Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The 768GB Flash Storage $1300 club
- Thread starter animatedude
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is significant. I had not read this yet. Based on this, what is stopping a user from adding in a 4TB SATA HDD and configuring the resultant setup as a 4.7TB Fusion drive? Because, I gotta tell you, that's what I would do. And perhaps even WILL do, if it's possible.
Well ... almost nothing would prevent you from doing that!
Although I haven't seen a tear-down of the SSD-only model iMac, I can pretty much guarantee that the hard-disk power/data cable assembly is not included with this model. There is also a different bracket ("Mechanism") for units w/HDD vs. wo/HDD according to the part list link below. I have not yet found a source for these items, but I would imagine they will be available soon.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/118836055/2012iMac
-howard
From another thread ... it appears the "Mechanism" is simply the mount bracket that connects to the stand and provides pivoting action. It may have a different "tension" to accommodate the different balance point for units with a heavy hard disk inside.
Last edited:
Voiding the warranty and potential internal damage is enough to stop me
Well, I would pay for an AAR to do the install; I don't like voiding my warranty either. As hfg said, though, if there is a missing mount or connection that might be cause for concern. Very intriguing!!!
Here are some pictures of the HD power/data cable from R.OG teardown posted in another thread.
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/16492876/
-howard
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/16492876/
-howard
Last edited:
I've ordered the 768 SSD despite the heavy cost because I dont trust Fusion and require faster response than HDD. For casual users I agree with the majority that the cost of this outweighs its practicality, but for those who are working this system to the limits this option makes alot of sense.
Anyone else who works with large media files, compositing or VFX, will be aware of how important file management is. Often we work with different versions of media clips, proxies etc., and there are often discrete render files (and "peak" files if your are using Premiere) which are saved to the local drive by default. Ideally most of this is handled by external drives but keeping a portion of your media on the local disk is sometimes unavoidable, at least in the short term.
Why not trust Fusion? There is no documentation on Fusion's protocols for file management, and apple certainly doesnt have the pro community in mind when cooking these things up. I cant afford to have slower disks at any stage of the production pipeline.
Why not get another mac pro? Thunderbolt. We are hooking the imac up to a Teranex converter for file to file conversions. For PCIE expansions (other than GPU) like the Red Rocket card we can also use Thunderbolt external chasis, so the need for a reconfigurable mac pro is diminishing.
Will they release a mac pro with all our needs in the next few months? Nobody knows, and we cant afford to wait.
Anyone else who works with large media files, compositing or VFX, will be aware of how important file management is. Often we work with different versions of media clips, proxies etc., and there are often discrete render files (and "peak" files if your are using Premiere) which are saved to the local drive by default. Ideally most of this is handled by external drives but keeping a portion of your media on the local disk is sometimes unavoidable, at least in the short term.
Why not trust Fusion? There is no documentation on Fusion's protocols for file management, and apple certainly doesnt have the pro community in mind when cooking these things up. I cant afford to have slower disks at any stage of the production pipeline.
Why not get another mac pro? Thunderbolt. We are hooking the imac up to a Teranex converter for file to file conversions. For PCIE expansions (other than GPU) like the Red Rocket card we can also use Thunderbolt external chasis, so the need for a reconfigurable mac pro is diminishing.
Will they release a mac pro with all our needs in the next few months? Nobody knows, and we cant afford to wait.
Gonna buy one of these when they come out Q2.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6614/microncrucial-announces-m500-ssd-line-of-ssds
960 GB SSD for less than $600.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6614/microncrucial-announces-m500-ssd-line-of-ssds
960 GB SSD for less than $600.
Last edited:
Damn when i started this thread i didn't expect it will get to page 10.i wanna thank the academy awards!
back on topic, for those who got the SSD option, how long does it take when you restart your iMac?
back on topic, for those who got the SSD option, how long does it take when you restart your iMac?
going 100% SSD would have been nice but paying Apple $1300 to do so is a joke
it's even more nuts then paying $600 to apple for 32GB of RAM
it's even more nuts then paying $600 to apple for 32GB of RAM
Wow, that almost 2TB (2 drives) for less than the cost of the internal 768GB itself!
