or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's new Fusion Drive debuts in latest iMacs, Mac minis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's new Fusion Drive debuts in latest iMacs, Mac minis

post #1 of 115
Thread Starter 
Apple's new iMac and Mac mini desktops feature what Apple is calling a "Fusion Drive" that offers nearly the same performance as a solid state drive, but allows for considerably more storage at a lower price point.

Commonly known as a hybrid hard drive, Apple's version uses a 128GB SSD coupled with either a 1TB or 3TB hard drive. The two drives are "fused together with software" into a single volume to allow faster reads and writes without forcing a user to put down thousands on a pure flash-based setup. The feature is automatically supported by Mountain Lion, though it is unclear if the company will be extending the Fusion Drives to other machines.

01d7d83b-cb03-499e-9770-97aaf6740767.png


Basically, hybrid drives calculate which apps are used most and place those assets on the faster SSD, while less frequently accessed files or software are stored on the capacious one or three terabyte hard disk drive. For example, disk-intensive tasks like booting up OS X to launching recently-used apps are stored and facilitated from the SSD, while a spreadsheet file that hasn't been modified for two years will be automatically placed on the HDD.

Core applications and the operating system is permanently stored and accessed from the SSD, with the leftover space used for frequently-accessed files, folders or programs.

The file transfers from take place in the background dynamically, so the system is seamless and unobtrusive to the user.

a8381700-0bb4-43b2-b471-12fc07d9bb86.png


Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller noted that the new Fusion Drive offers near the performance of flash with access to more storage. For example, compared to a baseline 1TB 7200 RPM HDD, the Fusion drive performs an Aperture photo import 3.5 times faster, a file copy of a 4GB folder 3.5 times faster, and system boot 1.7 times faster.
post #2 of 115
Don't really care about the thickness, but I am very curious as to how this one will perform. Love the SSD Platter hybrids. So glad Apple has started offering these.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #3 of 115

Very curious on this price- it'd be awesome with one- for sure.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #4 of 115
I currently run SSD and HDD in my 15" i7 MBP pretty much as described. All my apps and OS are on the 256 GIG SSD large data libraries on the 1TB HDD. Importing a photo into Aperture that fast would obviously depend on where the Aperture Library was and given the size of mine there is no way I can afford that on SSD as of yet although the application itself is. In Apple's new system would it try to move my Aperture Library (that I use many times a day) to the SSD? I hope not unless it somehow is intelligent enough to have a library split between SSD and HHD migrating older less used images to the HDD but I seriously doubt that. I'd be interested to know if like say Time Machine there are some user options on what the drives software can and can't do in terms of relocation.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #5 of 115

The Mac Mini is a useless product for my needs other than having a bottom feeder Mac for Web/Mail and publishing. Nothing for Engineering even at the entry level for OpenCL.

 

Too bad.

 

The iMac obsession with thin is ultra disappointing. I'll not touch the Nvidia garbage and their yield issues in the 28nm stamp out. The lack of commitment from Nvidia with OpenCL alone has me p/o'd enough as it is, but the garbage 512MB and up to 1GB RAM on the GPGPUs is embarrassing Apple.

 

You sacrifice potential performance for being ultra-thin. Looks sexy, too bad she can't reproduce.

 

Mac Pro is the only option left for heavy computing work.

post #6 of 115
The thinness is amazing, but I do wonder about a few things:
 
- I have never been able to install Windows via Bootcamp (I like playing PC games on a "casual basis"), so would this iMac offer Windows installation via USB?
 
- If it's thát much thinner, are they using a slower/lower power version for the CPU and GPU? And how much faster will it turn out to be compared to the previous model(s)?
 
- The standard HD is only 5400rpm, making loading heavy files (and games) a decent amount slower. The Fusion HD is extremely expensive in my opinion, and a standard "normal speed" 7200rpm drive doesn't seem to be standard. 
 
- The price is about the same as the previous model, but they offer a default drive of 5400rpm ánd removed the DVD drive (which I can applaud as long as I can install Windows via USB)… it feels like they didn't actually ádd something, because right now it seems like they kept the price the same but still used cheaper hardware (HD and removing the Superdrive).
 
