What Hard Drive 4 Mac Pro?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by AFMRPCUSER, Apr 19, 2010.

  1. AFMRPCUSER macrumors member

    AFMRPCUSER

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    Location:
    N. CA
    #1
    I am planning to add (2) internal hard drives to my Mac Pro. The question I have is... what Brands are people having the best luck with? Comments/Recommendations welcome...
     
  2. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #2
    I am a huge Western Digital fan because of quality and prices.
     
  3. nusynergy macrumors regular

    nusynergy

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Location:
    Kent - UK
  4. Nostromo macrumors 65816

    Nostromo

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Location:
    Deep Space
    #4
    On another thread about the noise a Mac Pro makes some said it was silent, some said they could hear the drives.

    Looks like it depends on the quality of the drive it it's a noisy drive or a silent drive.

    Which drives are silent?
     
  5. ncc1701d macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    #5
    Depends what you are using it for, but WD RE4 (FYYS) 2TB Enterprise Drives are the best, imo :)
     
  6. Loa macrumors 65816

    Loa

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Location:
    Québec
    #6
    Hello,

    As long as you stick to the first biggest brand names (Hitachi, Samsung, Seagate, WD), specs are more important.

    Get a 7200 drive, ideally 64mb of cache, and check for noise if it's important for you.

    Then look for deals, as prices can vary a LOT!

    Loa
     
  7. drewsof07 macrumors 68000

    drewsof07

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Location:
    Ohio
    #7
    I would suggest a small raptor (10,000rpm) for your main boot drive, then a huge drive for storage (>1TB).

    Loa, you do know that 7200rpm is standard for 3.5" drives, right?? ;)
     
  8. phpmaven macrumors 68040

    phpmaven

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    San Clemente, CA USA
    #8
    Well, if you can afford it, a SSD drive would be the fastest, and obviously the quietest. I just put a Crucial RealSSD 128GB drive in as my boot drive and it has made a phenomenal difference in the performance of my Late 2008 Mac Pro. Boots up in 30 seconds instead on 1min. Programs load like lightening. Very happy so far.
     
  9. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #9
    Even the 150GB Velocirator's wouldn't be the best though, as their prices are close enough to the 80GB Intel G2 SSD's it's foolish. For a few bucks more ($190 vs. 212USD), performance wise, the SSD makes better sense as boot drive.

    Now if it's meant for a high write environment, then the Velociraptor would have the advantage IMO.
     
  10. AFMRPCUSER thread starter macrumors member

    AFMRPCUSER

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    Location:
    N. CA
    #10
    My Reply 2 U

    I have considered SSD because of the R/W times but I believe I will wait as they improve them... and begin to offer them is larger memory capacities. Like most computer equipment faster more powerful means just waiting a couple of years. The sooner we distance ourselves from mechanical drives the faster the computer business will go. Thank you for your rapid reply.:cool:
     
  11. Loa macrumors 65816

    Loa

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Location:
    Québec
    #11
    That advice is at least 2 years old. As others have said, a SSD boot drive will perform head and shoulders above a 10,000 drive. Not even a possible comparison.

    As for 7200 being standard, it's the same thing: it used to be true. These days, there are 2 standards: 7200, and the green drives 5900.

    Some people will be tempted to put the much cheaper 5900 in their Mac Pros, and I advised the OP against that (unless it's for a back-up drive).

    AFMRPCUSER: if you wait a couple of years before buying a SSD, you'll have to live with 2 consequences. First, you'll have a much slower computer for a couple of years then you could have had. Second, in a couple of years, there may be a new technology that will be like SSDs are today. Why get a Mac Pro if you don't want the best technology and performance?

    SSDs, although still young compared to mechanical HDs, are already in their second generation (maybe third if the new new top-of-the-line sandforces deliver what they promise).

    I can't think of a single reason not to use a SSD as boot drive in a Mac Pro.

    Loa
     
  12. Murray M macrumors regular

    Murray M

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    #12
    So an ideal Mac Pro setup for someone doing [very] short videos and needing high data security would be:

    Drive 1: (Boot) SSD
    Drive 2: (Video Media) SSD
    Drive 3: (Boot Time Machine) any 7200 drive from a solid vendor
    Drive 4: (Video Media Backup) any 7200 drive from a solid vendor

    Sound like a good plan?
     
  13. Loa macrumors 65816

    Loa

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Location:
    Québec
    #13
    As I've said elsewhere, right now the best way to get both very high performance while still having lots of drive space is this:

    A SSD as boot drive (without user data) and a 4 disk RAID0 in the 4 mac pro bays. You put the SSD in the second optical bay and get at least 1 external drive for back-up.

