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.
Larger than 1TB HDD in MacPro 2009
- Thread starter bantrybay
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
CaptainChunk
macrumors 68020
To elaborate, any SATA compliant drive that fits on the Mac Pro's backplane will work.
Apple just doesn't offer 1.5TB drives in their CTO options, that's all.
Apple just doesn't offer 1.5TB drives in their CTO options, that's all.
fridgeymonster3
macrumors 6502
What type and size HDD are you looking at? I'm interested because I'm leaning towards filling my 4th bay with either a 1TB or something larger.
Trivial rock
macrumors regular
WD have released a 2TB 'green' drive, http://www.ebuyer.com/product/158614 I assume this will work fine in the Mac Pro then (2008)?
P.S sorry to semi hijack the thread.
P.S sorry to semi hijack the thread.
Tallest Skil
macrumors P6
YES. There is NO size limitation.
Oh, and before someone comes in with their rant about the eventual size limitation with 64-bit OS', let me remind them that by the time that solid state hard drives reach that size (because spinning disk ones will NEVER get that large), we'll already be at 256-bit computing, rendering their point moot. 😛
i was just thinking today about how HDD's are becoming a real bottleneck in an average computer..
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
I think about this often. 😱 😉
Fortunately, it can be solved. With a little help from RAID. 😀
Nah...RAID can kick the crap out of SSD's single drive performance 😱, and at less money. 😉 Granted, it takes more drives to do it, and maybe even a controller card for more drives than the MP can handle, (or any computer via on-board SATA ports), but hey, it's better than nothing. 😉 😛
hayduke
macrumors 65816
What about a 2006 Mac Pro? Presumably the same deal? I'm thinking about a RAID5 with 4x 2TB.
Tallest Skil
macrumors P6
There hasn't been a size limitation since before the introduction of the G4 QuickSilver in aught two.😉
fridgeymonster3
macrumors 6502
I have two of these in the 1 TB size and I really like them. Thinking of getting one of these or two of the new Samsung F2EG 1.5 TB EcoGreen drives that I saw announced a few weeks ago.
my .02 is that i would never want 2tb of anything on a single disk. hard drives fail, or if not they still become slower and less reliable when filled up.
the flipside to that is that you may be able to comfortably put a tb of information on a 2tb drive without seeing any performance hit like you would on a 1tb drive, and that you could always use one of these things for a system backup should one or two of your smaller drives fail. i guess it's as logical as any other computer purchase... but still, having that much data on one component scares me unless you're planning to invest in an equally sizable backup solution
the flipside to that is that you may be able to comfortably put a tb of information on a 2tb drive without seeing any performance hit like you would on a 1tb drive, and that you could always use one of these things for a system backup should one or two of your smaller drives fail. i guess it's as logical as any other computer purchase... but still, having that much data on one component scares me unless you're planning to invest in an equally sizable backup solution
Larger capacities/platter density are making things difficult in terms of RAID. Greater odds of a failure occuring while in the middle of a rebuild, totally trashing the data. 🙁 (RAID 5 & 6).
2TB drives are worrying me a little, particularly the consumer versions that only have UBE ratings of 1E14. 🙁 At that capacity, I'd think models with 1E15 would be a minimum, not an option. Most of these being enterprise drives, though exceptions do exist. WD's Caviar Black series are such an example. (I haven't yet checked out the new Green 2TB model).
In other news: In response to the increased speed caused by raid 0, programers have invented what they describe as "uncompressed High Definition Video" Which they say can, "make even raid seem slow." Professional editors who require high speed had no comment.
LMAO! 😀
Now if the software wasn't so bloated... 😱 😛
So say ~1.0 to 1.6GB/s is even too slow for Uncompressed HDV?
This is because Apple doesn't want the Seagate firmware problems presently affecting the Seagate SATA drives.
My external raid 0 via firewire 800 can't handle 10bit uncompressed HD. 🙁 Idk about internal.
FW800 is just under 100MB/s throughput (786Mb/s). I was under the impression that it would need something around 400MB/s min, and I'd think more would be rather desireable.
In looking over the replies, I'm thinking I'll go with the stock 640, an additional 1TB in bay 2, with a 1.5 in bay 3 for hourly Time Machine backups. I'll be using a NAS for nightly backups. I don't like packing the onboard HDD's full, so I should be fine on capacity. Thanks again....
