SSD or Fusion, the quesiton of our century

[varian55zx]

Here's some reading for you: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6679/a-month-with-apples-fusion-drive

I've read this entire article, my boy. I've done far more research on this subject and am far more informed on it than you

[doublepost=1481054842][/doublepost]

Thank you! So what would you recommend I keep on my 512 GB Flash, and what would you recommend I keep on my say... "4TB Seagate Fast" portable hard drive? Would I keep all of my applications on my 512GB internal Flash, but then all of the produced files + my media files, on the external? I am not super familiar with time machine/time capsule.

You should be very happy with the 512 flash, it provides a superb experience.

I would recommend to keep your system files and all applications on the internal SSD, and any extra files such as media files, document library, etc on the external.

If there is one media file, or document you find yourself frequently using, you can always more it back to the internal for the length of time that you are using it.

The external HDD should be more or less for storage, and the internal SSD can house your OS and applications primarily, and anything else you find yourself using frequently.

Yet another advantage to pure SSD is you don't have two internal drives to worry about failing, if one drive on the fusion drive fails (somewhat likely with the HDD), the computer is no longer usable. Alternatively, if an external HDD fails you can still boot your machine, and you would likely have a back up of that HDD anyway.

 

[gabeascarl]

I've read this entire article, my boy. I've done far more research on this subject and am far more informed on it than you


This is someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

I read the whole article as well and honestly at this point it seems like 512 Flash is the way to go with an external hard drive. The 2TB FD doesn't seem bad for what I would be using it for, but the 512 Flash seems like a safe bet.

Can you let me know if this sounds like it works...
-I will use the 512 internal flash for applications and everything I need to run fast.
-Then I will buy this external hard drive: https://www.amazon.com/Black-Passport-Portable-External-Drive/dp/B01LQQH86A/ and partition it so that 3TB are delegated to Time Machine back up, and 1 TB is to use as a portable hard drive (Ex. copying pictures from various computers that I want saved).

Does that work?

 

[varian55zx]

I read the whole article as well and honestly at this point it seems like 512 Flash is the way to go with an external hard drive. The 2TB FD doesn't seem bad for what I would be using it for, but the 512 Flash seems like a safe bet.

I agree with this sentiment 100%.

The 2 tb fusion is by no means a bad buy, the 1 tb fusion is a bad buy. It only has 24 gb of flash, so you won't be getting much use out of the flash portion of it. Especially considering how slow the fusion technology is to move frequently used data to the SSD portion, if the SSD portion is already loaded up with other data. Remember all incoming reads hit flash first (up to 4gb).

But I digress. The only downside to the 512 SSD vs the 2 tb option would be capacity, but that simple downside can be remedied by using external storage solutions (which you would likely already be using anyway).

Can you let me know if this sounds like it works...
-I will use the 512 internal flash for applications and everything I need to run fast.
-Then I will buy this external hard drive: https://www.amazon.com/Black-Passport-Portable-External-Drive/dp/B01LQQH86A/ and partition it so that 3TB are delegated to Time Machine back up, and 1 TB is to use as a portable hard drive (Ex. copying pictures from various computers that I want saved).

Does that work?

Most definitely, that would work perfectly and you will have a setup that will work very well for your needs, in addition to a beautiful new machine.

You can create the partition in disk utility, and as long as you select the time machine partition you made as the backup drive, you should have no issues with that setup.

 

[gabeascarl]

I agree with this sentiment 100%.

The 2 tb fusion is by no means a bad buy, the 1 tb fusion is a bad buy. It only has 24 gb of flash, so you won't be getting much use out of the flash portion of it. Especially considering how slow the fusion technology is to move frequently used data to the SSD portion, if the SSD portion is already loaded up with other data. Remember all incoming reads hit flash first (up to 4gb).

But I digress. The only downside to the 512 SSD vs the 2 tb option would be capacity, but that simple downside can be remedied by using external storage solutions (which you would likely already be using anyway).


Most definitely, that would work perfectly and you will have a setup that will work very well for your needs, in addition to a beautiful new machine.

You can create the partition in disk utility, and as long as you select the time machine partition you made as the backup drive, you should have no issues with that setup.

Thank you so much for all of your help!

 

[varian55zx]

Thank you so much for all of your help!

No problem my guy, and hope you enjoy your new machine!

 

[siddhartha]

Thank you so much for all of your help!

I have a 2014 rImac with a 3TB FD, and I will not buy another FD.

