SSD or Fusion for Bootcamp and space?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Shuzzone, Aug 31, 2014.

  1. Shuzzone, Aug 31, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2014

    Shuzzone macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #1
    WARNING! LONG POST​

    Hello people, I decided to register specifically just for this query. I'm having a problem deciding which drive to order in future with my new semi-maxed out iMac. This is how things are at the moment:

    So, at the moment I have a late 2013 Mac Mini, not maxed out but very close. I do video editing, photo edit, screen recording, gaming and recordings of videogames (being a youtuber) and so on.

    Right now I have a 256GB Samsung SSD. On it I have 2 partitions sized 200:50. On the 200 one, I have my main Mavericks partition where I do video editing, run VM's and so on. This is the partition where also where I've installed my 3-5 Steam games, because they would've taken up most of the space in the other partition. The 50GB partition is a clean Mavericks install for best performance results.
    On average, out of 250GB in total I only use 185GB (excluding recordings and edited videos). After exporting my recordings, I delete the original file otherwise I run out of space, and after I export the edited video I delete the project, imported files and move the video onto an external drive. Following so far?

    So, since my Mac Mini doesn't satisfy a couple of things (most of all Graphics Card), as soon as I earn enough from youtube I'll be buying an iMac with the following specs:

    3.5GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz (Might as well get CPU upgrade, helps with recording, video rendering and overall boosts)
    8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X4GB (I'll buy extra ram outside of apple stores for less :D)
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4GB GDDR5 (GPU upgrade for obvious reasons)

    Now, as most of you have noticed the thread is about the Hard Drive space, and it is also missing in the above specs.
    I can't make my mind up between 512GB SSD, 1TB SSD and 1-3TB Fusion Drive.

    The main problem can be solved in 3 situations:

    1)Therotically a 512GB SSD is big enough for 2 partitions (Mac/Windows - 250GB/250GB) and after I have installed everything on (games, programs, Virtual Machines) I would have about 120/175GB left, but with a recording of something at high quality and high bitrate I could easily fill up the drive, so an additional thing to get could be a Thunderbolt drive where I store chunky stuff like recordings, games etc. . I would get it Thunderbolt so it would be like an additional internal drive, seeing how fast people say it is. My external 3.0 USB drive is already impressive, so a thunderbolt should be extraordinary.

    2)If I get a Fusion drive, when I decide to boot camp Windows, the partition would get the normal 7200rpm hard drive. Is that good enough for running high end games and recording at the same time? Can it keep up or would an SSD be better? The extra space is a major plus, especially if I get a 3TB fusion drive, I can assign each partition 1/2TB of space, so there would be absolutely no problems with space and it'll still cost less than a 512GB SSD.
    Question: Would a Thunderbolt run faster than the internal disk? If that was the case I could move the processor demanding games/write my recordings directly to the Thunderbolt drive :cool:

    3)And then of course, is the ultimate integration. 1TB of SSD. Beautiful. I would have all the space I want in both partitions and not have to worry too much about stuff. The speed would be there, super snappy, but it obviously comes at a cost... 1000 bucks...


    Please help me make stuff clear, post opinions, anything that might help. If you've got a fact or say 'this is better' please give a reason, don't base it off your fantasy ;). Any help is really, really appreciated. Thanks for reading and to everyone who'll answer!
     
  2. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #2
    All I get is views and no replies... Everyone's threads have answers except mine... :(
     
  3. cypriot macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    #3
    SSD or Fusion for Bootcamp and space?

    I dont think 1 tb ssd's are cost effective right now (if you are not in a business need for them which i cannot think of). Ssd's are good for system setup and 7200 rpm would be enough for archive. You can find very cheap 7200 hdd's and multi disk enclosures to use. I even saw wireless drives and they were not expensive. And my work is more tidy and clean when i seperate archives from system installation. You can point osx to use other drives for itunes library and other document storage. I would get a 256 or 512 ssd and install the main system and main work projects on it then use an external enclosure to store archives. However if you are short in money i have seen people who find it very fast to use thunderbolt external ssd for system install.

    You can decide as your pocket allows. If you can afford it i would say go with 512 gb ssd + external archives.
     
  4. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #4
    Yeah, the pocket dictates everything;). I'm starting to think that is the best option, not money saving but it's a very temptating compromise :p
    I also read that external drives cann't go any faster than the internal drive, right? So if someone was to have a 5400rpm disk and got a thunderbolt drive that would be useless, right?
     
  5. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #5
    Yes, that's true. Unless the boot disk is the Thunderbolt drive. Note that the Thunderbolt drive itself shouldn't be a 5400rpm HDD either.

    If I were you, I'd go for a 512GB internal SSD and stick to USB 3.0 external drives for just storage.
     
  6. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #6
    So it should be like a 10000rpm+ disk to get the best results? Because otherwise it's like buying a Ferrari that moves by pedal power, right?

    Just USB 3? I have a USB 3 drive and it's fast, but what if I have to write fraps recordings to it whilst it's recording or if I have to launch games and/or apps off of it? Shouldn't I buy a fast Thunderbolt drive and stick with that? Better be safe than sorry, and I would rather spend my money once and spend it well... But I may be wrong, you guys tell me :D
     
  7. FreemanW macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    The Real Northern California
    #7
    This post is not from experience, only what I've read here and in other forums.

    Bootcamp will install on the spinning platter hdd, NOT the SSD when you have a system with a Fusion drive.

    I can only guess that you would need to have ONLY a SSD to get Bootcamp installed ON the SSD.
     