    Even with four relatively cheap enterprise-grade 500GB drives (like WD's RE.3s or Seagates' ES.12), you get 2TB of incredibly fast (about 3 to 4 times as fast as a single 7200 2TB drive) data inside your Mac, with a ridiculously fast SSD for your OS.

    I've yet to see a faster compromise (unless you're ready to shell out for 1TB SSDs!!!).

    Loa
     
  14. phpmaven macrumors 68040

    phpmaven

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    San Clemente, CA USA
    #14
    Well. Crucial also makes a 256GB model. Of course it's quite expensive. I have the 128GB as my boot drive and have 3 other internal drives for storage as well as a 1TB external drive for all of my media files. I felt like I got a new computer after I put in the SSD. But they will certainly get cheaper and faster. I've been waiting for years myself to get one. I decided it was time to pull the trigger.
     
  15. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #15
    If you're looking for good price and great storage, I would look at western digital caviar green. The prices are really good, great company, and up to 2tb. The only downside is that the rpm isn't a constant 7200, it uses energy saver "technology" to determine speed, anywhere from 5900-7200. So it can go at 7200 rpm, but won't stay that way forever. Seems like a good drive to have as a time machine backup drive because you don't need that to be uber fast but has great capacity.
     
  16. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #16
    There's evidence to contradict that though. It seems they're actually fixed at ~5900 RPM, not variable.

    If you think about it, it actually makes sense when you look at the price. Variable speed tech would be more expensive to produce (more complicated firmware and spindle motor), yet the drives are less expensive than their 7200 fixed RPM counterparts (same capacity).
     
  17. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #17
    Either way you don't need something really fast for just time machine backups
     
  18. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #18
    No, not at all, and the Green drives are wonderfully inexpensive for larger capacities. Which is ideal for backups. :D
     
  19. Sam1487 macrumors member

    Sam1487

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Location:
    Between Nottingham & Derby, UK
    #19
    Apologies for thread-jacking with my own question, but I thought this would best suit here.

    I have a December 2006 Mac Pro and I'm looking at getting a new hard drive for it - is there a "maximum storage" that the mac pro can handle? I heard a rumour that it can't read the drives properly when the total exceeds 3Tb - is this the case?

    Currently I have:

    Main HD: 500gb
    2nd Bay: 1.5Tb
    3rd Bay: 160Gb
    4th Bay: 750Gb

    Looking at replacing Main HD due to age and it's beginning to act up a bit. Although having read through the thread I'm tempted by SSD, but I was just wondering what my options are regarding size of HD's.

    Cheers

    S
     
  20. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #20
    Personally I have not heard anything like that and head that it's fine with up to 8tb, but I could be wrong.
     
  21. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #21
    No.

    The max drive capacity is whatever the largest currently manufactured is (currently 2TB). And it changes each time a larger drive is released.
     
  22. Apple Corps macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #22
    I've been running a WD 150 GB Raptor for a couple of years - noisy, some vibration, over rated regardless of what the reviews report from their tests.

    Going forward, I would concur with SSD for boot and apps - not for storing HD video though !!!

    Samsung SPINPOINT F3s will probably be my next purchase.
     
  23. Phantom Gremlin macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Location:
    Tualatin, Oregon
    #23
    All drives these days are "wonderfully inexpensive". Does it really matter if a 1000 GB drive costs $80 or $120? Either way, they're ridiculously cheap.

    I remember paying over $1000 for a ~700 MB (not GB) CDC drive a while back. Going back further, it cost me many hundreds of dollars (I forget exact amount) for an approx 10 MB (not GB) Tandon Magnetics drive. Sad to say, these older drives (and quite a few others) are still collecting dust somewhere around the house.
     
  24. Transporteur macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    :confused:

    Does it really matter if a car costs $30000 or $45000?

    50% is 50%, regardless of the fact that the price is low compared to 10 years back.
    And personally, I absolutely don't see the point of wasting 50% more money for a drive that does not need to be fast because the environment it is used in will never max out its speed.
    40 bucks won't hurt for a single drive, but lets say you need 4, 8 or 16 drives! Still not hurting?
     
  25. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #25
    $40 on it's own may not be that much to some, but those on a fixed budget, it usually is.

    But what I was actually getting to, is multiple drives needed for backups (or RAID), so the cost differences are multiplied by n units. So if n = 24, and the difference is $40, do the math: $960USD isn't negligible. Not to an individual, nor to enteprise customers in the current economy (where n may be much larger).
     

Share This Page