All in all, I was waiting for a new iMac to replace my current one, but I'll have to wait and see what the reviews say about both USB-installable Windows and performance. It ís amazingly thing though! :)
post #7 of 115

Yes, I'm sure that your investment in two storage devices and manually splitting the OS & Apps from the data files is a MUCH better engineering effort than Apple has come up with. I'm so glad you were able to take the time out of your busy day of designing & engineering storage architecture to comment on this item.

 

I've always suspected I could do a better job than Apple if I would just pop down to Micro Center & buy a couple ESATA enclosures with some 7200RPM drives. You have inspired me to action! Thank You!!!

nothing to see here

Reply

nothing to see here

Reply
post #8 of 115

They didn't pay much attention to their entry models here. 5400 RPM drives are ridiculous in a desktop, even given performance improvements in recent years. The display update might be nice. I'll wait to see it. The mini update is a little dumb in that they maintained the price points while dropping discrete graphics. I can understand if they felt the HD4000 was good enough, but they charge quite a lot for some of those gaps on a lower end machine. CPU cost wouldn't change either. Quad core cpus are around the same price as the most expensive duals, like the one used in the 2011.

post #9 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Very curious on this price- it'd be awesome with one- for sure.

The mac mini 1TB Fusion drive upgrade is $250. 

 

Figure the 3TB for the iMac will be around $400.   

post #10 of 115
Quote:

Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple's new iMac and Mac mini desktops feature a new Fusion Drive that offers nearly the same performance as a flash-only drive, but features considerably more storage.
The hybrid technology drive has 128 gigabytes of Flash storage coupled with a 1-terabyte or 3-terabyte hard drive. These are fused into a single volume to allow faster reads and writes, and work automatically with Mountain Lion.

It's indeed very good to know Apple relatively quickly adopts this promising tech. We've been clandestinely installing hybrid drives with pitiful 4GB of Flash in our Macs for quite a while now and used to think Apple did not really like what we did. Apparently, they are with us and, sure, astounding 128GB of Flash --- which they subsidize when pricing the machine --- matter. 

 

 

Quote:

The Fusion Drive system will automatically take less-frequently used applications and move them to the slower hard disk drive. More popular applications are automatically moved to the flash drive, which gives faster speed.

This traditional approach is nevertheless not that much convincing. The Mac OS X works for months without a restart and actively used applications are all just sitting in the RAM. Documents are loaded from disk and saved back. In fact, the configuration, keeping documents in the Flash storage and applications --- on the hybrid drive, seems showing even better performance in terms of daily usage.      

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #11 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by polymnia View Post

Yes, I'm sure that your investment in two storage devices and manually splitting the OS & Apps from the data files is a MUCH better engineering effort than Apple has come up with. I'm so glad you were able to take the time out of your busy day of designing & engineering storage architecture to comment on this item.

I've always suspected I could do a better job than Apple if I would just pop down to Micro Center & buy a couple ESATA enclosures with some 7200RPM drives. You have inspired me to action! Thank You!!!

If you were replying to me (hint, it's Quote not Reply) I think you misunderstood. In Time Machine there is a user option to select items to leave out. I was merely (and long windily perhaps) saying I hoped the new drive has a Systems Preferences setting to exclude items from being transferred to the SSD. If so I am sure Apple's new device will be mind blowing.

BTW my MBP required very little work to achieve what I did and being a 2010 model it was worth the small effort to make it way faster booting from an SSD.

For many years I did indeed have an Apple engineering department at my company and many highly qualified staff but alas these days I am semi retired so just play around for myself.
Edited by digitalclips - 10/23/12 at 12:07pm
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #12 of 115
My guess is that "operational storage" will use the SSD -- meaning, that if you "suck images into Aperture" it first goes on the SSD, and over time, migrates to the hard drive. Same thing with any PhotoShop file you are working on.

You'll have that performance hit the first time you START working on a file, but on subsequent uses -- say within a week, it'll use the SSD.

