MacBook Pro RAID 0 results

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by napolean hill, Nov 17, 2013.

  1. napolean hill, Nov 17, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2013

    napolean hill macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    #1
    Just wanted so say thanks to those guys who gave me some great advice on setting up my raid setup. Got a late 2012 15 in macbook pro 2.3 ghz, 16 gb ram, 2 samsung 840 pro ssds configured to raid zero (striped raid) heres a screenshot for any of you thinking of doing it. Id say go for it. Boot times 12 sec too from shut off to home screen.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. yangchewren macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2012
    #2
    Impressive and a good choice of SSDs.

    Exactly what the last classic model should be used for!
     
  3. napolean hill thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    #3
    yes, thank you. Exactly why i bought it over the new retina and i tell all my friends to do the same.. Minus the better screen obviously.
     
  4. Macshroomer, Nov 17, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2013

    Macshroomer macrumors 65816

    Macshroomer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    #4
    Why on earth tell your friends to do that?
    The cost of buying that model refurb and putting two expensive 840 Pro SSD drives in it compared to just flat out buying the new retina with the even faster 512 or 1TB PCIe drive with more reliability is a far better deal, I bet yours would cost more to do actually...

    Not saying those are not nice numbers but in reality, the new PCIe retinas are still going to spank it overall plus you have a warranty.
     
  5. Ccrew macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    #5
    Unless you like your data and care that it's all lost if you lose just one of your two drives.
    RAID 0 = twice the possibility that you're going to suffer a catastrophic data loss all so you can gain a marginal amount of speed.
     
  6. napolean hill, Nov 17, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2013

    napolean hill thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    #6
    i use cloud storage and back up every single day, not worried about it at all.

    ----------

    the drives are $215 on amazon, i bought the stock model new and upgraded from there, i believe it was around $2100, there is absolutely no cost comparison between a maxed out, unupgradeable retina through the apple store and a stock upgradeable macbook pro. The maxed out retina is $3300 before tax. My friend has a fully maxed out retina and my numbers are better than his. yes his screens nicer and i like that its thinner than mine but theres no such spanking going on. i don't know how you came to that conclusion. As far as the warranty goes all i have to do is put back in the original components if i ever have to have apple care done on it. Im not saying its the best thing for everybody, but if cost is an issue i found that this was the next best option for me anyway rather than going on and purchasing a fully maxed out retina.
     
  7. Macshroomer, Nov 17, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2013

    Macshroomer macrumors 65816

    Macshroomer

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    #7
    I thought would include part of another thread to preface the following question: If you backup your data at a *much* slower rate via cloud and never used the HDD for storage...what exactly do you need stripe raid speeds for? Most people I know in person, not the web kind, who need and use that kind of speed are VM users, video and photo pros, you know, for actual work.

    I understand your cost analysis now given you are using 240GB drives, but about those numbers, are you talking just drive speeds or overall...I bet in real world "work" applications, not benchmarks, the maxed out 15" retina will still allow the professional to get work done faster overall. I priced the refurb 15" plus 16GB ram upgrade, drive caddy and two drives at about $2,100. The top model Retina is $2,599 or even better, $2,399 via EDU discount ( easy to get ). That's not a huge difference for the person considering either a new Retina 15" or messing around with stripe SSD's in a 2012.

    Enjoy your upgrade but be ready to fend off users of the new 15" in terms of those "numbers". If I had the 15" you do, I would not have upgraded to the retina either, too close in specs and I use this hardware strictly for work, not play so I think differently about said numbers...

    P.S. I am a 13" retina user..:)
     
  8. napolean hill, Nov 17, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2013

    napolean hill thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    #8
    yes correct, when i said i tell my friends to do the same i meant they already have a regular macbook pro and ask me whether they should upgrade to the new retina or not and i tell them no, if you want to have the speed just upgrade your system which is something you can't do with the retina. I personally just like taking things apart and making them faster. :) Im not sure how to get the edu discount if your not a student but I'm sure theres a way to do anything. But without that discount a fully maxed out retina from the apple store is around $3500 with tax. I am a commodities broker for which i use to run my charting platforms for work. Is there a NEED for faster speeds? Of course not. But since when did need become the prerequisite for doing anything fun in this world. :)
     
  9. john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #9
    You're making a completely invalid comparison. Why are you talking about a "fully maxed out retina" as if it's comparable to the late 2012 refurb you bought? The CPUs on the top-of-the-line Haswell are much, much, much faster than the 2.3 Ghz Ivy Bridge model you bought. In fact, your CPU correlates most closely to the 2.0 Ghz Haswell.

