2019 iMac Fusion drive - am I mad to consider one?

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

I'd never buy a Fusion drive these days. The SSD difference is just too big. Unfortunately, Apple makes this a hard choice due to price.

If you get a Fusion drive, at least get a 2TB+ drive, because the 1TB drive uses a measly 24GB SSD, while the 2TB+ uses a 128GB SSD.

 

[cardfan]

The only thing fusion you’d want to buy is a reactor. Stay away from internal spinners.

 

[crsh1976]

I assume this won't be a popular opinion, but for limited budgets I'd rather have a 1 TB Fusion Drive than a 256 GB SSD - Apple's upgrade prices being what they are, both options are a compromise between storage space and speed.

A 256 GB SSD is small, it gets full in no time after adding some apps, and you'll be forced to rely on external drives - so I'm not sure the Fusion Drive's lousy 32 GB SSD is really an issue, that is unless you can at least move up in terms of storage options : either the 2 TB Fusion Drive, or a 512 GB SSD (again, Apple's storage option prices are whacked so neither is a cheap decision).

 

[familychoice]

I'd never buy a Fusion drive these days. The SSD difference is just too big. Unfortunately, Apple makes this a hard choice due to price.

The 256gb upgrade option is only £90 - but they're charging three times the price of this (£270) for double the storage with the 512. That doesn't make sense to me.

A 256 GB SSD is small, it gets full in no time after adding some apps, and you'll be forced to rely on external drives - so I'm not sure the Fusion Drive's lousy 32 GB SSD is really an issue, that is unless you can at least move up in terms of storage options : either the 2 TB Fusion Drive, or a 512 GB SSD (again, Apple's storage option prices are whacked so neither is a cheap decision).

That's what I'm thinking 256 wouldn't work at all. 512 would be the minimum.

Think I'm going off the idea of an iMac now, my budget just won't stretch to a configuration that's be usable in the long term. Best I could do would be to go with the Fusion drive, use that as file storage and hook up an external £70 500gb Evo. Unless I suddenly come into some money the Mini is probably going to get the job.

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

The 256gb upgrade option is only £90 - but they're charging three times the price of this (£270) for double the storage with the 512. That doesn't make sense to me.

NVEM SSDs are quite pricey, the higher the storage. That's not Apples fault as such, but their high markup is though.

 

[Fishrrman]

If you buy the 1tb fusion drive, I predict that you'll come to REGRET the purchase sooner rather than later.

Best choice:
Either a 256gb or 512gb SSD.
Add to that EXTERNAL USB3 storage (can be either HDD or SSD, whatever your needs).

Yes, there will be a SIGNIFICANT speed difference between booting from an internal SSD vs booting from an external USB3 SSD. The internal SSD is an nvme flash drive that is VERY fast -- at least FOUR TIMES as fast as ANY USB3 SSD.

There's really no way to get around this reality.
The only reason to get -something less than- an SSD in a Mac now is because you are:
1. Uninformed
2. Totally broke.

I sense that you are neither.
So... make the right choice!

One other possible course of action:
Get a 2018 Mac Mini.

 

[familychoice]

If you buy the 1tb fusion drive, I predict that you'll come to REGRET the purchase sooner rather than later.

Best choice:
Either a 256gb or 512gb SSD.
Add to that EXTERNAL USB3 storage (can be either HDD or SSD, whatever your needs).

Yes, there will be a SIGNIFICANT speed difference between booting from an internal SSD vs booting from an external USB3 SSD. The internal SSD is an nvme flash drive that is VERY fast -- at least FOUR TIMES as fast as ANY USB3 SSD.

There's really no way to get around this reality.
The only reason to get -something less than- an SSD in a Mac now is because you are:
1. Uninformed
2. Totally broke.

I sense that you are neither.
So... make the right choice!

One other possible course of action:
Get a 2018 Mac Mini.

Thanks for the info - the speed difference between internal and external is helpful.