I have spent many days and hours contemplating SSD vs fusion drive vs external booting for my new iMac and I've finally decided to stay in the 768GB club. I had mine ordered 12/11, but didn't really have a solid decision until it prepared for shipment today.
To me the SSD is completely worth it. Any SSD solution is going to be expensive, that's a fact. With educational discount, the price point really isn't $1300, especially when you consider the extra price one would have to pay for a Fusion Drive anyways.
Why I didn't get a Fusion Drive:
- Bootcamp.. I use Windows too regularly to not have SSD capabilities.
- I don't need the extra space.
- I like knowing my computer is running at consistent speeds.
- Really.. no SSD in windows? I know I already said this, but this was the dealbreaker; if I'm paying extra for SSD speeds, it better apply to my entire computer.
Why I didn't want to boot externally:
- SSDs are fast already, people. Is it really that important to you that your super fast drive goes a little bit faster? Will you even be able to notice it without your trusty Black Magic tester? I honestly don't mind trading a little speed on an already fast SSD to have a more aesthetically pleasing and satisfying computer setup. The whole setup just seems clumsy to me.
- Boot Camp.. I don't want to jump through hoops just to get this to work externally, and I don't want to deal with problems that might arise if I did.
- A 1TB LaCie SSD is going to be around $1k anyways. The Apple SSD with educational discount is only a little bit more expensive, but the extra money is worth it to me to keep the form factor sleek and the computer all-internal.
- I don't like the idea of accidentally unplugging an external HD and having my entire computer crash.
The iMac is an investment to me, if I have to splurge a little to get it exactly as I like, then so be it. It's not every day that I'm spending thousands on a computer that is essentially a lifeline in my line of work and something I can use for entertainment as well. It's a lot of money, but that can be said about any SSD solution. Is it the best solution? I don't think anyone can say that it is or isn't, but it's definitely a viable alternative given the options available. Paying for form factor isn't a foreign concept by any means, and is a big reason that Apple is so successful to begin with.
People who can't fathom the purchase need to open your minds a little. People trying to put others down for ordering the 768GB SSD option are being unreasonable and seem to be borderline bitter. There are great reasons why one would want to spring for the 768GB SSD. That isn't to say Apple doesn't suck for only giving a 768GB SSD option.
EDIT: My iMac shipped as I was typing this! Wooooo.
To me the SSD is completely worth it. Any SSD solution is going to be expensive, that's a fact. With educational discount, the price point really isn't $1300, especially when you consider the extra price one would have to pay for a Fusion Drive anyways.
Why I didn't get a Fusion Drive:
- Bootcamp.. I use Windows too regularly to not have SSD capabilities.
- I don't need the extra space.
- I like knowing my computer is running at consistent speeds.
- Really.. no SSD in windows? I know I already said this, but this was the dealbreaker; if I'm paying extra for SSD speeds, it better apply to my entire computer.
Why I didn't want to boot externally:
- SSDs are fast already, people. Is it really that important to you that your super fast drive goes a little bit faster? Will you even be able to notice it without your trusty Black Magic tester? I honestly don't mind trading a little speed on an already fast SSD to have a more aesthetically pleasing and satisfying computer setup. The whole setup just seems clumsy to me.
- Boot Camp.. I don't want to jump through hoops just to get this to work externally, and I don't want to deal with problems that might arise if I did.
- A 1TB LaCie SSD is going to be around $1k anyways. The Apple SSD with educational discount is only a little bit more expensive, but the extra money is worth it to me to keep the form factor sleek and the computer all-internal.
- I don't like the idea of accidentally unplugging an external HD and having my entire computer crash.