    And, as the poster above noted, the PCIe storage is faster—substantially so—than the previous generation. Early benchmarks suggest comparable sequential read-write numbers to the system you put together.

    $2599 ($2399 with EDU pricing) therefore buys someone a Retina that's got a faster CPU, a faster GPU, and comparable SSD speeds. You cited the "upgradeability" of the non-Retina model, but I fail to see how that's really going to matter going forward. You may, or may not, see compatible 16GB DDR3L SDRAM upgrades in the future...and you may, or may not, see faster SSDs, although you're close to the max throughput on that old bus anyway. So really, "upgradeability" strikes me as a non-argument.

    It's cool if you had fun and enjoyed it...but let's be intellectually honest with our comparisons.
     
  10. napolean hill thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    #10
    I don't know where all this hates coming from? All i was doing was saying thanks to the guys who helped me out and posting the results. Sounds like some of you are looking to justify spending over 3k for a laptop thats going to be outdated next year when the new one comes out anyway. Again, i didn't buy a refurbished one i had this one already and when it came time to decide whether i was going to upgrade or buy a 15 in fully maxed retina, i decided to do what i did. Its not for everyone but it worked for me. This edu you speak of is only for certain people who qualify for edu, so that to me is a non argument since were speaking in general terms and not selected individuals. I have two 840 pros which imho are better or just as good as apples that i bought for the same price you paid for one. And i saved over 1500 dollars not upgrading. Because i don't get "edu". So are there pros and cons in comparison to the new retina? of course there are. I never posted this thread as a comparison to the new retina in any way, i simply stated that if people were in my position with a late 2012 iMac they could use this option and achieve pretty much identical operational speed to the retina, minus the new screen thats all i said. I already own a brand new 2013 maxed out iMac with a 768 ss 32 gb ram etc, i have two thunderbolt screens 27 inches that i use with it as well, i am in no way "jealous" of anyone with a retina, if i wanted a retina id buy it. However it seems to me some of you are second guessing your purchases of the new retina?? food for thought my friend
     
  11. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #11
    The reason people are criticizing you is because you're telling you seem think that your machine is faster then a brand new rMBP and you're telling your friends to do the same.

    While you raw disk io is faster, you're increasing your risk because if there's any issues with one volume you lose all your data (you need a solid back up procedure). Also there are other factors to performance, CPU, GPU, bus speeds, all of which are improved on the newer laptops.

    I'm not saying you have a bad machine and you seem happy with it, so that's all that matters but for many of people the retina model is a better buy.
    1. Get better display
    2. Faster CPU
    3. Faster GPU
    4. PCIe

    There are downsides to the rMBP, like upgradeability but most consumers don't really upgrade their laptops.

    Enjoy your new machine, it definitely has some impressive disk benchmarks, but as I mentioned be sure to keep current backups just in case.
     
  12. john123, Nov 18, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2013

    john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #12
    Hate? It's not hate. It's just straight talk.

    Nope, I haven't purchased a Haswell, and I'm not sure that I'm going to. If I do, I certainly won't get a top of the line one. Either way, I'm not sure I see your point—per my original post, it's not like your machine will have any magical ability not to be outdated next year either. "Upgradeability" is a nice word, but you've pretty much hit the max of what you'll ever be able to do with your 2012 cMBP—so as I explained previously, I don't see how you have much (if any) headroom to upgrade further given the architecture of the laptop you're stuck with.

    $2399 vs $2599—it doesn't really matter. The original points I made stand unaffected by that difference in price. Don't get lost in the pricing details. The point is that your comparison to a "top of the line $3100+ retina" isn't even close to fair, because your machine has nowhere close to that much firepower.

