Why the Hate for Fusion Drives?

[Feek]

This is a long thread and I've not read all the way through but I'd like to share why the Fusion drive doesn't work well for me.

I have (for another couple of days) a 2011 iMac. I bought it with the Apple 250Gb SSD and 2Tb mechanical drive. Two years ago I replaced the mechanical drive with a 4Tb drive because I'd filled up the 2Tb. I used one of the guides to combine these two drives into a 4.25Tb Fusion drive.

I store a lot of media in an iTunes library which is streamed out to quite a few devices around the house. The media is accessed more than anything else. I also do development work, share a massive number of small files and they're being updated and uploaded regularly.

To start with, it was perfectly fine. In fact, I'd say that for perhaps six months, it was perfectly fine but over time, just using my iMac for normal work got slower and slower. I could hear the mechanical drive chattering away all the time - My conclusion was that the iMac decided that the media was being accessed more than anything else and had shifted it onto the SSD.

So I finally went through the very painful procedure of breaking the Fusion drive and restoring everything back. In fact, I moved my media to a Drobo ready for the new iMac which will be delivered this week. I've ordered it with a 1Tb SSD.

My performance is back, this iMac goes like a rocket again!

In my specific situation, a Fusion drive quite simply doesn't work well. I ran it for over two years and really wish I hadn't bothered. At least I know for sure that it's not good for me though and I won't ever use one again.

 

[Taz Mangus]

So I'm going to revive this thread to give my review of the SSD vs. Fusion drive debate. Having now had several 2017 iMacs with . There is a noticeable difference. It is at the operating system level. The operating system is consistently choppy and slowish to respond. On the SSD it is completely seamless. You click on something it loads immediately.

SO I will qualify that I had two 2017 iMacs (one i7 and one i5) that had the 1tb fusion drive. The current mac I have is an 27" 3.8 i5 with an 512ssd. I know that the 1tb fusion drives have only 28gb of ssd. So that would explain why it's so choppy in performance. I think you would see some performance improvement on 2 or 3tb fusion drives (with 128 ssd).

But my analysis is still that the priority on your mac purchase is:

21" - SSD Drive, RAM, Processor
27" - SSD Drive, Processor

*27" iMacs can have after market ram added later (so not a priority), 21" iMacs don't have upgradeable ram.

Therefore don't order the 21" i7 processor with the 1tb fusion drive and 8gb of ram (yea, that was the first computer I ordered)....

Small correction the SSD on the 1TB Fusion drive is 32GB not 28GB for the 2017 iMac.

 

[AFEPPL]

Yes but that has 4GB which is used as a write buffer.
So the system appears as 28GB

 

[Glockworkorange]

This is a long thread and I've not read all the way through but I'd like to share why the Fusion drive doesn't work well for me.

I have (for another couple of days) a 2011 iMac. I bought it with the Apple 250Gb SSD and 2Tb mechanical drive. Two years ago I replaced the mechanical drive with a 4Tb drive because I'd filled up the 2Tb. I used one of the guides to combine these two drives into a 4.25Tb Fusion drive.

I store a lot of media in an iTunes library which is streamed out to quite a few devices around the house. The media is accessed more than anything else. I also do development work, share a massive number of small files and they're being updated and uploaded regularly.

To start with, it was perfectly fine. In fact, I'd say that for perhaps six months, it was perfectly fine but over time, just using my iMac for normal work got slower and slower. I could hear the mechanical drive chattering away all the time - My conclusion was that the iMac decided that the media was being accessed more than anything else and had shifted it onto the SSD.

So I finally went through the very painful procedure of breaking the Fusion drive and restoring everything back. In fact, I moved my media to a Drobo ready for the new iMac which will be delivered this week. I've ordered it with a 1Tb SSD.

My performance is back, this iMac goes like a rocket again!

In my specific situation, a Fusion drive quite simply doesn't work well. I ran it for over two years and really wish I hadn't bothered. At least I know for sure that it's not good for me though and I won't ever use one again.