Reason is that although it seems to work just fine with the OS X portion, it was a HUGE hassle to get it working right with bootcamp. I ended up, several times, with "unfused" drives, and it was a huge hassle to correct that issue. Then, trying to re-do the install, many, many times resulted in a proper installation (probably 2 complete, correct installs in about the 20+ times I tried to do it, and I am not an amateur) before the final install, which I am running on.

Lesson learned. I liked the increased storage with the 3TB drive, but not the hassle. I would absolutely go with a SSD in the future. Won't even consider a FD again

 

[kschendel]

I certainly would not attempt a Fusion drive across different operating systems. I'd expect it to be squirrely even across multiple installations of the same operating system, not that anyone normally does that with OS X.

The fusion drive concept absolutely has its uses (see also "cachefs"). Even the small FD will beat a straight spinner for the right workload (light editing and such). But, if you can afford the pure SSD and the size works for you, that would be my choice as well.

 

[varian55zx]

I have a 2014 rImac with a 3TB FD, and I will not buy another FD.

Reason is that although it seems to work just fine with the OS X portion, it was a HUGE hassle to get it working right with bootcamp. I ended up, several times, with "unfused" drives, and it was a huge hassle to correct that issue. Then, trying to re-do the install, many, many times resulted in a proper installation (probably 2 complete, correct installs in about the 20+ times I tried to do it, and I am not an amateur) before the final install, which I am running on.

Lesson learned. I liked the increased storage with the 3TB drive, but not the hassle. I would absolutely go with a SSD in the future. Won't even consider a FD again

You're really sounding smart, always nice to hear from someone who speaks from experience, and knows what they are talking about, instead of some online trolls who have never used the gear, don't know anything about it, and are only going to mislead people with their posts!

As if the reports from the other people in the thread aren't enough, take it from me. I've owned both the 2tb fusion, and pure SSD, and the SSD makes all the difference. Best computer I've ever owned !

 

[siddhartha]

I think the issue is that FD is not well supported (if at all) in the Windows world, at least in the format that Apple uses, and this has caused issues for me.
Again, as SSD comes down in price, I would not consider a FD again. If I needed mega-storage, it will be internal SSD, and external HDD in a RAID for now

 

[rbart]

I've read this entire article, my boy. I've done far more research on this subject and am far more informed on it than you

[doublepost=1481054842][/doublepost]
You should be very happy with the 512 flash, it provides a superb experience.

I would recommend to keep your system files and all applications on the internal SSD, and any extra files such as media files, document library, etc on the external.

If there is one media file, or document you find yourself frequently using, you can always more it back to the internal for the length of time that you are using it.

The external HDD should be more or less for storage, and the internal SSD can house your OS and applications primarily, and anything else you find yourself using frequently.

Yet another advantage to pure SSD is you don't have two internal drives to worry about failing, if one drive on the fusion drive fails (somewhat likely with the HDD), the computer is no longer usable. Alternatively, if an external HDD fails you can still boot your machine, and you would likely have a back up of that HDD anyway.

I have found a very interesting contribution from an expert:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ssd-vs-fusion-drive-imac.1846485/page-5#post-22748905

 

[maflynn]

I have found a very interesting contribution from an expert:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ssd-vs-fusion-drive-imac.1846485/page-5#post-22748905

I found that Fusion works well, and OS X does do a good job. an SSD is the best option, provided its within your budget and/or your data can fit within the constraints of the SSD size. For me I have the 2 TB Fusion drive its worked well for me.

 

[rbart]

I found that Fusion works well, and OS X does do a good job. an SSD is the best option, provided its within your budget and/or your data can fit within the constraints of the SSD size. For me I have the 2 TB Fusion drive its worked well for me.

I agree with you, but I was just showing varian55zx contradictions ...
Fusion drive is a very good compromise between HDD high capacity storage and pure SSD performance for a reasonable cost.

 

[maflynn]

I agree with you, but I was just showing varian55zx contradictions ...

\
I know and Fusion is a good product

 

[briloronmacrumo]

Hello all,
Do you recommend I:
1. Keep the 1TB Fusion Drive
2. Upgrade to 2TB Fusion Drive for $188.
3. Upgrade to 512GB Flash for $282, while also Velcro-ing a Seagate portable hard drive to the stand and keeping it plugged in at all times. We can think of this upgrade as a ~$420 purchase.

Personally, I always purchase the latest proven technology that I can afford. This tends to future-proof my investment a little.

