Likewise, Apple is doing the same thing, but is using a bigger SSD drive. Like the other hybrid drives, Apple is fusing the two drives together to be treated as one.
Not quite. Hybrid drives are one drive. One 3.5" drive casing, everything is in there.
Fusion Drive is a RAID between two full-size drives of different physical and storage sizes and different types.
Originally Posted by charlituna
It's a hybrid drive with much much smarter software.
I have a question about a Fusion Drive, almost a year ago I spilled lemon aid on my 2011 macbook pro 13" it still works with some problems but it only runs 3/4 the regular speed I used speed test to find this out, would my computer run faster if I installed a Fusion Drive in it?
Yep, it is fun to think Apple was first though. Not sure who would want these drives but I guess it's nice to have options.
Once again, you're wrong. Read the thread: It's a RAID created by two separate drives of different types. Not one drive. Nothing to do with that Seagate thing. And Fusion Drive has intelligent placement software.
Originally Posted by Relic
Actually the Seagate is identical to the Fusion drive.
Once again, you're wrong. Read the thread: It's a RAID created by two separate drives of different types. Not one drive. Nothing to do with that Seagate thing. And Fusion Drive has intelligent placement software.
Wow. No.
Actually it really is, instead of caching in hardware Apple does it in software using what they call CoreStorge. It's still a Hybrid, two drives. This isn't anything new nor is it something that should be sought after in my opinion. Buy a smaller SSD for the system and larger HDD for data.
The Fusion Drive doesn't use caching and isn't a RAID drive
We've seen hard disks with SSD caching for years now, and of course RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks) storage has been around since PCs were made of wood.
However, the Fusion Drive is neither a caching drive or a RAID one: it's a hybrid drive, so instead of mirroring - creating a cached copy of frequently used data on the SSD - it moves frequently used data from the HDD to the SSD.
However, the Fusion Drive is neither a caching drive or a RAID one…
Fine. Mea culpa.
It's two drives. Not one drive. Not the Seagate. Seagate uses the SSD to cache the spinning disk. Apple actually uses the space on the SSD for storage. NOT the Seagate!
Here you go! What did I say before? Just one or more BTO options on the base models and you'd be just fine. The quad-core non-server Mac mini should offer at least one 3 TB Fusion I feel but ah well.
It's two drives. Not one drive. Not the Seagate. Seagate uses the SSD to cache the spinning disk. Apple actually uses the space on the SSD for storage. NOT the Seagate!
Fine, however it's still just another approach to the same goal. It's a gimmick, the price for SSD's have gone down significantly. Purchasing the iMac with it's original capacity and then purchasing an additional 64GB 550MB+ RW drive is not only cheaper but a much better solution.
The quad-core non-server Mac mini should offer at least one 3 TB Fusion I feel but ah well.
That'd require a physical retooling though. The Mac Mini uses 2.5" drives and you'd have to have a 3.5" for that.
Originally Posted by Relic
It's a gimmick…
lol. It's a stepping stone.
…the price for SSD's have gone down significantly.
Yeah, those 3TB SSDs are passed around like toilet paper.
Purchasing the iMac with it's original capacity and then purchasing an additional 64GB 550MB+ RW drive is not only cheaper but a much better solution.
So, what, an external drive that isn't as fast, you mean? How's that better? It doesn't automatically assign more often used things to the SSD. It's external. I thought that was inherently bad…
It's only the system that needs to be fast, data not so much.
So what's your proposal, removing the internal 1TB drive and replacing it with a 64GB SSD, using the 1TB as an external?
Aside from the physical difficulty of doing that in any iMac, how in the heck is this a "better" solution than having both internal and both working as a fusion drive does?
So what's your proposal, removing the internal 1TB drive and replacing it with a 64GB SSD, using the 1TB as an external?
Aside from the physical difficulty of doing that in any iMac, how in the heck is this a "better" solution than having both internal and both working as a fusion drive does?
No, I would just use the dual HD mounting kit from ifixit and just add the second drive.
Actually, there are hybrid drives from HDD manufactures out there today. Been available for a couple years now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
yes I believe Fusion Drive is a trademarked name owned by Apple.
But the tech isn't totally Apple. It's a hybrid drive with much much smarter software. Anyone could have that kind of system if they wanted. Might take some rewriting and perhaps licensing a patent or two but it is possible.
People already have - I remember reading within days of release that someone demonstrated cobbling together a 3rd party HW solution that the Mac treated as a fusion drive. Unless memory fails, that is... ...not that that ever happens to this humble poster....
I actually did it in my late 2009 iMac 27 inch. I used the iFixit hard drive tray and replaced my optical drive with a 1 TB drive and replaced the hard drive with 160 gig Intel SSD. Then I used the CoreStorage commands to create a logical volume which allows you to create the Fusion drive. All in, about $150 (I already had a spare SSD).
Comments
Originally Posted by TBell
Likewise, Apple is doing the same thing, but is using a bigger SSD drive. Like the other hybrid drives, Apple is fusing the two drives together to be treated as one.
Not quite. Hybrid drives are one drive. One 3.5" drive casing, everything is in there.
Fusion Drive is a RAID between two full-size drives of different physical and storage sizes and different types.
Originally Posted by charlituna
It's a hybrid drive with much much smarter software.
It's a RAID.