This is a home made fusion solution? I think there is a different experience with an Apple made fusion that intelligently switches/moves files between SSD and HDD.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Please elaborate on this more. From everything I had read, a Fusion drive is managed by CoreStorage. So what else is Apple doing with the factory Fusion drive that would make it perform differently than a DIY Fusion drive. I assume here that the poster used CoreStorage to setup the DIY Fusion drive.

 

[Glockworkorange]

Please elaborate on this more. From everything I had read, a Fusion drive is managed by CoreStorage. So what else is Apple doing with the factory Fusion drive that would make it perform differently than a DIY Fusion drive. I assume here that the poster used CoreStorage to setup the DIY Fusion drive.

Not sure if I am correct. I just assume Apple uses a secret sauce to manage fusion drives. If CoreStorage manages homemade options without any issue, that's great.

 

[Taz Mangus]

Not sure if I am correct. I just assume Apple uses a secret sauce to manage fusion drives. If CoreStorage manages homemade options without any issue, that's great.

Now one thing that might have affected the poster DIY Fusion drive is that the spinner could have started to fail. One symptom of a failing spinner is that the drive experiences speed reduction.

 

[Lioness~]

I've been very pleased with my 1TB fusion drive on my iMac 2013, and still is.
But I won't get a fusion drive when I replace this iMac with a new one.

I don't have need for a larger storage on my computer so getting a 1TB fusion drive with that little SSD won't happen.
I will most likely get a 512GB SSD instead. But I'll see what happens next year. We'll see how the new 2018 iMac's are. Not upgrading yet.

 

[Feek]

Now one thing that might have affected the poster DIY Fusion drive is that the spinner could have started to fail. One symptom of a failing spinner is that the drive experiences speed reduction.

The drive is fine, since splitting the Fusion, I've run multiple diagnostics over it with no issues indicated whatsoever. Speed test results are exactly what I'd expect from a mechanical drive.

 

[AppleDroid]

If Apple offered a 256GB SSD + 1-3TB HD version of the Fusion I'd be all for it. With all my Adobe Apps etc the 24GB/120GB SSD portion would fill up quickly.

 

[hfg]

Was trim enabled for the SSD part of the Fusion drive?

 

[Feek]

Was trim enabled for the SSD part of the Fusion drive?

It's an Apple SSD, the OS deals with that so I'd assume so.

 

[Glockworkorange]

If Apple offered a 256GB SSD + 1-3TB HD version of the Fusion I'd be all for it. With all my Adobe Apps etc the 24GB/120GB SSD portion would fill up quickly.

I think a lot of people would be as well.

 

[richman555]

You meant 2TB SSD?

Sorry for the typo. I ordered an iMac i7 with a 2TB fusion drive (128GB SSD).

So far, it is much faster than my mid 2010 MacBook Pro which has a 512GB 7200 RPM drive.

Boot times are fast and copying files is speedy.

Thus far, I am pleased with the Fusion drive and it works very well.
[doublepost=1503091861][/doublepost]

This is a long thread and I've not read all the way through but I'd like to share why the Fusion drive doesn't work well for me.

I have (for another couple of days) a 2011 iMac. I bought it with the Apple 250Gb SSD and 2Tb mechanical drive. Two years ago I replaced the mechanical drive with a 4Tb drive because I'd filled up the 2Tb. I used one of the guides to combine these two drives into a 4.25Tb Fusion drive.

I store a lot of media in an iTunes library which is streamed out to quite a few devices around the house. The media is accessed more than anything else. I also do development work, share a massive number of small files and they're being updated and uploaded regularly.

To start with, it was perfectly fine. In fact, I'd say that for perhaps six months, it was perfectly fine but over time, just using my iMac for normal work got slower and slower. I could hear the mechanical drive chattering away all the time - My conclusion was that the iMac decided that the media was being accessed more than anything else and had shifted it onto the SSD.

