I actually like the updates from the latest WWDC. Even the iMac Pro looks cool despite being extremely overpriced and not user upgradeable (from what I can tell). But why oh why is Apple still using 5400rpm HDD in their iMac?? No other Mac comes with a traditional HDD. They're all SSD which is far faster than a traditional HDD. The only obvious reason is that Apple wants users to pay more for SSD which by now shouldn't cost more per GB than a standard HDD. To upgrade the iMac to a 512GB SSD is another $480 (Canadian). That's a lot of coin. I was under the impression that Apple was supposed to be "progressive" and leave legacy stuff behind.
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.
5400rpm HDD in 2017??
- Thread starter bigpoppamac31
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree 5400RPM drives need to die ASAP. They've been the biggest bottleneck in any Mac since 2012. Even Fusion drive as standard, a paltry 24GB SSD partition, would make a world of difference with perceived real world performance on the Mac Mini or any Mac.
However it's worth considering that these SSDs are a far cry from a Sandisk SSD you can pick up from Amazon. They're extremely quick with more than five times the read/write speeds and are considerably more expensive than traditional HDDs, let alone traditional SSDs. Just to get an idea of pricing on the market, I believe Apple use the Samsung 960 or 960 Pro Flash chips, though with a proprietary interface rather than the market NVMe. They are pretty pricey.
However it's worth considering that these SSDs are a far cry from a Sandisk SSD you can pick up from Amazon. They're extremely quick with more than five times the read/write speeds and are considerably more expensive than traditional HDDs, let alone traditional SSDs. Just to get an idea of pricing on the market, I believe Apple use the Samsung 960 or 960 Pro Flash chips, though with a proprietary interface rather than the market NVMe. They are pretty pricey.
If the price difference is really that significant that they couldn't soak up most in margin, maybe have "standard" SSD in low end models with "high performance SSD" as an option and standard on high end models.
Exactly. My 2014 rMBP gets about 600MB/s read and write. Not sure how fast the new ones are but that plenty speedy for me. The iMac could have an SSD with speeds like that with the higher up models having speeds of 1,000MB/s or more.
1000MB speeds were what Apple was using in 2013. The 2016 MacBook Pros get up to 2800MB/s read speeds and >1400MB/s writes. They are crazy fast.
At this point, the only thing not using a fusion drive is the Mac mini (which is probably dead) and two SKUs of iMac. It sucks they didn't just eat the cost and give the 4K iMac a nicer experience, no doubt about it. But it's also not a major issue for the vast majority of their products now. Here's to hoping 2018 brings the end to hard disk-only models and we see flash BTO prices drop to more comfortable levels.*
*I would imagine a lot of people would be better served by a 256GB SSD standard, but I can only presume the fusion drives remain because people are not storage-conscious.
In any event my point being is that a traditional HDD inside consumer based (not pro based) computer is so 2006. It's been years overdue to ditch the standard hard drive. They're fine in something like a Mac Pro tower where you can have multiple drives and use them as backups. But not when you have only one drive inside and it's not user upgradeable.
The 5400rpm drive was used for a reason.
On all iMac late 2009 to mid 2011, changing any drive required a heat sensor kit unless one used then identical model hard drive to the original. Apple overcame this for the 21.5" model by introducing the notebook style drive certainly at a cost in performance.
Apple also went with that model into non-user upgradeable memory so it became a bottom line model.
At the time of purchase a buyer could have gone with the option of Fusion or Flash drives at a much higher price.
On all iMac late 2009 to mid 2011, changing any drive required a heat sensor kit unless one used then identical model hard drive to the original. Apple overcame this for the 21.5" model by introducing the notebook style drive certainly at a cost in performance.
Apple also went with that model into non-user upgradeable memory so it became a bottom line model.
At the time of purchase a buyer could have gone with the option of Fusion or Flash drives at a much higher price.
Using those drives was bad in the 2013 refresh, indefensible in 2015, and absurd today. It's a shame because low-end buyers (and not that low-end: the $1300 4K iMac has a spinner!!) will use these macs as-is and have a really bad experience.
What would it cost apple per unit to use those fusion drives with 32 gb SSD in every iMac? It's bean-counting taken to a truly surreal level.
What would it cost apple per unit to use those fusion drives with 32 gb SSD in every iMac? It's bean-counting taken to a truly surreal level.
Exactly. Apple is just being greedy. Making a profit is obviously a good thing for any business but Apple has pushed t to the next level.