Choice #3 with the largest flash/SSD you can afford seems the best option ( assuming price is not a deal-breaking factor ). However, depending on your circumstances ( need to purchase now or can wait ), it might be worth waiting for the next iMac revision at this point. Given the increased storage options Apple offers in the new MBP ( 2 TB flash ), it is reasonable to assume new iMacs will have it. That's my plan anyway. YMMV.

 

[MichaelDT]

Buy the 2Tb fusion, crack open the iMac and trade the 24Gb SSD portion out for a 512gb from OWC or wherever re-roll the FD with the larger SSD component. Or even keep them as seperate internal drives. Then disengage all complaints.

 

[rbart]

Buy the 2Tb fusion, crack open the iMac and trade the 24Gb SSD portion out for a 512gb from OWC or wherever re-roll the FD with the larger SSD component. Or even keep them as seperate internal drives. Then disengage all complaints.

Bad idea for me ...
You will lose warranty, it's quite complex to completely tear down this machind (I have done it on a late 2012) and the OWC SSD is way slower than the Apple one.
By the way, the 2Tb FD includes a 128Gb SSD drive.

 

[bingeciren]

Here is my 2¢ worth from my hands on experience with Fusion and split drives. Also, I have read everything regarding Fusion and I know very well how it works.

I have a 2012 Mac Mini Server which is perfect for DIY Fusion. There is a 512 GB SSD in one slot and a 4200 2TB HDD in the other slot.

After testing the Fusion drive for a few months, I decided to split the drives and go back to managing files on my own. Not that I'm a super human and manage shifting blocks better than Fusion, but for my usage pattern, I can manage things better doing it myself. Let me explain:

I have about 500GB worth of pictures archive going all the way back to the late 30's, scanned from old family albums etc. They can happily reside in the slower HDD and would hardly benefit from a speed increase. Similarly I have 65 GB of iTunes files, very dynamic, but they have no business being in the SSD drive.

However, I have a bunch of Parallels VM files about 300 GB in total. I use some of them infrequently, say once a month, but I want all of them in my SSD because regardless of using them infrequently, I want them to load as fast as possible when I need them. So, they reside in the SSD drive no matter what.

Also, I relocated my Pictures, Documents and Downloads folder to the HDD. Documents always load fast, whether they are in the SSD or HDD because individually they are rather small, but in sum occupy gigabytes of space.

I have all my archival Video files and disk images in an external USB3 hard drive and only my current iMovie Library and my linked (referenced) Photos Library stays in my SSD.

This type of management also has yet another benefit from a backup point of view. I use Carbon Copy Cloner and make incremental backups of each drive independently.

Media files being in a separate drive also becomes very handy for Bootcamp or if I boot from a different partition.

Is there a penalty or disadvantage with this kind of setup? Well, the only disadvantage I can see is that I don't use the free space as efficiently as the FD. I always have a slack in the SSD portion, but I like leaving at least 30% of the SSD empty for the OS anyhow.

In any case, If I was going to buy an iMac with FD, I'd go at least with the 2TB version because of the 128GB SSD.

 

[Phil A.]

In a perfect world where money was no object, I'd have a 2TB SSD in my iMac. However, I don't live in a perfect world and money is a consideration so I have the 2TB Fusion Drive instead.
I was actually pleasantly surprised at how well it works: I had visions of having to either split it or use an external SSD as a boot drive but in reality the experience has been smooth and pain free and performance has been excellent

 

[bingeciren]

Do you recommend I:
1. Keep the 1TB Fusion Drive
2. Upgrade to 2TB Fusion Drive for $188.
3. Upgrade to 512GB Flash for $282, while also Velcro-ing a Seagate portable hard drive to the stand and keeping it plugged in at all times. We can think of this upgrade as a ~$420 purchase.

Thanks so much!

Consider velcro-ing this to the stand:

https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-MiniT...id=1481881040&sr=8-1&keywords=shadow+mini+ssd

You will be impressed with its speed.

 

[maflynn]

Buy the 2Tb fusion, crack open the iMac

The risk of damage is too high, its not an easy process and there's very delicate cables/components that you need to be careful. The operation is doable, but I don't think its worth the risk, especially if you're not used to working on computers

 

[varian55zx]

Here is my 2¢ worth from my hands on experience with Fusion and split drives. Also, I have read everything regarding Fusion and I know very well how it works.

I have a 2012 Mac Mini Server which is perfect for DIY Fusion. There is a 512 GB SSD in one slot and a 4200 2TB HDD in the other slot.