So I finally went through the very painful procedure of breaking the Fusion drive and restoring everything back. In fact, I moved my media to a Drobo ready for the new iMac which will be delivered this week. I've ordered it with a 1Tb SSD.

My performance is back, this iMac goes like a rocket again!

In my specific situation, a Fusion drive quite simply doesn't work well. I ran it for over two years and really wish I hadn't bothered. At least I know for sure that it's not good for me though and I won't ever use one again.

I think with a solution like this, it really depends what you are doing with your computer. I know the 1TB SSD is the best possible solution and hopefully by the time I am ready for another computer, its much cheaper option. It will be the defacto standard someday.

This is a long thread and I've not read all the way through but I'd like to share why the Fusion drive doesn't work well for me.

I have (for another couple of days) a 2011 iMac. I bought it with the Apple 250Gb SSD and 2Tb mechanical drive. Two years ago I replaced the mechanical drive with a 4Tb drive because I'd filled up the 2Tb. I used one of the guides to combine these two drives into a 4.25Tb Fusion drive.

I store a lot of media in an iTunes library which is streamed out to quite a few devices around the house. The media is accessed more than anything else. I also do development work, share a massive number of small files and they're being updated and uploaded regularly.

To start with, it was perfectly fine. In fact, I'd say that for perhaps six months, it was perfectly fine but over time, just using my iMac for normal work got slower and slower. I could hear the mechanical drive chattering away all the time - My conclusion was that the iMac decided that the media was being accessed more than anything else and had shifted it onto the SSD.

So I finally went through the very painful procedure of breaking the Fusion drive and restoring everything back. In fact, I moved my media to a Drobo ready for the new iMac which will be delivered this week. I've ordered it with a 1Tb SSD.

My performance is back, this iMac goes like a rocket again!

In my specific situation, a Fusion drive quite simply doesn't work well. I ran it for over two years and really wish I hadn't bothered. At least I know for sure that it's not good for me though and I won't ever use one again.

I would be curious once you stop using that iMac, if you delete and restore everything back to factory if it still has these issues. It would be interesting to know if that 4TB drive is ok.

 

[steve62388]

This is a home made fusion solution? I think there is a different experience with an Apple made fusion that intelligently switches/moves files between SSD and HDD.

No, it's the same. Evidence pointing to that fact is why you can split an 'Apple made' Fusion Drive and recreate it again without issues.

 

[robeddie]

This is a home made fusion solution? I think there is a different experience with an Apple made fusion that intelligently switches/moves files between SSD and HDD.

Well all I can tell you is I have a brand new 2017 iMac 21.5 inch with a 1tb fusion drive. I also have an SSD connected via a thunderbolt 2 enclosure (using the apple thunderbolt 3 to thunderbolt 2 dongle), and it's a NOTICEABLY better experience when I boot from the SSD rather than the internal fusion drive.

The fusion drive was and still is by it's very nature, a compromise. The ONLY reason fusion drives came into existence back in 2012 was that SSD prices were so high. Now that SSD prices are perfectly reasonable, a fusion drive with a measly 32gb (or even 128gb) of ssd storage is a pathetic relic of a time gone by.

None of apple's laptops have had fusion drives. There's a reason for that. So don't hobble your iMac with a fusion drive.

P.S. In a month or two I'm going to take out the 1tb fusion drive and install a 2tb SSD so I won't have to run the OS of the external drive.

 

[steve62388]

None of apple's laptops have had fusion drives for years. There's a reason for that. So don't hobble your iMac with a fusion drive.

Not for the reasons you're alluding to. It's because they're lighter, use less power, produce less heat and are less susceptible to shock damage. All characteristics that are a perfect match for a laptop.

 

[robeddie]

Not for the reasons you're intimating. It's because they're lighter, use less power, produce less heat and are less susceptible to shock damage. All characteristics that are a perfect fit for a laptop.

... and a hell of a lot faster. And BTW, apple laptops had spinning drives for decades without too much problems, so they could have used fusion drives in the their laptops 2012-onward if they wanted to.