I have a question about a Fusion Drive, almost a year ago I spilled lemon aid on my 2011 macbook pro 13" it still works with some problems but it only runs 3/4 the regular speed I used speed test to find this out, would my computer run faster if I installed a Fusion Drive in it?
Any help would be appreciated
This tech has been around for awhile, I personally prefer an all SSD solution but each to his own.
http://www.seagate.com/internal-hard-drives/laptop-hard-drives/momentus-xt-hybrid/
Originally Posted by Relic
This tech has been around for awhile…
Not in the slightest. Not with that drive, at any rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhaha
Actually, there are hybrid drives from HDD manufactures out there today. Been available for a couple years now.
Yep, it is fun to think Apple was first though. Not sure who would want these drives but I guess it's nice to have options.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Not in the slightest. Not with that drive, at any rate.
Actually the Seagate is identical to the Fusion drive. The tech is from Intel -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Response_Technology
Originally Posted by Relic
Yep, it is fun to think Apple was first though. Not sure who would want these drives but I guess it's nice to have options.
Once again, you're wrong. Read the thread: It's a RAID created by two separate drives of different types. Not one drive. Nothing to do with that Seagate thing. And Fusion Drive has intelligent placement software.
Originally Posted by Relic
Actually the Seagate is identical to the Fusion drive.
Wow. No.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Once again, you're wrong. Read the thread: It's a RAID created by two separate drives of different types. Not one drive. Nothing to do with that Seagate thing. And Fusion Drive has intelligent placement software.
Wow. No.
Actually it really is, instead of caching in hardware Apple does it in software using what they call CoreStorge. It's still a Hybrid, two drives. This isn't anything new nor is it something that should be sought after in my opinion. Buy a smaller SSD for the system and larger HDD for data.
The Fusion Drive doesn't use caching and isn't a RAID drive
We've seen hard disks with SSD caching for years now, and of course RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks) storage has been around since PCs were made of wood.
However, the Fusion Drive is neither a caching drive or a RAID one: it's a hybrid drive, so instead of mirroring - creating a cached copy of frequently used data on the SSD - it moves frequently used data from the HDD to the SSD.
Originally Posted by Relic
However, the Fusion Drive is neither a caching drive or a RAID one…
Fine. Mea culpa.
It's two drives. Not one drive. Not the Seagate. Seagate uses the SSD to cache the spinning disk. Apple actually uses the space on the SSD for storage. NOT the Seagate!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Fine. Mea culpa.
It's two drives. Not one drive. Not the Seagate. Seagate uses the SSD to cache the spinning disk. Apple actually uses the space on the SSD for storage. NOT the Seagate!
Fine, however it's still just another approach to the same goal. It's a gimmick, the price for SSD's have gone down significantly. Purchasing the iMac with it's original capacity and then purchasing an additional 64GB 550MB+ RW drive is not only cheaper but a much better solution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Introduced in October 2011 alongside the redesigned iMac,
Is there some odd back to the future thing going on here or did I sleep for a year?
I thought fusion drive and redesign iMac was 2012.
Originally Posted by Winter
The quad-core non-server Mac mini should offer at least one 3 TB Fusion I feel but ah well.
That'd require a physical retooling though. The Mac Mini uses 2.5" drives and you'd have to have a 3.5" for that.
Originally Posted by Relic
It's a gimmick…
lol. It's a stepping stone.
…the price for SSD's have gone down significantly.
Yeah, those 3TB SSDs are passed around like toilet paper.
Purchasing the iMac with it's original capacity and then purchasing an additional 64GB 550MB+ RW drive is not only cheaper but a much better solution.
So, what, an external drive that isn't as fast, you mean? How's that better? It doesn't automatically assign more often used things to the SSD. It's external. I thought that was inherently bad…
It's only the system that needs to be fast, data not so much.
Originally Posted by Relic
It's only the system that needs to be fast, data not so much.
So what's your proposal, removing the internal 1TB drive and replacing it with a 64GB SSD, using the 1TB as an external?
Aside from the physical difficulty of doing that in any iMac, how in the heck is this a "better" solution than having both internal and both working as a fusion drive does?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So what's your proposal, removing the internal 1TB drive and replacing it with a 64GB SSD, using the 1TB as an external?
Aside from the physical difficulty of doing that in any iMac, how in the heck is this a "better" solution than having both internal and both working as a fusion drive does?
No, I would just use the dual HD mounting kit from ifixit and just add the second drive.
Originally Posted by Relic
No, I would just use the dual HD mounting kit from ifixit and just add the second drive.
But you can't do that. So…
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhaha
Actually, there are hybrid drives from HDD manufactures out there today. Been available for a couple years now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
yes I believe Fusion Drive is a trademarked name owned by Apple.
But the tech isn't totally Apple. It's a hybrid drive with much much smarter software. Anyone could have that kind of system if they wanted. Might take some rewriting and perhaps licensing a patent or two but it is possible.
People already have - I remember reading within days of release that someone demonstrated cobbling together a 3rd party HW solution that the Mac treated as a fusion drive. Unless memory fails, that is... ...not that that ever happens to this humble poster....
[URL]http://www.macworld.com/article/2014011/how-to-make-your-own-fusion-drive.html[/URL]
And to clarify, it doesn't work at the file level. It works at the block level.