Seems I have two options: iMac with 512gb SSD upgrade (I don't think the 256gb would be enough) plus external backup (already have that), or the Mac Mini with 512gb SSD upgrade.

I'll have a dig around the back of the sofa and see if I can find £270 in spare change...

 

[Fishrrman]

"I have two options: iMac with 512gb SSD upgrade (I don't think the 256gb would be enough) plus external backup (already have that), or the Mac Mini with 512gb SSD upgrade."

If you have a display/keyboard/mouse that you're content with now, the Mini can be a good alternative for less money. I've been very happy with my 2012 Mini, soon going to get the 2018 model to replace it.

Of course, the iMac has the 5k display (if that is of prime importance to you).

 

[Martius]

Get the 512GB SSD + external storage. I know it sucks paying extra, because in 2019 the 512GB SSD should have been a standard in all 27" iMacs (it's 2019, SSDs are cheap, Apple!), but I think it's worth it and after several years you won't have a problem selling it, mainly because of the SSD.

 

[Apple Mac Daz]

External X5 or T5 are very fast drives even from booting off

 

[Nerdyaf]

Thanks for the info - the speed difference between internal and external is helpful.

Seems I have two options: iMac with 512gb SSD upgrade (I don't think the 256gb would be enough) plus external backup (already have that), or the Mac Mini with 512gb SSD upgrade.

I'll have a dig around the back of the sofa and see if I can find £270 in spare change...

what is your budget? i think you can just upgrade to 256gb. you just have to install software on your imac ssd and then store documents on the external ssd. shouldnt impact your startup speed much.

based on what you have said so far i will choose a mac mini

1) better price
2) more versatile: ram can be upgraded in future, imac cannot. while its graphics card sucks compared to imac, i think it is sufficient for your current usage. if you need a better card in future, hopefully the prices of egpu has fallen
3) not really an important point, but i have heard of people buying a new imac because it is too expensive to repair their faulty screen. everything else is still working fine though

 

[theluggage]

The 256gb upgrade option is only £90 - but they're charging three times the price of this (£270) for double the storage with the 512. That doesn't make sense to me.

When you go Fusion-to-SSD256 you're no longer getting the 1TB HD, which is probably "worth" at least $100 including Apple Upgrade Tax. Unfortunately, Apple's SSD prices are gouge-y even alongside comparable fast NVMe products.

That's what I'm thinking 256 wouldn't work at all. 512 would be the minimum.

So, on my 2017 iMac, my Apps/System/Library files come to about 160GB and that includes Xcode, Logic Pro X (with full sound library - about 60GB that could be re-located to external storage if needed) FCPX/Motion etc. (not used much - I got an education deal so it was as cheap to get the full Pro bundle than just logic) full MS Office and more. Yeah, I do a bit of everything. Having that stuff (plus temp files, swap etc.) on fast SSD is what gives the biggest speed boost. 256GB is do-able if you keep most of your 'user' files on external.

I actually went for the 1TB SSD (education price again) and so far I've yet to use 512GB of it. 256GB would be slightly inconvenient but worse things happen at sea. Having to choose is the price of having a Mac without upgradeable internal storage.

Unless I suddenly come into some money the Mini is probably going to get the job.

The value of the Mini vs. the 5k iMac depends a lot on what you expect from the display - adding a 5k display to the Mini will cost about £1200 and even a decent 4k display fit to breathe the same air as the iMac will cost £600+

On the other hand, the Mini gives you a choice of displays and, odds are, it will work usably with your old display, and you can worry about upgrading that later. Only caveat is that larger (and cheaper) 1080p displays aren't the best match for the MacOS UI - the system fonts, menus, icons dialogs all come out a bit large. If you're buying a display and won't stretch to 4k/5k either go smaller than 27" or 2560x1400.