After testing the Fusion drive for a few months, I decided to split the drives and go back to managing files on my own. Not that I'm a super human and manage shifting blocks better than Fusion, but for my usage pattern, I can manage things better doing it myself. Let me explain:

I have about 500GB worth of pictures archive going all the way back to the late 30's, scanned from old family albums etc. They can happily reside in the slower HDD and would hardly benefit from a speed increase. Similarly I have 65 GB of iTunes files, very dynamic, but they have no business being in the SSD drive.

However, I have a bunch of Parallels VM files about 300 GB in total. I use some of them infrequently, say once a month, but I want all of them in my SSD because regardless of using them infrequently, I want them to load as fast as possible when I need them. So, they reside in the SSD drive no matter what.

Also, I relocated my Pictures, Documents and Downloads folder to the HDD. Documents always load fast, whether they are in the SSD or HDD because individually they are rather small, but in sum occupy gigabytes of space.

I have all my archival Video files and disk images in an external USB3 hard drive and only my current iMovie Library and my linked (referenced) Photos Library stays in my SSD.

This type of management also has yet another benefit from a backup point of view. I use Carbon Copy Cloner and make incremental backups of each drive independently.

Media files being in a separate drive also becomes very handy for Bootcamp or if I boot from a different partition.

Is there a penalty or disadvantage with this kind of setup? Well, the only disadvantage I can see is that I don't use the free space as efficiently as the FD. I always have a slack in the SSD portion, but I like leaving at least 30% of the SSD empty for the OS anyhow.

In any case, If I was going to buy an iMac with FD, I'd go at least with the 2TB version because of the 128GB SSD.

I said the exact same thing and nobody understood the advantage of it. People on this site are funny

 

[jetjaguar]

Ive had fusion drives in the past and I would never get anything now a days that wasn't a ssd

 

[MichaelDT]

The risk of damage is too high, its not an easy process and there's very delicate cables/components that you need to be careful. The operation is doable, but I don't think its worth the risk, especially if you're not used to working on computers

I've said this before, we used to solder our own kit computers. Now people are afraid of plug and play components. The ribbon cables are so delicate. Wow.. The 2011's and earlier were a bit of work but still not hard. The newer ones are so much easier inside, so much room, you have to razor blade off some display adhesive nbd. There are cables and yes you need to be careful, but really... As for voiding the warranty if you open or change a component, NO. US law prohibits that behavior. http://motherboard.vice.com/read/warranty-void-if-removed-stickers-are-illegal They can say you voided it but you didn't, simply press the issue and threaten legal they'll cover you.

I only say this because I run a 256gb SSD with 3TB HDD FD and it is fantastic. If opening up a computer is out of the question then the question is: do I want another device/HD next to my sleek iMac for a performance increase and to keep storage space? This might seem silly but, you'll notice when you have beautiful iMac with a single power cable vs other things constantly plugged in and cables everywhere. If that is acceptable go SSD, else FD.

 

[bingeciren]

I said the exact same thing and nobody understood the advantage of it. People on this site are funny

FD is kind of like the automatic transmission of a car. Not only it is perfectly adequate for most people most of the time, but it is also desirable.

However, just like the automatic transmission cannot anticipate to downshift on an approaching curve while any experienced driver seeing the curve ahead knows to downshift manually before entering the curve, FD cannot fully anticipate each user's requirement, especially if the usage pattern does not follow a regular pattern. I cannot tell the FD never ever put my music files on the SSD even though I use them quite frequently for instance.

Some of us, like you and I, prefer the manual transmission.

 

[hfg]

FD is kind of like the automatic transmission of a car. Not only it is perfectly adequate for most people most of the time, but it is also desirable.

However, just like the automatic transmission cannot anticipate to downshift on an approaching curve while any experienced driver seeing the curve ahead knows to downshift manually before entering the curve, FD cannot fully anticipate each user's requirement, especially if the usage pattern does not follow a regular pattern. I cannot tell the FD never ever put my music files on the SSD even though I use them quite frequently for instance.

Some of us, like you and I, prefer the manual transmission.

Just for those interested ...

If there are files you absolutely don't want to ever be on the SSD portion of a Fusion drive (music, video, photo, etc. ), simply use the BootCamp application to create a separate partition on the hard drive which is outside of the Fusion management algorithm, and put your "hard disk only" files there. They will never occupy any SSD space no matter how often you access them.