  8. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #8
    That's exactly what I've said in the main post xD
     
  9. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #9
    Also no. For best results, you should buy a Thunderbolt SSD like the LaCie Rugged.

    A Thunderbolt drive will only be fast if there's an SSD in it.

    A USB 3 drive with an SSD in it will also be fast, but without TRIM support.

    Myself, I put a 500GB Samsung 840 Evo in a Buffalo HD-PATU3 Thunderbolt enclosure and dedicate that entire Thunderbolt SSD to Boot Camp. Results aren't bad, with around 400-450 MB/s read/write.
     
  10. SaSaSushi, Sep 1, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2014

    SaSaSushi macrumors 68040

    SaSaSushi

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Location:
    Takamatsu, Japan
    #10
    I've got a Late 2013 iMac with a 1TB Fusion drive but I am booting off a 500GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD in a Thunderbolt enclosure that is divided equally between BootCamp and OS X. I use the internal Fusion drive and several large USB3-attached HDDs for media storage, etc.

    This works perfectly for me.

    As yjchua95 mentioned, you will only get the speed benefits of USB3/Thunderbolt with an SSD and only get TRIM support with Thunderbolt. This is why I've gone with TB in spite of the fact that UASP USB 3 is actually slightly faster performance.
     
  11. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #11
    As for performance differences between USB 3 and Thunderbolt, it actually depends on the controller of the enclosure.

    For instance, with my Buffalo HD-PATU3, Thunderbolt consistently scored slightly faster than USB 3 (the enclosure has both USB 3 and TB).
     
  12. SaSaSushi macrumors 68040

    SaSaSushi

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Location:
    Takamatsu, Japan
    #12
    Thank you for the correction. I should have written UASP USB 3 at the very least, and have now edited it. :)
     
  13. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #13
    That get's kina expensive then o_O . I mean, I'm getting an iMac with 500gb internal SSD and I'd have to get an external one too? Na-na-na... Not happening.
    At the moment I have a 7200rpm 1TB drive in a USB 3 enclosure, and it's fast.
    Would a 10000-15000rpm disk inside a USB enclosure give very good results or what? Since 15000 is more than 2x faster than the disk I have now, it should be very fast.

    How come I saw 2TB Thunderbolt drives on the apple store that cost something like 200-300 bucks?

    Edit: Found them: here and here
     
  14. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #14
    Trust me, that G-drive isn't fast at all. It clocks in at around 160-170 MB/s. But then, my definition of fast is 300MB/s and above.

    If you buy something like a LaCie Rugged, you'll be getting around 400MB/s.

    If I were you, with a 512GB internal SSD, I'd partition half for Boot Camp. I would also stick back to USB 3 drives, but for storage only. If I want to work on stuff in the external drive (like photo editing or video editing), I would move it to the internal SSD first. Once I'm done with it, I would transfer it back to the external drive.
     
  15. cypriot macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    #15

    I think the same way. This is a nice tidy way to organize your work and its really fast. 7200 hdd is really enough just for storage.
     
  16. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #16
    Damn it, I got my hopes us too soon :confused:

    Sounds like a nice way to me too, my only fear being that the screen recordings take up all the space at the time of the recording, because I heard fraps has basically no compression, so on average it's like 4GB/min(then again depending on the stuff I record, but doesn't screen size and resolution matter too? Because the iMac screen is 4k?). Most of the time I would be fine, seeing as I do 10-25 minute recordings. Also, when I export it, I can get a compression of 100:1,200:1, so something like 80GB:400MB. That's fine by me, I was just worried that soon after getting the iMac I would be running outta space, that's all.

    USB 3 sounds like a deal then. And it'll have to be 7200rpm because it's big brothers cost lotta money for not much storage space :(
     
  17. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #17
    What's UASP USB 3? I have no idea, so I'm just wondering...
     
  18. Fried Chicken macrumors 6502

    Fried Chicken

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    #18
  19. SaSaSushi macrumors 68040

    SaSaSushi

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Location:
    Takamatsu, Japan
    #19
    As I mentioned in my review of the Inateck USP USB3 enclosure I linked to above, UASP is a much-improved transfer protocol which uses the standard SCSI command set. It greatly improves file transfer speed over USB3, particularly with random reads and writes.

    Faster USB 3.0 Performance: Examining UASP And Turbo Mode

    What's the difference between USB UASP and BOT?

    Unfortunately however, as mentioned, USB still does not support TRIM commands. :(
     
  20. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #20

    Problem being not only the price, but also the fact that you have to pop the iMac screen off to access the stuff behind it, like the drives etc. ? I didn't wanna mess around with it too much...
     
  21. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #21
    Isn't TRIM the thing that saves space on drives? Like, it hides or disables files that haven't been used in a long time to save space?
     
  22. Fried Chicken macrumors 6502

    Fried Chicken

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    #22
    Yup, screen is sticky taped on (WTF Apple?!).

    Gonna have to grow a pair and go in to do any work.
     
  23. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #23
    I would really rather not :confused:, it gets messy and there's space for mistake. I'd rather buy it all in one piece at once and only have to change the RAM.
     
  24. Shuzzone thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    #24
    So, what should I go for? Everyone seems to say that a 512gb SSD + external storages etc. is the best thing.
     
  25. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #25
    Yes, go for this one.

    As I said earlier, just use external drives for storage only. If you're working on it, move it to the internal SSD first, then move it back when you're done with it.
     

Share This Page