I've seen a few reports here that the 8GB Mini can be a bit sluggish running 4k/5k displays but upgrading the RAM helps - not surprising, since the weak spot of the Mini is its GPU which takes its video RAM from the main memory - and high res displays mean quad-size framebuffers. Something to consider if you're contemplating getting a high def display in future.

Also bear in mind that upgrading the RAM in the Mini is a major operation requiring total disassembly and always involves replacing the existing RAM - whereas it is an absolute cinch to pop open the little door and add another pair of RAM sticks to the 5k iMac's empty slots.

 

[a2jack]

Opened a failed 27" iMac to check out the HDD. Never again! (HDD was OK).

If you buy the iMac think of hauling that big lump to the Apple store when it dies. Or sticking it behind your 4k TV, just to see how it works. LOL

Mac Mini wins again. LOL. a2

 

[familychoice]

what is your budget? i think you can just upgrade to 256gb. you just have to install software on your imac ssd and then store documents on the external ssd. shouldnt impact your startup speed much.

Initially I'd decided to replace the Windows desktop - the current one cost about £1100, and has lasted well. Unfortunately Dell don't seem to provide an option to customise their products now - just a set range to choose from, and the one's in that price bracket all have standard HDD's (seems to be a bit of a theme). Plus I'm not keen on Win 10, and the new Mini came out, so I considered one of those as an alternative. I already have a Macbook Pro, and have been using Mac's since the 90's so I'm happy to drop Windows.

The iMac update caught me by surprise - I've always wanted one, so it seemed like a good time to buy. Realistically my budget is about £1200, which works with the Mini - but the jump to £1749 didn't seem too outrageous considering it comes with the screen and I could just about scrape that together. But then adding on nearly £300 for the SSD and suddenly I'm in scary money territory.

256GB is do-able if you keep most of your 'user' files on external.

Good points about the Mini. I'll check my Macbook Pro setup and see how much disk space I'm using with the apps on there. Perhaps I could squeeze into a 256gb, though it'd probably hit the resale value - then again I tend to keep my devices until they conk out.
[doublepost=1553533335][/doublepost]

Opened a failed 27" iMac to check out the HDD. Never again! (HDD was OK).

If you buy the iMac think of hauling that big lump to the Apple store when it dies. Or sticking it behind your 4k TV, just to see how it works. LOL

Mac Mini wins again. LOL. a2

That scares me a bit...thinking of having problems with a £2k machine after only a couple of years use. The all-in-one thing is a bit daunting.

Seems like it's swings and roundabouts on this one - Mini vs iMac.

 

[Nerdyaf]

what is the spec of your MBP? why dont you just get docking station for your MBP?

https://www.imore.com/best-docking-stations-macbook-pro

 

[familychoice]

what is the spec of your MBP? why dont you just get docking station for your MBP?

https://www.imore.com/best-docking-stations-macbook-pro

It's a non-retina 2012 base model, but I put another 4gb of RAM in taking it up to 8gb. I have it hooked up to a spare monitor and a couple of SSD's, as the internal HD is pretty much useless for doing anything apart from checking email and web browsing - courtesy of the last few OS updates. I use it for travelling, meetings, and for music stuff where I boot from one of the SSD's.

It's done well, and I could buy another drive and make that bootable with work stuff, but I don't want to push it - as it's showing its age a bit. However I am keeping it as a backup - so if/when the Dell desktop stops working I can use that until I get a replacement.

Get the 512GB SSD + external storage. I know it sucks paying extra, because in 2019 the 512GB SSD should have been a standard in all 27" iMacs (it's 2019, SSDs are cheap, Apple!), but I think it's worth it and after several years you won't have a problem selling it, mainly because of the SSD.

I think this is my conclusion after starting this thread. I would be completely mad to buy a new iMac with the Fusion drive, and for my purposes the 512gb upgrade is the minimum I can get away with.

Thanks to everyone that replied - it's been very helpful. Just need to see if I can afford the iMac with the upgrade, or settle for a Mini.