That at least is how I would do it -- and it stands to reason that Apple spent some time to manage this the right way, since they are making it part of the standard now. I'm glad they jumped on making hybrids valuable -- it just makes a lot of sense.
post #13 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

In Apple's new system would it try to move my Aperture Library (that I use many times a day) to the SSD? I hope not unless it somehow is intelligent enough to have a library split between SSD and HHD migrating older less used images to the HDD but I seriously doubt that.

Your Aperture library isn't a single file.

 

.tsooJ

post #14 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by polymnia View Post

Yes, I'm sure that your investment in two storage devices and manually splitting the OS & Apps from the data files is a MUCH better engineering effort than Apple has come up with. I'm so glad you were able to take the time out of your busy day of designing & engineering storage architecture to comment on this item.

 

I've always suspected I could do a better job than Apple if I would just pop down to Micro Center & buy a couple ESATA enclosures with some 7200RPM drives. You have inspired me to action! Thank You!!!

 

That's an Operating System specific update. BFD. The Hardware is just a hybrid drive albeit now a full size 128GB SSD [And I'm sure a low to mid-entry OEM performer] on top of a 1TB or 3TB drive. I'm all for it, until the SSD starts failing and you're DOA with unlike the boring Disk based drives that warn you ahead of time with sector errors and noise.

 

I'm sure a 3rd party app monitoring drive performance will come out for $50 to jack up the consumer on that one. Or Apple could have it built-in, who knows.

 

Apple is just making it easy to have all user accounts symlinked to their traditional disc based drive. Not rocket science.

 

The fact you're stuck with a 5400 RPM disc drive [no fusion unless BTO] for $1499 means a thinner design to house a newer CPU/GPU minus DVD drive and lower cost to them for the Panel implementation [Yes the new tech is less expensive for Apple and as a stock holder that's good news] but I'm not seeing the WOW under the hood.

 

All the WOW under the Hood is Extra which isn't much unless you hit the 27 in top end BTO.

 

https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/

 

Beautiful exterior, though she's getting anorexic but the guts aren't blowing me away.

 

I'd rather wait for the Mac Pro if and when Intel can manage Xeons for their current and soon-to-be 1 year off Ivy Bridge model.

 

 

Quote:

3.2GHz

3.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i5 processor (Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz) with 6MB L3 cache

Configurable to 3.4GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 (Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz).

 

By the time one is configured for this we're at the Mac Pro pricing with not multi-GPGPU solution, half the RAM, less Power in the system, and zero expansion for storage other than an external T-Bolt RAID option that is effin' expensive [baseline an additional $1150+].

 

Call me critical, but besides the evolving sexy look I'm not blown away with the guts, especially when it comes to heavy computing.

 

If Apple doesn't exceed the GPGPU of the iMac for the Mac Pro they might as well cancel the line. After all, these are Mobile GPGPUs were discussing. Since Apple presently has a hard-on for Nvidia [and we know how that changes] this has to be the baseline for the Mac Pro:

 

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-670

 

Anything less is an insult.

 

The same company that doesn't even advertise for OpenCL and Apple is using them. That is pathetic. Nvidia's OpenCL stack is now behind Intel's for completeness. Pathetic.

 

Then again, a year from now Apple most likely will jump back to AMD on their GPGPUs and cripple them by using the low end prior year option calling for people to demand they return to Nvidia.

 

Show us the Mac Pro that can lead a Workstation market or get out of it completely.

post #15 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyorpb View Post

Your Aperture library isn't a single file.

.tsooJ

I actually covered that in my post. I said "I hope not unless it somehow is intelligent enough to have a library split between SSD and HHD migrating older less used images to the HDD but I seriously doubt that." (i'd love it if it did).

I also have to wonder about HD video capture to one of these Fusion drives. I am intrigued, not being negative. I can't wait to read the tests. I just read they are 5400 rpm hybrids not 7200 rpm as of yet.
Edited by digitalclips - 10/23/12 at 12:40pm
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #16 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

That's an Operating System specific update. BFD. The Hardware is just a hybrid drive albeit now a full size 128GB SSD [And I'm sure a low to mid-entry OEM performer] on top of a 1TB or 3TB drive. I'm all for it, until the SSD starts failing and you're DOA with unlike the boring Disk based drives that warn you ahead of time with sector errors and noise.

