SATA 6Gbps vs 3Gbps internal HDD, 2009 Mac Pro

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by ssri1983, Jan 28, 2011.

  1. ssri1983 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    #1
    So, I have been trying to figure out if using a 6Gbps internal HDD would have any real benefit in an early 2009 Mac Pro as opposed to a 3Gbps one. I am interested in buying the 2TB WD Caviar Black and I can't decide if I should go for WD 2002FAEX which has a 6Gbps interface or the WD 2001FASS which has a 3Gbps interface. I looked around but can't find information on where the bottleneck would be. They are very close in price... and other specifications and I don't mind going for either, but would like to know if there is any real benefit in going for the 6Gbps one.

    Can anyone give me information on this, or point to somewhere that talks about this?

    TIA.
     
  2. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    6Gb/s SATA is capable of over 500MB/s, whereas 3Gb/s SATA (SATA II) is good for about 275MB/s. There is not a single mechanical hard drive that can max out SATA II. The fastest drives you can get these days are 3TB 7200RPM and 300GB 10k RPM Velociraptor drives with transfer about 150MB/s, so way less than what SATA II is capable of.
     
  3. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #3
    Plus unless OP has SATA 6Gb/s PCIe card, the bandwidth would be limited to 3Gb/s as that's what the chipset in Mac Pro is capable of.
     
  4. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    In this case, the capacity of the interface doesn't matter at all, as the mechanical drive will be the limiting factor, not the interface.
    So any mechanical drive will be fine in the Pro.
     
  5. ssri1983 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    #5
    Thanks! yeah, I was looking for the Mac Pro chipset info. No, I don't have a 6GB/s PCIe card, so that may play a role when I get an SSD, I guess. Thanks Transporteur, you are right, the HDD transfer rate would be the bottleneck.
     

Share This Page