 

[mpe]

It all depends on your storage needs. I used Fusion drive for some time. The variant of Fusion with 128G SSD(2TB/3TB) is still perfectly fine IMHO and if you have normal needs it is hard to notice any practical difference compared to SSD only (apart from benchmarks and I/O heavy tasks). It is unlikely the fusion will be slowing you down.

I would prefer 2TB/3TB fusion over a tiny 256GB SSD if having hard budget.

That's being said I wouldn't personally buy desktop with less than 512GB SSD these days. Some iMac upgrades are mandatory and sadly storage is one of them. It is way more important than CPU/GPU upgrade.

 

[Martius]

Thanks to everyone that replied - it's been very helpful. Just need to see if I can afford the iMac with the upgrade, or settle for a Mini.

The problem with Mac Mini (for me) is that there is not a single monitor I would like to buy right now. Even though the standard iMac comes with just a Fusion Drive, I think it's still the best value in Mac product line because of the amazing display. I have never thought that there is gonna be just a single 5K monitor (LG ultrafine) on the market in 2019 and even that monitor is expensive and plasticky. I would go for the Mac Mini, if I could purchase 27" 5K thunderbolt-like Apple monitor for a reasonable price ($1000 max, $1500 if it had an good integrated GPU). But if Apple is gonna make a new "pro" monitor, it will be more like $2500... so as I said, iMac is still not that bad value because of that display.

 

[familychoice]

It all depends on your storage needs. I used Fusion drive for some time. The variant of Fusion with 128G SSD(2TB/3TB) is still perfectly fine IMHO and if you have normal needs it is hard to notice any practical difference compared to SSD only (apart from benchmarks and I/O heavy tasks). It is unlikely the fusion will be slowing you down.

I would prefer 2TB/3TB fusion over a tiny 256GB SSD if having hard budget.

That's being said I wouldn't personally buy desktop with less than 512GB SSD these days. Some iMac upgrades are mandatory and sadly storage is one of them. It is way more important than CPU/GPU upgrade.

Yeah definitely. It's £180 for the 2tb Fusion update, so definitely a no-go - I'd rather pay another £90 for the 512 SSD, and the 256gb is too small for future proofing.

The problem with Mac Mini (for me) is that there is not a single monitor I would like to buy right now. Even though the standard iMac comes with just a Fusion Drive, I think it's still the best value in Mac product line because of the amazing display. I have never thought that there is gonna be just a single 5K monitor (LG ultrafine) on the market in 2019 and even that monitor is expensive and plasticky. I would go for the Mac Mini, if I could purchase 27" 5K thunderbolt-like Apple monitor for a reasonable price ($1000 max, $1500 if it had an good integrated GPU). But if Apple is gonna make a new "pro" monitor, it will be more like $2500... so as I said, iMac is still not that bad value because of that display.

The Mac Mini has a few drawbacks - no gpu, audio issues with USB interfaces that have stopped me jumping in and getting one. Plus upgrading RAM is harder than with the iMac.

I'm going to hold off until some proper reviews have been posted - it'll be useful to see the performance of the Fusion drive, but I'm resigned to the SSD upgrade if I want the iMac.

 

[adamjackson]

Maybe you already purchased but as a 2015 iMac owner with a maxed out computer on everything except the 3TB Fusion drive (instead of spending $900 more at the time for a 1TB SSD), that's the main reason I'm buying a new iMac. When you first reload the OS, it's okay and if you stick to normal activities...it's okay. Just okay. Once you start really using the Mac with a lot of startup / menu items, large Final Cut Pro or photoshop projects that exceed the 128GB Fusion SSD on-board and use the 7200RPM drive, it gets slow. The iMac I had before reloading it for the 10th time took about 21 minutes from booth to getting started. I had a lot of things installed sure but my MacBook Pro with SSD had the same boot process and it's up and running in 45 seconds. Watching safari bounce 25 times got old so that's why I bought a new iMac this time with SSD.