I'm sure a 3rd party app monitoring drive performance will come out for $50 to jack up the consumer on that one. Or Apple could have it built-in, who knows.

Apple is just making it easy to have all user accounts symlinked to their traditional disc based drive. Not rocket science.

The fact you're stuck with a 5400 RPM disc drive [no fusion unless BTO] for $1499 means a thinner design to house a newer CPU/GPU minus DVD drive and lower cost to them for the Panel implementation [Yes the new tech is less expensive for Apple and as a stock holder that's good news] but I'm not seeing the WOW under the hood.

All the WOW under the Hood is Extra which isn't much unless you hit the 27 in top end BTO.

https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/

Beautiful exterior, though she's getting anorexic but the guts aren't blowing me away.

I'd rather wait for the Mac Pro if and when Intel can manage Xeons for their current and soon-to-be 1 year off Ivy Bridge model.



By the time one is configured for this we're at the Mac Pro pricing with not multi-GPGPU solution, half the RAM, less Power in the system, and zero expansion for storage other than an external T-Bolt RAID option that is effin' expensive [baseline an additional $1150+].

Call me critical, but besides the evolving sexy look I'm not blown away with the guts, especially when it comes to heavy computing.

If Apple doesn't exceed the GPGPU of the iMac for the Mac Pro they might as well cancel the line. After all, these are Mobile GPGPUs were discussing. Since Apple presently has a hard-on for Nvidia [and we know how that changes] this has to be the baseline for the Mac Pro:

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-670

Anything less is an insult.

The same company that doesn't even advertise for OpenCL and Apple is using them. That is pathetic. Nvidia's OpenCL stack is now behind Intel's for completeness. Pathetic.

Then again, a year from now Apple most likely will jump back to AMD on their GPGPUs and cripple them by using the low end prior year option calling for people to demand they return to Nvidia.

Show us the Mac Pro that can lead a Workstation market or get out of it completely.

I just posted on another thread the hope that a 3rd party software company comes out with something to allow this on a DIY set up. You give me hope. It would be kind of like the days in the mid 1990s when we built our own SCSI RAIDS! DIY hybrid 7200 rpm HDD and a 512 SSD would be sweet.

A new Mac Pro ... what a dream ...
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #17 of 115
Its about time Apple brought this tech to market. I read about these hybrid drives a few years back!
post #18 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1983 View Post

Its about time Apple brought this tech to market. I read about these hybrid drives a few years back!

My feeling is hybrid technology will be a massive improvement for the average consumer but will need tweaking for those of us editing HD video and massive RAW files. IMHO A Mac Pro or MBP with a large SSD for the OS and apps and 7200 rpm HDD for images and video won't be bettered until we have inexpensive SSDs 1 TB and upward. Although as I said earlier up the thread, of we had some control over the intelligent software it might just work. I'd want to specify what was always to go the the HDD. Not for speed but for price / capacity.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #19 of 115
So far, no one else has exactly what Apple has here with the Fusion drive. So we have some drives like the Momentous, with 8GB Flash for cache, and we have caching drives, which are usually 30 Gb or so. But other than getting a 128Gb SSD, and an HDD, there is no other combo like this. Even that isn't the same thing.

It's Apple's software that make this different. With other drives, you don't get the intelligent determinations where software will be placed the way this does. Even caching drives are less sophisticated than this one is. I don't think this is in one drive case though. I don't see how 128 GB flash can fit into the same case as a HDD. It's likely done in a different way, even though it will function as a single drive to the user.

edit:

I just saw this article on ArsTechnica, where they cover this sort of thing fairly well in speculative articles. Of course, we'll have to wait for AnandTech to really test this properly after the machines come out, next month, at least.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/10/apple-fusion-drive-wait-what-how-does-this-work/

If true, it's actually very exciting.
post #20 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

So far, no one else has exactly what Apple has here with the Fusion drive.

 

Wrong. You might want to look up Intel's Smart Response Technology.