The iMac is an investment to me, if I have to splurge a little to get it exactly as I like, then so be it. It's not every day that I'm spending thousands on a computer that is essentially a lifeline in my line of work and something I can use for entertainment as well. It's a lot of money, but that can be said about any SSD solution. Is it the best solution? I don't think anyone can say that it is or isn't, but it's definitely a viable alternative given the options available. Paying for form factor isn't a foreign concept by any means, and is a big reason that Apple is so successful to begin with.
People who can't fathom the purchase need to open your minds a little. People trying to put others down for ordering the 768GB SSD option are being unreasonable and seem to be borderline bitter. There are great reasons why one would want to spring for the 768GB SSD. That isn't to say Apple doesn't suck for only giving a 768GB SSD option.
EDIT: My iMac shipped as I was typing this! Wooooo.
Last edited:
Agree as well!
It all works out so nicely:
512GB -- OS X SSD
256GB -- Windows SSD
NAS for everything else and backup
It all works out so nicely:
512GB -- OS X SSD
256GB -- Windows SSD
NAS for everything else and backup
Fusion Drives don't know ANYTHING about file management. That's an abstraction layered above the disk.
Core Storage is a Logical Volume Manager. It glues together disks in various ways. With Fusion, it tiers 128K regions of data to-and-from the SSD to the HDD. It has no filesystem knowledge.
Damn when i started this thread i didn't expect it will get to page 10.i wanna thank the academy awards!
back on topic, for those who got the SSD option, how long does it take when you restart your iMac?
bout 14 seconds give or take
I'd like to sell everybody in this thread a Beautiful bridge in Brooklyn. PM me for paypal addy
While I can afford the 768, The iMac I have on order has the 3TB Fusion and this is my thoughts:
1. If Apple had offered a 256, 512, or 768 Flash drive + 3TB 7200 HDD I would have gone that way. The way I see is that in 3 years, I am going to rip it open and upgrade the Flash SATA port to whatever the max in 3 years is, and will replace the 3TB HDD with a large SSD drive or maybe a monster HDD..cross that bridge when I get there. So the 3TB fusion gives me 90% of what I was expecting to get anyway.
2. The price of the 768 Flash upgrade is out of control in comparison to what else I can buy with the 900$ difference. While I would LOVE to have 4TB of flash in my desktop, I think we are still 2 generations of computers away from that time. In addition if I go 768, I will have an unused sata port inside the iMac for 3 years and it's a desktop not a notebook, so I will expect to have at least 2 drives inside it maximizing my storage.
3. I can drop the 900$ into a Drobo 5D, add flash cache to it and start to fill it up with whatever drives I have laying around till it's 100% SSD. In less than a year, I can have 5 SSDs inside it, with loads of fast redundant thunderbolt storage space
4. I'm disappointed that my Fusion drive coming in my iMac does not have a 256GB Flash drive and 3TB HDD
5. Apple clearly wants us to buy the fusion drive...just take one look at the options and prices. With my system on the SSD and cache'ing via Fusion, I do believe it's the best option weighing cost and size
6 My 2013 MacBook Pro with Retina will have a 768GB flash storage or whatever the max option is at that time...
7. My music collection is 400GB, so it's not like I can only have 768GB of internal desktop storage
So these are my ideas, thoughts, and reasons... have a great day everyone
1. If Apple had offered a 256, 512, or 768 Flash drive + 3TB 7200 HDD I would have gone that way. The way I see is that in 3 years, I am going to rip it open and upgrade the Flash SATA port to whatever the max in 3 years is, and will replace the 3TB HDD with a large SSD drive or maybe a monster HDD..cross that bridge when I get there. So the 3TB fusion gives me 90% of what I was expecting to get anyway.
2. The price of the 768 Flash upgrade is out of control in comparison to what else I can buy with the 900$ difference. While I would LOVE to have 4TB of flash in my desktop, I think we are still 2 generations of computers away from that time. In addition if I go 768, I will have an unused sata port inside the iMac for 3 years and it's a desktop not a notebook, so I will expect to have at least 2 drives inside it maximizing my storage.