 

[steve62388]

... and a hell of a lot faster. And BTW, apple laptops had spinning drives for decades without too much problems, so they could have used fusion drives in the their laptops 2012-onward if they wanted to.

For the reasons I listed the advantages of SSD are felt more keenly in laptops than desktops.

 

[robeddie]

For the reasons I listed the advantages of SSD are felt more keenly in laptops than desktops.

I think most people would agree the speed of an SSD is the main thing by far. The other things you listed are nice bonuses, but not the guiding motivation for anyone choosing an ssd over a drive that has spinning components.

 

[steve62388]

I think most people would agree the speed of an SSD is the main thing by far. The other things you listed are nice bonuses, but not the guiding motivation for anyone choosing an ssd over a drive that has spinning components.

You're starting to shift from your point which was why Apple made the change, not what consumers base their buying decisions on.

If Apple made the decision to shift to SSD on laptops was based only on the criteria of speed as you implied than they would have made the same shift on desktops.

 

[robeddie]

You're starting to shift from your point which was why Apple made the change, not what consumers base their buying decisions on.

If Apple made the decision to shift to SSD on laptops was based only on the criteria of speed as you implied than they would have made the same shift on desktops.

Well, the MAIN point of my post was that fusion drives came along as a compromised solution in the early days of extremely expensive mass market SSD's.

They are quickly becoming a pathetic relic of a time gone by.

 

[steve62388]

They are quickly becoming a pathetic relic of a time gone by.

For consumers they will likely fade in significance, but not in the time frame I would consider 'quickly'. For example there is no way I would consider replacing the 14TB of hard drives in my network storage devices with SSDs any time soon due to the astronomical cost. The speed, weight, size, heat production and shock resistance are not important for my use. Size and price are important.

Just like tape drives are still used for applications, hard drives will find their niche too.

 

[robeddie]

For consumers they will likely fade in significance, but not in the time frame I would consider 'quickly'. For example there is no way I would consider replacing the 14TB of storage in my network storage devices with SSDs any time soon due to the astronomical cost. The speed, weight, size, heat production and shock resistance are not important for my use. Size and price are important.

Just like tape drives are still used for applications, hard drives will find their niche too.

Agreed. When you're looking at huge storage needs like that.
But for anything pretty much 2tb or less, its getting ridiculous to not go with an SSD.
So when we're talking about a 1tb fusion drive vs a 1tb ssd, choosing the fusion drive is a big fail, imo

 

[ApfelKuchen]

... and a hell of a lot faster. And BTW, apple laptops had spinning drives for decades without too much problems, so they could have used fusion drives in the their laptops 2012-onward if they wanted to.

Flash storage has many undeniable advantages. Not only those mentioned previously, but also because Flash blades are far more compact than a 2.5" SATA drive (whether it's a spinner or SSD) - more space for batteries and/or a thinner configuration.

Yes, they could have offered Fusion in the 2012-onward laptops, had they wanted to sell a bulkier, heavier machine. They wanted the space occupied by the 2.5" SATA drive. I think the pressure was on to close the weight/bulk gap between Air and Pro - deliver more of the benefits of the Air to the performance-focused MBP buyers. A Fusion-equipped laptop might have occupied a separate niche - heavier and bulkier than the MBA and MBP, far more internal storage (for the money), value-priced... they didn't do that.

Of course Flash-equipped PCs are much faster. If speed was the key selling point, then it wouldn't matter whether it was a laptop or a desktop machine. If it was just a matter of speed, when SSD-only iMacs came on the market they'd quickly have become the dominant configuration, based on customer demand. They didn't. To this day, the only Mac desktop to come with all-Flash as the base configuration is the nMP.

Laptop owners have always had to compromise in order to have portability. They'll live with smaller storage capacity on the laptop, so long as they have plenty of mass storage on their desktop. Desktop owners have a tendency to want huge amounts of internal storage (at an affordable price), in large part to minimize routine housecleaning - save everything! Fusion suits this tendency - affordable mass storage, higher performance.