 

-kpluck

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply
post #21 of 115

Apple was quite good at bringing simplified enterprise-grade solutions to John "The Consumer" Doe.

 

The Fusion Drive should be to tiering what the Time Machine is to enterprise-grade backup.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #22 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

The Mac Mini is a useless product for my needs other than having a bottom feeder Mac for Web/Mail and publishing. Nothing for Engineering even at the entry level for OpenCL.

 

Too bad.

 

The iMac obsession with thin is ultra disappointing. I'll not touch the Nvidia garbage and their yield issues in the 28nm stamp out. The lack of commitment from Nvidia with OpenCL alone has me p/o'd enough as it is, but the garbage 512MB and up to 1GB RAM on the GPGPUs is embarrassing Apple.

 

You sacrifice potential performance for being ultra-thin. Looks sexy, too bad she can't reproduce.

 

Mac Pro is the only option left for heavy computing work.



 

So... I'll sum up:

 

"I'm an engineer and heavy OpenGL user. I'm UPSETI can't use a Mac Mini or iMac for my ENGINEERING OpenGL WORK."

 

...to which I say: You can't use a Honda Civic to haul a horse trailer either.

post #23 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


My feeling is hybrid technology will be a massive improvement for the average consumer but will need tweaking for those of us editing HD video and massive RAW files. IMHO A Mac Pro or MBP with a large SSD for the OS and apps and 7200 rpm HDD for images and video won't be bettered until we have inexpensive SSDs 1 TB and upward. Although as I said earlier up the thread, of we had some control over the intelligent software it might just work. I'd want to specify what was always to go the the HDD. Not for speed but for price / capacity.

 

 

As a pro video editor, I strongly disagree. I'd rather boot off a single mechanical HDD and keep my media on an SSD, if that was my only choice - A single 7200rpm drive is way too slow for editing. As it is, I boot SSD and have a RAID of mechanical drives, since the latter remains the best value / speed / capacity combination. Though not for long, as larger capacity SSDs keep getting cheaper.

post #24 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

It's indeed very good to know Apple relatively quickly adopts this promising tech. We've been clandestinely installing hybrid drives with pitiful 4GB of Flash in our Macs for quite a while now and used to think Apple did not really like what we did. Apparently, they are with us and, sure, astounding 128GB of Flash --- which they subsidize when pricing the machine --- matter. 

 

This traditional approach is nevertheless not that much convincing. The Mac OS X works for months without a restart and actively used applications are all just sitting in the RAM. Documents are loaded from disk and saved back. In fact, the configuration, keeping documents in the Flash storage and applications --- on the hybrid drive, seems showing even better performance in terms of daily usage.      

 

You don't seem to understand subsidized pricing compared to base and cto configurations. There is a higher markup for customization at time of sale when purchasing a new machine. You see this as subsidized as opposed to not paying the cost of configured to order.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Apple was quite good at bringing simplified enterprise-grade solutions to John "The Consumer" Doe.

 

The Fusion Drive should be to tiering what the Time Machine is to enterprise-grade backup.


It's not a new concept. Seagate did something like this with their drives on a conceptual level where the NAND was used as a cache. I'm not sure how much of this was custom work, but they definitely had reference material available. It's still cool. I'll be watching these displays. I want to see how much they've improved.

post #25 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluck View Post

Wrong. You might want to look up Intel's Smart Response Technology.

-kpluck

Nope! Not the same thing. If you had read the article I linked to before posting, you would know that.
post #26 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

The Mac Mini is a useless product for my needs other than having a bottom feeder Mac for Web/Mail and publishing. Nothing for Engineering even at the entry level for OpenCL.

 

Too bad.

 

The iMac obsession with thin is ultra disappointing. I'll not touch the Nvidia garbage and their yield issues in the 28nm stamp out. The lack of commitment from Nvidia with OpenCL alone has me p/o'd enough as it is, but the garbage 512MB and up to 1GB RAM on the GPGPUs is embarrassing Apple.

 

You sacrifice potential performance for being ultra-thin. Looks sexy, too bad she can't reproduce.