    1) See above—I didn't "pay" for anything
    2) No, striping is definitely not better. You're getting performance on par with extra risk of failure. That's why no one does RAID0 in mission critical environments. You said you don't care about data loss, and that's great, but your argument that your rig is "better" doesn't pass the facts test. Two 256GBs in RAID1 with SATA is not better than one 512GB PCIe.

    And that's a sensible choice. But where you went off the rails in this thread was when you said that's why you did this "over the retina" and then said you tell your friends to "make the same choice." If someone has a 2012 or earlier cMBP and wants to improve their disk speed, sure. But I wouldn't counsel most people to buy one of those and then equip it like yours. AND, not every user will have their backups in as good a shape as you do. I would never recommend RAID0 to 99% of the people I know, simply because most consumers don't have a good enough backup and data recovery plan in place.

    Also, you didn't really "save 1500 dollars not upgrading." Option B was the choice to sell your machine on the secondary market, forego the two 256GB drives, and purchase a new Retina. The net difference would not be $1500. There would be a difference, simply because these new machines have more capabilities than yours. Whether that's a tradeoff you care about or value is a personal and individual decision.

    That's false. You're behind the curve on CPU speeds.

    See above. You're way off the mark, and you seem defensive about the route you took. I don't think you need to be. Like I said formerly, I'm glad your rig is working for you and saved you some money. And it's always fun to experiment with hardware. But current Haswell Retinas will basically equal your disk IO performance will beating you across on processor and graphics, WiFi, and external storage via TB2—and, of course, the screen. To imply that everything is equal between your model and a top-of-the-line model except the price and screen is silly. That's all I'm saying.
     
  13. yangchewren macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2012
    #13
    Sweet price too.

    Btw I have the new 15" retina 512GB. But I agree entirely with your post being a "proof of concept" that would allow other forumers, who use the classic chassis, to refer to and understand the (albeit risky) awesomeness of 2 SSDs in raid 0.
     
  14. napolean hill thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    #14
    One more time, i never told any friends who DIDNT have a laptop to do what i did. You misread what i wrote. I did however tell the ones who DID have one and were thinking of upgrading that this is what i was doing and to considerate as a viable option. Also you keep talking about speeds etc etc. I highly doubt that theres any real world or discernible difference in speeds between mine and a new one, but if there is I DONT CARE! I never said mines better than anybody's, theres always going to be a better faster computer, no matter what you get, it will be superseded by something better, i don't fall into that trap and advised my friends to do the same and save some money. Thats all I'm saying
     
  15. john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #15
    Your original statement was ambiguous, and you later clarified it as:
    But as has already been explained, you're only getting equal speed in ONE dimension: Disk I/O. You're BEHIND on CPU and GPU.

    I'm super confused about why you posted a thread with benchmarks if you don't care, but okay...

    Yeah, you did, and that's why we're talking about speeds! You said:
    Whether you meant to do it or not, you made it sound like tossing a couple SSDs into a 2012 model and striping them gave you a machine with performance equal to or better than currently selling models. That's true on at best one dimension (disk performance), and untrue on others.

    That's all the rest of us have been saying. I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. I'm just trying to get us all on the same page, which I think ought to be easily doable.
     
  16. kkar macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    #16
    The newer rMBP has 2GB/s SSD speeds. It blows away the slow samsung SSDs even in RAID 0. Your 2 SSDs are a waste on money and expensive.
     
  17. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #17
    Except for the fact that the thread is nearly 2 years old, and he's working on a 3 year old computer. The speeds of the newer rMBP were not around when he started the thread.
     
  18. Rhinoevans macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #18
    WOW!
     
  19. zone23 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    #19
    I love the speed of my iMac right out of the box.

    [​IMG]
     
  20. Rhinoevans macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #20
    Same here. Bought the classic so I could play with it with upgrades. Did the ram (16) and the Samsung EVO 256. I guess the Raid is next for me given those numbers. Retina, to me is not a requirement on a notebook and highly overrated, IMHO. Nothing that I run really needs a quad core or a DGPU.
     

Share This Page