSX takes up less than fifteen gigabytes. You can run it comfortably on a 30GB partition if you don't plan on installing anything. The OP will keep all his photos, documents, and music on another hard disk. The boot drive will be just that, a boot drive. People have used small hard disks FOR YEARS to install the OS and applications and push all their documents and data onto another disk.

    The OP could get away with a drive even smaller than the 80GB Intel drive, don't make things up and suggest that 160GB isn't enough. That's a bald faced lie
     
  10. ma2ha3 macrumors regular

    ma2ha3

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    #10
    maybe for you, you dun think the space.
    my HDV camera files take up a lot of space.
    my 5d2 files take up a lot of space.
    one outing and i have place massive amount of data into the hd for processing.
    i use ssd for high speed, so now i want to use my magnetic hd to store files for processing? what the point why dun i get magnetic hd in the first place.
    my application take up a lot of space.
    80GB is not enough.
    I am talking by experience.
    what is your experience, do you have an intel 80GB running on OS X 10.5.8?




     
  11. FieryFurnace macrumors 6502

    FieryFurnace

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Location:
    Berlin, Germany
    #11
    I have a 60GB Vertex in my MB, with the OS + CS4 Design Premium + some music + a couple of GB assignment files, I am at 31GB used / 28GB free.
     
  12. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #12
    Who cares? The OP won't be storing those or any of his files on the SSD drive. Those files will be kept on a magnetic drive.

    My applications don't take up much space at all. What application do you have that seems to be taking up a lot of space?
     
  13. Cynicalone macrumors 68040

    Cynicalone

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Location:
    Okie land
    #13
    80GB is more than enough for OS X and a large number of apps. Keep you data on the external and you should be fine.
     
  14. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    Pfft... Nonsense!
    I've got the 160GB Intel SSD for OS and apps and it's not even half full.
    My OS is 10.6 and besides lots and lots of apps it even holds 3 VMs. Currently 66GB are full.
    That said, for the average user 80GB should be more than enough for the OS and apps.
    If you're into video or audio (Final Cut Studio and Logic take about 50GB each with all plugins), it should be pretty hard to fill up 80GB with apps.
     
  15. knewsom macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    #15
    Even with FCP Suite 2, if you install the additional content like SFX and stock footage libraries on a different drive (which total about 40 GB), it's absolutely doable. I have every app I need installed right now, and even with every conceivable plugin for Final Cut, 80 gigs is plenty. 80 GB is the size I'll but adding to my machine. I just don't need more.

    Keep DATA FILES and PROJECTS ETC on a different drive. Voila.
     
  16. ma2ha3 macrumors regular

    ma2ha3

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    #16
    fcp suite 2.
    it does not install on the other hd. it must be on the hd with the OS.

    what about my other applications?

    what about my email from 2003?

    what about about all the massive amount of data i download from the web?

    not only it is not enough to install all my applications. i have to constantly move data around. why i should be bother with this? why not change to magnetic hd, which is exactly what i am going to do. use my 80gb ssd for something else.

    if the guy who thinking of buying 80GB SSB hobby including constantly moving data around to keep your hd from filling up. go ahead.

    you must ask yourself, you buy SSB to speed up your work, if your data is in magnetic hd when you are doing data processing on it. Do you think SSB massive improve your performance?
     
  17. knewsom macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    #17
    Install the APP on the SSD, install all the CONTENT somewhere else. In the installation process, it allows you to select another place to put said CONTENT, like music loops, sample video clips, live fonts, etc.

    What about them? Main HD. Apps are small.

    Unless you've been getting 1+meg attachments many times a day since 2003, I think there's probably room. Also, you can archive it on another drive.

    Change your downloads directory.

    Sure it is, you just don't realize it. However, realize that an SSD is generally beter as your boot drive, and NOT as your main storage. Use another hard drive for all the junk that one collects in this digital world. Movies, music, HD video files you're working on (that should NEVER EVER be on your boot drive anyways), etc. Also, you can use Automator to help keep your files more organized, and automatically move things for you, you guessed it, to another hard drive.

    I think you mean SSD. In case you missed the other incredibly informative thread on SSD upgrades, which cites numerous benefits thereof, here's the thing: If you rely on massive data processing, using the SSD for that source media won't make much difference, because SEQUENTIAL read/write operations of large data off a magnetic HDD are plenty fast for most of that type of work. HOWEVER, for SYSTEM use, magnetic drives are BAD at random read/writes with teeny tiny files. This is where SSDs really shine. This improves your boot time, app launch time, and anything that involves your computer fetching app and plugin data randomly of the disc. Sometimes, using a project file located on the SSD could be valuable, for saving and reading the project itself, but remember, you'll probably want to archive them elsewhere.

    If you don't want to constantly move data around, then put things wehre you want it to be the first time, or use Automator to do it for you. If you don't care about having to wait a few seconds for the computer to access the main HD, and don't need the performance increase from the faster system drive, then stick with a magnetic drive.
     
  18. pcconvert thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    #18
    I am on the same page as knewsome.

    In the meantime I dropped in that 80GB SSD and am installing apps. Boy this thing wakes up.

    When I had it opened however I realized I will go a little different route - next week my hitachi 7200rpm 2TB is going back in and SSD is going to replace the optical! I would have done it today unfortunately Frys don't carry the slimsata-sata adapter... The unsuper 'superdrive' will go to recycle bin - will use BD ext.

    I think Apple owes the nation factory config like that - ext. optics, sata SSD and sata 2TB storage. Let's scream @ apple to deliver! (removing glass was a bit scary at first and putting screws back along magnets was ehmm little challenging:)
     
  19. knewsom macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    #19
    ...now it is I who is on the same page as you. :) That's precisely what I'll be doing, except with a 1TB drive instead of a 2. For the big big stuff, I've got me DROBO. :D
     

Share This Page