 

Mac Pro is the only option left for heavy computing work.

actually, 2gb vram nvidia 680m.

post #27 of 115

I wonder if there is a way to enable the FusionDrive software in my current configuration.  I took out the optical drive in my 15" MBP (early 2011) and I have a 180 gb SSD along with a 500 GB HDD.  If it's already baked into Mountain Lion (which I'm running), I wonder if there will be a way to make it work?  VERY interesting!  :)

post #28 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

The Mac Mini is a useless product for my needs other than having a bottom feeder Mac for Web/Mail and publishing. Nothing for Engineering even at the entry level for OpenCL.

Too bad.

The iMac obsession with thin is ultra disappointing. I'll not touch the Nvidia garbage and their yield issues in the 28nm stamp out. The lack of commitment from Nvidia with OpenCL alone has me p/o'd enough as it is, but the garbage 512MB and up to 1GB RAM on the GPGPUs is embarrassing Apple.

You sacrifice potential performance for being ultra-thin. Looks sexy, too bad she can't reproduce.

Mac Pro is the only option left for heavy computing work.

You're being needlessly melodramatic. Web/mail? If that's all you need, you get a five year old computer. Doing heavy engineering work on a sub $1000 computer is asking for trouble anyway.

I use a quad iMac for my CAD/CAM work and it does better than the dual-dual Xeon it replaced, which was no old slouch either.

If you're really into super grunty-grunty heavy lifting, then a Mac Pro is what you should have been choosing in the first place.
post #29 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerD View Post


As a pro video editor, I strongly disagree. I'd rather boot off a single mechanical HDD and keep my media on an SSD, if that was my only choice - A single 7200rpm drive is way too slow for editing. As it is, I boot SSD and have a RAID of mechanical drives, since the latter remains the best value / speed / capacity combination. Though not for long, as larger capacity SSDs keep getting cheaper.

I just find it amazing that when I was doing this work hot and heavy, years ago, and we were compressing video on our Targa boards for broadcast, mostly commercials, I jumped at buying four brand new Fuji 9GB 7200 rpm drives for $3,000 apiece. Didn't think anything of it either. Neither did it seem seem like a high price. But we really needed to raid four drives because of their small capacity, and because of slow performance, needed to partition the drives so that we only used the outer half.

Things have changed so much since then.
post #30 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

The Mac Mini is a useless product for my needs other than having a bottom feeder Mac for Web/Mail and publishing. Nothing for Engineering even at the entry level for OpenCL.

 

Too bad.

 

The iMac obsession with thin is ultra disappointing. I'll not touch the Nvidia garbage and their yield issues in the 28nm stamp out. The lack of commitment from Nvidia with OpenCL alone has me p/o'd enough as it is, but the garbage 512MB and up to 1GB RAM on the GPGPUs is embarrassing Apple.

 

You sacrifice potential performance for being ultra-thin. Looks sexy, too bad she can't reproduce.

 

Mac Pro is the only option left for heavy computing work.

LOL i'm sure Apple feels really bad for you.  Having to buy their high end product for your high end needs.  Gee, why doesn't Apple start selling a workstation class system for the price of the Mini!  What a rip-off!?!

post #31 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerD View Post


As a pro video editor, I strongly disagree. I'd rather boot off a single mechanical HDD and keep my media on an SSD, if that was my only choice - A single 7200rpm drive is way too slow for editing. As it is, I boot SSD and have a RAID of mechanical drives, since the latter remains the best value / speed / capacity combination. Though not for long, as larger capacity SSDs keep getting cheaper.

I'm not sure we are in disagreement. My last sentence stated my point was HDD (RAID or otherwise) was the only cost effective solution for pro level capture of HD. Yes SDD would be nice if it were the same price and one day i'm sure it will be. As to booting, given a 512 GIG SSD can easily keep Mountail Lion and a ton of apps why not boot from it? PS CS6 is blindingly fast with the app and cache files on SSD even if my RAW files are in a Library on a fast HDD. It's all about cost performance at the moment and we are in a transitional phase. I was building RAIDs for TV production in the 1990's when a modest array of 16 GIGs cost over $10K so i appreciate seeing the changes and I am excited about hybrid technology too especially if it has user prefs for exclusions by name and file type for the time being until SSD is really cheap and far larger.
Edited by digitalclips - 10/23/12 at 2:48pm
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #32 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerD View Post



 

So... I'll sum up:

 

"I'm an engineer and heavy OpenGL user. I'm UPSETI can't use a Mac Mini or iMac for my ENGINEERING OpenGL WORK."

