Apple adds 256GB, 512GB flash storage upgrade options for iMac

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
Build-to-order iMac options from Apple's official online store now include either 256 or 512 gigabytes of flash storage for both the 21.5- and 27-inch models.

iMac


Choosing 256 gigabytes of all-flash storage will add $300 to the entry-level iMac price, while 512 gigabytes will cost an extra $600. The new options were first noticed on Thursday by MacRumors.

Previously, buyers of the 21.5-inch iMac had no all-flash options when customizing their order. The choices were restricted to a default 1-terabyte 5400rpm Serial ATA drive, or spending an additional $250 for a 1-terabyte hybrid Fusion Drive.

As for the 27-inch iMac, the only flash drive available previously was a massive 768-gigabyte option that cost an additional $900.

All iMacs in default configurations are advertised to ship within 24 hours from Apple's online store. Availability of the all-in-one desktops was severely constrained through the end of 2012, which prompted Apple CEO Tim Cook to admit last week he wished he had held off on launching the thinner iMacs until 2013.

Apple's apparent production issues were said to have stemmed from a unique screen lamination process that allowed Apple to achieve the ultrathin design. With those issues now seemingly addressed, Apple is offering more options for internal storage.

For a breakdown of the best prices on other iMac configurations, see the iMac section of the AppleInsider price guide, included below:



Separately, for those interested in going portable with a MacBook Pro with Retina display, MacMall is offering the high-end 13.3-inch model with an Intel Core i5 2.5-gigahertz processor, 8 gigabytes of RAM and 768 gigabytes of flash storage for just $1839.99, or $1,159 off the suggested price. Be sure to apply the coupon code APPINSDRMWB38717 before checking out to receive your discount.

Prices on Apple's MacBook Pro models continue to fall. Users can browse the latest deals in the MacBook Pro price guide section listed below:

«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 55
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,379member
    When will these SSDs drop in price? Surely some time soon?
  • Reply 2 of 55
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Nice.

    Waiting for people to state they want this SSD size options for Fusion Drive.
  • Reply 3 of 55
    tjwaltjwal Posts: 404member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    When will these SSDs drop in price? Surely some time soon?


     


    It wasn't that long ago that they were $2/Gig, now they are under a $1.  I'm surprised the Apple prices actually aren't that bad.  They must have lowered the Tax! LOL

  • Reply 4 of 55
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,740member


    Still waiting for an updated TBD with that new screen lamination process...  Also USB 3.0 and MagSafe 2...


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    When will these SSDs drop in price? Surely some time soon?


     


    Have you seen the Crucial M500 960GB SSDs? 


     


    Not that you'd be able to use one in a 21.5" iMac, but I've got a mini that's going to get one (if they are ever back in stock).

  • Reply 5 of 55
    irelandireland Posts: 17,751member


    This is my 4th iMac I've owned in the past 8 years. Do yourself a favour and don't order one with a Fusion drive. I would go so far as to say Apple's claims about Fusion Drives are false. It's so slow sometimes, waking from sleep etc. etc. I was absolutely led to believe it would be a lot faster than it actually is, and I've regretted getting a Fusion Drive ever since.


     


    If these options existed a 2 months ago I would have absolutely chosen one of them.

  • Reply 6 of 55
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,328member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tjwal View Post


     


    It wasn't that long ago that they were $2/Gig, now they are under a $1.  I'm surprised the Apple prices actually aren't that bad.  They must have lowered the Tax! LOL



     


    Apple's generally been good about BTO upgrade costs for the last couple of years (within $50 of the components), so I generally don't bother going the DIY route anymore.

  • Reply 7 of 55
    yvvvyvvv Posts: 18member
    In this case, I'd rather have the 1 TB Fusion drive. But SSD prices are still dropping slowly. The new Crucial m500 SDD with 1 TB is 600$ (0,60$/Gig) at Newegg...
  • Reply 8 of 55
    bdkennedy1bdkennedy1 Posts: 1,459member
    Apple's upgrade pricing is a rip off. I bought a 500gb flash drive at Fry's for $300.
  • Reply 9 of 55
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,328member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    This is my 4th iMac I've owned in the past 8 years. Do yourself and don't order one with a Fusion drive. I would go so far as to say Apple's claims about Fusion Drives are false. It's so slow sometimes, waking from sleep etc. etc. I was absolutely led to believe it would be a lot faster than it actually is, and I've regretted my getting a Fusion Drive ever since.