 

[mcpix]

I have 2 iMacs (2015) with the 2TB fusion drive. A lot of people on this forum don't like the fusion drive, but so far it has worked great for me. However, if I was buying new, I would also go for an SSD. I know what it's like when funds are tight and even a few more dollars (or pounds) makes a difference. Although the 512GB SSD is obviously preferred, I think you would probably be fine with the 256GB SSD. That's the same size SSD on have in my 13" MBP and it works fine. When I have a large video project, I just plug in my 512GB Samsung T5 external drive to hold my files.

 

[smetvid]

How much you use the drive will determine how mad you are. The 2TB Fusion drive uses a 128GB SSD. After that fills up the rest of the 2TB HDD is used. How big are the files being used on the HDD portion of the drive? This is something to take into consideration. A PDF isn't going to open much faster on the SSD vs the HDD. We are talking a 1 second difference. SSD always matter more for the OS drive so booting is faster. Once the system is booted up opening small documents isn't going to really have a massive impact. I shoot and edit 4k video and my external edit drives are still HDD. Putting that low bandwidth content on a SSD isn't going to speed up the process very much.

I have a ton of video, animation and design applications allow with Xcode and other development tools on all my Macs and I rarely get close to using 128GB of my drives. I keep my iTunes, photos and documents on an external drive so I can move them between Macs easily.

I really think of the Fusion drive as two drives in the computer. A 128GB system drive and a 2TB extra content drive. You can even split them up into two drives. That way you could have just a 128GB SSD MacOS drive and use the 2TB HDD as your time machine drive. Or use the HDD for the iTunes, photos and document content. Thats pretty much what Fusion does. Keeps most of the frequently used OS files on the SSD portion and the lesser content like a tax document only opened once a year on the HDD portion. It handles where to put the frequently used files so you don't have to shuffle them around. Pretty smart system but of course it isn't perfect.

Personally if I really need my content on a SSD I would just add an affordable external SSD drive for that and still keep the Fusion. Like I mentioned above use it for time machine or something.

From a failure perspective Fusion could potentially fail more frequently than just a SSD could. Since the Fusion is combined into a single drive if the HDD portion croaks it kills everything. I have had the HDD portion fail on an iMac. It was still covered under warranty so no big deal. If an iMac is out of warranty a user could always split the fusion drive so they can reload MacOS on the SSD and just ignore the dead HDD. A dead HDD portion doesn't have to mean dead in the water.

 

[familychoice]

I have 2 iMacs (2015) with the 2TB fusion drive. A lot of people on this forum don't like the fusion drive, but so far it has worked great for me.

How much you use the drive will determine how mad you are. The 2TB Fusion drive uses a 128GB SSD. After that fills up the rest of the 2TB HDD is used.

Thanks for the replies. If I was going to spend £180 on the 2tb Fusion upgrade though, then I might as well shell out another £90 for the 512 SSD.

I'm waiting for the teardown's and full reviews. If they're good, and I can find the extra cash then I'm resigned to the 512 SSD upgrade.

The Mini is back in the running though - sounds like the audio issues have been sorted with an OS update. The only black mark against that now for me is the difficulty in user-upgradeable RAM.

 

[nihil0]

Seems like the Samsung external T5 and X5 SSDs are popular here. I myself have a 500GB T5. It's great for the price.

Does it work as system drive too? Because when I had 2013 27-ich iMac I bought Transcend StoreJet 500 (TB2 connection) and I always had problems after updating macOS - it would not boot from external SSD after the update, I had to go to Recovery mode and set it everytime as startup drive.

 

[LuminousFX]

Yea you're mad.

It's even more mad that Apple is still using a spinning HDD in their machines. Come on Apple, you don't need to put the latest and greatest NVMe SSD in iMac. Even a low tier SSD makes a HUGE difference in comparison to a HDD.