 

...to which I say: You can't use a Honda Civic to haul a horse trailer either.

Exactly

post #33 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

LOL i'm sure Apple feels really bad for you.  Having to buy their high end product for your high end needs.  Gee, why doesn't Apple start selling a workstation class system for the price of the Mini!  What a rip-off!?!

Why the unpleasantness? Pros require high end gear and Apple has always excelled at providing it. The boundaries are always pushed at the bleeding edge and with photography and video it never stops getting bloodier. With RED Support now available in FCP X capture and editing will be like going back to a Quadra 840av with NTSC without something very high end from Apple! OMG what a thought ...
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #34 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I just find it amazing that when I was doing this work hot and heavy, years ago, and we were compressing video on our Targa boards for broadcast, mostly commercials, I jumped at buying four brand new Fuji 9GB 7200 rpm drives for $3,000 apiece. Didn't think anything of it either. Neither did it seem seem like a high price. But we really needed to raid four drives because of their small capacity, and because of slow performance, needed to partition the drives so that we only used the outer half.
Things have changed so much since then.

Oh the memories ... I agree we thought nothing of the price of drives back then. It was just so amazing not to need tape! Hey, were you ever tempted by a Cube? I saw a demo of their wavelet technology and my draw dropped then I saw the price and it dropped again. Then I went back to my suite of Media 100 stations and waited for rendering...
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #35 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdog5142 View Post

I wonder if there is a way to enable the FusionDrive software in my current configuration.  I took out the optical drive in my 15" MBP (early 2011) and I have a 180 gb SSD along with a 500 GB HDD.  If it's already baked into Mountain Lion (which I'm running), I wonder if there will be a way to make it work?  VERY interesting!  1smile.gif

I use the Air Parrot answer to Air Play on older unsupported Macs as a model i.e. someone else will step in to fill that need. I'd suspect some 3rd party solution to achieve exactly that will be forthcoming. It may even be more configurable as Apple correctly focuses on the non technical folks these days with their mainstream products.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #36 of 115

In the market for a new 15" MacBook Pro.  Now wondering if I should hold off and see if they offer this Fusion drive as an option.  200 quid a bit of a hard-to-swallow premium, but might be worth it.

post #37 of 115
BootCamp installation is probably handled the same way it is on an Air. The BootCamp Assistant builds a complete Windows installer on a USB Thumb Drive from your Windows install DVD.
post #38 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerD View Post

 

 

As a pro video editor, I strongly disagree. I'd rather boot off a single mechanical HDD and keep my media on an SSD, if that was my only choice - A single 7200rpm drive is way too slow for editing. As it is, I boot SSD and have a RAID of mechanical drives, since the latter remains the best value / speed / capacity combination. Though not for long, as larger capacity SSDs keep getting cheaper.


If the Fusion's 128 GB's not enough, what about bolting on, say, a 512 GB SSD external via TB?  Would that get us anywhere else in terms of functionality for those who need it??

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #39 of 115
BootCamp installation is probably handled the same way it is on an Air. The BootCamp Assistant builds a complete Windows installer on a USB Thumb Drive from your Windows install DVD.
post #40 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdog5142 View Post

I wonder if there is a way to enable the FusionDrive software in my current configuration.  I took out the optical drive in my 15" MBP (early 2011) and I have a 180 gb SSD along with a 500 GB HDD.  If it's already baked into Mountain Lion (which I'm running), I wonder if there will be a way to make it work?  VERY interesting!  :)


This is what I'm wondering too. Will you be able to configure your own fusion drive out of a SSD and a HDD? I'm sure someone will find a way!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's new Fusion Drive debuts in latest iMacs, Mac minis