Thunderbolt or USB-C External Hard Drive?

[Aragornii]

I am looking to attach an external hard drive to the current model 24" iMac. Will I notice the difference between a USB-C 3.0 connection vs a Thunderbolt (edited) connection, or is the read/write speed the limiting factor?

My primary use is as a Plex server. Does SSD vs hard disk make a difference? At 4TB+ storage capacity the hard drive is much more cost effective. I don't need portability, although I am looking for a drive that is not large and does not need to be plugged in.

 

[Juicy Box]

Will I notice the difference between a USB-C 3.0 connection vs a Lightning connection, or is the read/write speed the limiting factor?

I think you mean Thunderbolt.

To answer your question, you probably will not notice a difference for use as a media server.

For HDDs, I wouldn't bother with the TB drive, as it will be more expensive without the benefits, unless you plan on doing RAIDs.

For SSDs, TB drives have the benefit of TRIM support, so it could be worth it beyond the speed increase.

My primary use is as a Plex server. Does SSD vs hard disk make a difference?

Not really, imo.

Adding media would be faster with the SSD, but playback should be pretty similar.

Not sure if you plan on using 2.5" HDD, if that is the case, and you have multiple streams, then the 2.5" HDD could be a bottleneck.

 

[Juicy Box]

I will also add that I have been using HDDs for my Plex server for many years.

Currently, I am using my old Mac Pro 1,1 as a headless media server. I have a SW RAID0 for the Plex library, a large single HDD for a back up for the library as well as a few different older OS versions that I use for older software and troubleshooting, and a single SSD that I use for the primary boot drive.

I never had any issues with using HDDs for Plex.

My plan is to use my M1 Mac Mini as my next Plex server, but only when I replace it with the rumored high performance Mac Mini, or maybe a Studio.

 

[dwig]

I presume you mean "Thunderbolt" when you say "Lightning". Lightning is only present on iPhones and iPads. The 24" iMac has two ports that support Thunderbolt 3 & USB4 and some also have two additional USB 3 ports.

No hard drive is fast enough to saturate the bandwith of a USB 3 port. Some SSDs will challenge the ability of a USB 3.2gen1 (aka USB 3.1gen1) port but most don't. Therefore, Thunderbolt would be no advantage when connecting a single drive of any type. Thunderbolt has the advantage only when multiple devices (fast SSDs, monitors, ...) that require significant bandwidth need to be connected to the same port.

 

[jav6454]

No HDD based solution will ever saturate a USB3+ connection. SSD perhaps, but not HDD. However, in the interest of specificity, I would say you stick to Thunderbolt. There are more accessories and a better ecosystem around that. Also, USB-C is just part of Thunderbolt on Macs.

 

[ssmed]

My experience would say get an SSD - if your really want the best speed get TB3 and a fast SSD, but that will cost a lot of money. However, for almost instantaneous hourly backups with considerable changes (big image files) it is flawless.

 

[Aragornii]

I think you mean Thunderbolt.

I presume you mean "Thunderbolt" when you say "Lightning".

Thank you for the correction. I have edited the post.

Based on this a USB-C HDD should suit my needs, which is good to know as that opens up a lot of very reasonably priced options.

 

[Fishrrman]

I'd suggest a 2.5" SATA SSD, in the USB3 enclosure of your choice.

Reasons why:
The SATA 2.5" SSDs seem to run the coolest of all SSDs (vis-a-vis "nvme" blade drives, which run warm-to-hot).
They yield decent speed and are economical, too.

I'm thinking that 4tb might be unavailable or expensive.
Can you do with 2tb?

For 4tb, perhaps a platter-based drive (do these come in 2.5" form factor?), again in a USB3 enclosure...?