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

SATA 6GB HDD over SATA 3GB HDD

Icaras

Icaras

macrumors 603
Original poster
Mar 18, 2008
6,350
3,396
I'm aware that the new Mac Pros still cap at SATA 3.0GB/sec and that that SATA is backwards compatible.

That said, I'm in the market for a WD Black Caviar 640GB drive and was debating between the SATA 2 and 3 versions.

Currently on Amazon, the SATA 6GB/s model is only selling for a measly $7.49 more than the SATA 3GB/s model.

So would it perhaps be wise to just up purchase to the 6GB/s model, in case I later decided to sell my MP for a later MP that would include SATA 6GB/s and just swap the drive to the new MP?
 
That drive can't match the speeds that SATA 2 can handle, so I don't see the need for the SATA 3 version. Only SSDs really get the full benefit from the upgraded interface.
 
alust2013 said:
That drive can't match the speeds that SATA 2 can handle, so I don't see the need for the SATA 3 version. Only SSDs really get the full benefit from the upgraded interface.
Click to expand...

I know, but the MP will eventually support SATA 3, hopefully starting with Sandy Bridge. I could just swap the HDD to a new MP (if i ever decide to sell, that is) and take advantage of the SATA3 speeds.

Anyway, the point was it only sells for $7.49 more, so I'm thinking, why not? Just in case?
 
First, if you're really looking to future-proof a drive, buy larger than you need today and get a Caviar Black 1TB. Take it from someone who started with 750GB, then 1TB, and finally 2TB as I needed more and more capacity. You'll get more use out of more capacity than from the 6Gbs interface. Second, not even a 10,000rpm VelociRaptor can come close to saturating a 3Gbs interface much less a 6Gbs, so there's no way to future-proof rotating magnetic media - it just isn't the future.
 
Thanks for both your inputs. I know SSDs are the future.

I just need this drive for my sample library (for music production), but would eventually replace it with an SSD when prices are much more mainstream. But since time tables for SSD are somewhat in the air, I just figured I'd ask about future proofing mechanical drives.

I should have just stuck with my original upgrade path idea, which was just to get a fast, but cheap mechanical drive now, and then later replace with an SSD.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification.
 
Additional Hard Drives

Thanks for the above info. That being said...

I added one Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB to Bay#2.
(I also have a WD Elements 1TB USB2 and Seagate 500GB FW800 for data backups)

I am looking to add more internal memory.

Should I match the Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB or move to the WD Caviar Black 1TB drives for the other two bays? or take advantage of some of the larger capacity though slower equally priced drives. (such as the Samsung EcoGreen F3 1.5TB Serial ATA 3Gb).

Thanks in advance.
 
covrc said:
I am looking to add more internal memory.

Should I match the Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB or move to the WD Caviar Black 1TB drives for the other two bays? or take advantage of some of the larger capacity though slower equally priced drives. (such as the Samsung EcoGreen F3 1.5TB Serial ATA 3Gb).
Click to expand...

If you already have a Samsung F3 (which is a really good hd in my eyes) you could buy another one and make a Raid 0 out of these two drives. A Samsung EcoGreen F3 2TB or a WD Caviar Green 2TB make a good backup drive or just storage if you don't really need it to be fast.
 
Thanks

So using the affordable yet slower 5400rpm drives is OK if they are being used as a back up to the faster drives I will be accessing for active projects?

I had not been considering the slower drives like the eco line. Are the slower internal drives still faster than my external FW800 and USB2.0 drives?

Thanks for the assist.:eek:
 
Icaras said:
I know, but the MP will eventually support SATA 3, hopefully starting with Sandy Bridge. I could just swap the HDD to a new MP (if i ever decide to sell, that is) and take advantage of the SATA3 speeds.

Anyway, the point was it only sells for $7.49 more, so I'm thinking, why not? Just in case?
Click to expand...

