Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

VTGuy79

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 12, 2023
74
29
Other than the aesthetics of the two devices, what's the difference?

I see:
  • Branding
  • One is Thunderbolt 3 where the "newer" re-branded one is USB 3.2 Gen 2
This is where my photos and files will live and will also back up to another drive for off site storage. I'm trying to find some video reviews on these, some reviews on B&H say it's loud while other don't.
 
These are regular Hard Drives. Won't come close to saturating USB 3.2 Gen 2 let alone Thunderbolt. I could see Thunderbolt on a RAID 0/5 setup with a whole bunch of hard drives. Not just one drive. One drive won't even saturate USB 3.0. Get the cheaper one.
 
I understand that, I'll get about 250MB/s max. It must be more of a re-brand than anything. I like the looks of the older one better. :|
 
I understand that, I'll get about 250MB/s max. It must be more of a re-brand than anything. I like the looks of the older one better. :|
Bigger profit margin on the Thunderbolt is probably the reason. I could see it if they included an M.2 slot. Designed with custom formatting software to allow a huge SSD cache. That would be pretty useful.

As it stands it’s just unnecessary tech for a regular HDD. Like putting WiFi in a toaster.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.