3. I can drop the 900$ into a Drobo 5D, add flash cache to it and start to fill it up with whatever drives I have laying around till it's 100% SSD. In less than a year, I can have 5 SSDs inside it, with loads of fast redundant thunderbolt storage space
4. I'm disappointed that my Fusion drive coming in my iMac does not have a 256GB Flash drive and 3TB HDD
5. Apple clearly wants us to buy the fusion drive...just take one look at the options and prices. With my system on the SSD and cache'ing via Fusion, I do believe it's the best option weighing cost and size
6 My 2013 MacBook Pro with Retina will have a 768GB flash storage or whatever the max option is at that time...
7. My music collection is 400GB, so it's not like I can only have 768GB of internal desktop storage
So these are my ideas, thoughts, and reasons... have a great day everyone
For those who have received their 768GB SSD iMacs ...
What does "Get Info" report as the size of the drive?
I understand the issues of drive size reporting regarding formatted/unformatted and the 1000/1024 calculation marketing. Just curious how the Apple "Get Info" is calculating the reported size ... 768GB or 750.42GB?
Thanks
What does "Get Info" report as the size of the drive?
I understand the issues of drive size reporting regarding formatted/unformatted and the 1000/1024 calculation marketing. Just curious how the Apple "Get Info" is calculating the reported size ... 768GB or 750.42GB?
Thanks
???? Thoughts, please
OK, this darn thread has got me re-thinking my order. Woke up the last two mornings mental lol. If you have time, please share your thoughts with me after you read this:
I have about 896GB of data that I need on high speed (200+/- OS/Apps/Backups/Mail, 700 Media++). Of course, the media part is growing. I know we have all read about what the fusion does with our OS and Apps, so I'm leaving out that logic.
Neither 768F or the 3TB fusion (referring to what will actually be stored on high speed flash for quick access anytime) will be enough. Either way, going to need external SSD/RaidBox.
So won't I be better off getting the 3TB fusion and a 1TB external SSD for the 700GB of media? The extra cost of the 768 is the same as a 1TB SSD solution, and my OS/Apps will always be running off the Flash portion of the Fusion so no performance hit ... also giving me 2.6TB of pretty fast space for whatever! for the same price. And I get to keep the 1TB thunderbolt if I ever sell my iMac and or use it on other macs I own vs it being locked away in the iMac.
Your thoughts..thanks!
OK, this darn thread has got me re-thinking my order. Woke up the last two mornings mental lol. If you have time, please share your thoughts with me after you read this:
I have about 896GB of data that I need on high speed (200+/- OS/Apps/Backups/Mail, 700 Media++). Of course, the media part is growing. I know we have all read about what the fusion does with our OS and Apps, so I'm leaving out that logic.
Neither 768F or the 3TB fusion (referring to what will actually be stored on high speed flash for quick access anytime) will be enough. Either way, going to need external SSD/RaidBox.
So won't I be better off getting the 3TB fusion and a 1TB external SSD for the 700GB of media? The extra cost of the 768 is the same as a 1TB SSD solution, and my OS/Apps will always be running off the Flash portion of the Fusion so no performance hit ... also giving me 2.6TB of pretty fast space for whatever! for the same price. And I get to keep the 1TB thunderbolt if I ever sell my iMac and or use it on other macs I own vs it being locked away in the iMac.
Your thoughts..thanks!
Last edited:
If you can't justify the expense of the $1300 upgrade to the 768GB SSD option, and you think that Fusion Drive might be OK (but are not sure), then I would get the 1TB or 3TB Fusion, and start using it. If it doesn't meet your needs, add an external drive via Thunderbolt at a later date. The only cost at risk here is really the uplift from a non-Fusion drive to Fusion ($250), which will still be covered by the difference between what you can buy for external SSD and the higher price of the Apple SSD.
I do like the all SSD option, and would prefer a clean, all internal solution. Still on the fence about this. I work for a solid state storage company, and truly believe that disk is for secondary, non-working copies of data (such as backup and archive), not for primary data.