It's not really worth it in my opinion. There's no way the drive can saturate SATA2 speeds and SATA3 ports are backwards compatible anyway so the drive would work in any future Mac Pro that has SATA3 compatibility. Some SSD drives are getting close to breaking SATA2 speeds so there it would be worthwhile going for a SATA3 drive sometimes but I really don't see the point with standard drives.
 
Back-up Plan

Hi Guys,

So many good deals right now, I am looking to fill up the empty bays on my 2009 MP.

I would like to have my data back-up automatically.

What additional hard drives would work for this and/or should I buy to 'future proof' as best I can. Should I just buy a couple 2TB Caviar Blacks so as I won't have to worry about them being 'slow' etc.

I don't game, I do lots of Lightroom and Photoshop and no video editing..yet.

How would you use my current hardware.

WD 640 GB Bay #1
Samsung F3 iTB #2
#3 empty
#4 empty

WD Elements external 1TB
Seagate Free Agent 500GB FW800

From what I have read, the Element and Free Agent cannot be used as part of RAID.

Thanks for the assist. I appreciate it greatly.:eek:
 
WD Caviar Black

Ended up getting a great deal on 2 Western Digital 2TB Caviar Black drives.

Now to figure out how best to use them along with what I have. Suggestions are most welcome.

Bay#1 WDC Caviar Blue 640GB drive.
Bay#2 Samsung SpinPoint F3 1 TB

and now the 2 Caviar Black 2TB drives.

Any suggestions are most welcome.

Thanks
 
covrc said:
Ended up getting a great deal on 2 Western Digital 2TB Caviar Black drives.

Now to figure out how best to use them along with what I have. Suggestions are most welcome.

Bay#1 WDC Caviar Blue 640GB drive.
Bay#2 Samsung SpinPoint F3 1 TB

and now the 2 Caviar Black 2TB drives.

Any suggestions are most welcome.

Thanks
Click to expand...
640GB = boot disk
1TB = dedicated scratch space (you can even partition it for a short stroke partition if you wish, which is faster by keeping data to the outermost tracks).
2TB #1 = primary data
2TB #2 = backup of primary data (not a mirror = RAID 1)
 
Thanks

Nano,

Thanks for the reply and direction. It is greatly appreciated.


640GB = boot disk
I can keep all my applications on this also, correct?


1TB = dedicated scratch space (you can even partition it for a short stroke partition if you wish, which is faster by keeping data to the outermost tracks).
Dedicated scratch space using preferences in PS CS4 correct?
I know what partitioning is, what size partitions? And what size do you recommend?


2TB #1 = primary data

2TB #2 = backup of primary data (not a mirror = RAID 1)
Not sure what you mean by this. Are you implying manually back up data or use Time Machine etc?

Thanks covrc
 
covrc said:
I can keep all my applications on this also, correct?
Click to expand...
Yes.

covrc said:
Dedicated scratch space using preferences in PS CS4 correct?
I know what partitioning is, what size partitions? And what size do you recommend?
Click to expand...
Yes. Keep it at 10 - 20%, so say 200GB at most (outermost tracks = fastest on the platters).

covrc said:
Not sure what you mean by this. Are you implying manually back up data or use Time Machine etc?
Click to expand...
Use Time Machine, other backup software (Super Duper or Carbon Copy Cloner), or do it manually.

Just not a mirror, which is automatic (i.e. if you delete a file, it's duplicated on both disks immediately).

Backup software won't do this, unless you delete the backups, don't realize it you've a missing file, and make another backup (= no other full or incrementals available to get it back).
 
Icaras said:
I know, but the MP will eventually support SATA 3, hopefully starting with Sandy Bridge. I could just swap the HDD to a new MP (if i ever decide to sell, that is) and take advantage of the SATA3 speeds.

Anyway, the point was it only sells for $7.49 more, so I'm thinking, why not? Just in case?
Click to expand...

That is not correct - that drive will never benefit from bandwidth capacity beyond its engineered 300 MB/s output.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back