     


    Haven't noticed any problems at all with the Fusion drive in my iMac.  Wakes from sleep instantaneously and the programs I use regularly launch very fast.  Maybe it's because it also has 16GB of RAM (needed to keep 8 cores running smoothly with Xcode), I dunno.

  • Reply 10 of 55
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    ireland wrote: »
    This is my 4th iMac I've owned in the past 8 years. Do yourself a favour and don't order one with a Fusion drive. I would go so far as to say Apple's claims about Fusion Drives are false. It's so slow sometimes, waking from sleep etc. etc. I was absolutely led to believe it would be a lot faster than it actually is, and I've regretted getting a Fusion Drive ever since.

    If these options existed a 2 months ago I would have absolutely chosen one of them.

    Between running Fusion Drive in my 2012 iMac and 2010 MBP, not to mention all the independent testing on the Internet, I can most assuredly say Apple's claims are accurate.
  • Reply 11 of 55
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,328member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post



    Apple's upgrade pricing is a rip off. I bought a 500gb flash drive at Fry's for $300.


     


    SSD read/write performance specs can vary wildly, and the cheaper ones usually don't perform as well as the more expensive ones.  Apple generally uses the Samsung 840 Pro, which is always close to the top of the performance comparisons on Tom's Hardware, and is more expensive than many others.

  • Reply 12 of 55
    irelandireland Posts: 17,751member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by auxio View Post


     


    Haven't noticed any problems at all with the Fusion drive in my iMac.  Wakes from sleep instantaneously and the programs I use regularly launch very fast.  Maybe it's because it also has 16GB of RAM (needed to keep 8 cores running smoothly with Xcode), I dunno.



     


    It's not the RAM, it's the lack of SSD. Was your previous iMac SSD? Mine was, and it had 4GB of RAM.

  • Reply 13 of 55
    irelandireland Posts: 17,751member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    Between running Fusion Drive in my 2012 iMac and 2010 MBP, not to mention all the independent testing on the Internet, I can most assuredly say Apple's claims are accurate.


     


    I debated making that comment because I expected responses like yours. Waking from sleep is about 5X slower. I use screen sharing from my iOS devices a lot, it's mega-annoying. Like I say, I'll never recommend Fusion. Sometimes if I wake from sleep and immediately open Safari it'll say "you're not connected to the internet" etc. It's so annoying that it takes that time to connect. Slow. Considering my previous iMac was 5.5 years old I didn't expect things like this to be much slower, I thought they'd be faster. Anyway, that's my story.

  • Reply 14 of 55
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    john.b wrote: »
    Still waiting for an updated TBD with that new screen lamination process...  Also USB 3.0 and MagSafe 2...

    Have you seen the Crucial M500 960GB SSDs? 

    Not that you'd be able to use one in a 21.5" iMac, but I've got a mini that's going to get one (if they are ever back in stock).

    I don't see why it can't be used. It looks exactly the same size as the 2.5" drive used in the iMac.

    auxio wrote: »
    SSD read/write performance specs can vary wildly, and the cheaper ones usually don't perform as well as the more expensive ones.  Apple generally uses the Samsung 840 Pro, which is always close to the top of the performance comparisons on Tom's Hardware, and is more expensive than many others.

    840 Pro, you mean? 500GB 840 is $350 at Amazon. 512GB like what Apple offers seems to be only offered in Pro.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147194
  • Reply 15 of 55
    malicmalic Posts: 13member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    This is my 4th iMac I've owned in the past 8 years. Do yourself a favour and don't order one with a Fusion drive. I would go so far as to say Apple's claims about Fusion Drives are false. It's so slow sometimes, waking from sleep etc. etc. I was absolutely led to believe it would be a lot faster than it actually is, and I've regretted getting a Fusion Drive ever since.


     


    If these options existed a 2 months ago I would have absolutely chosen one of them.





    I'm surprised to read this. My experience between my home iMac and my work iMac (w/Fusion drive) has been the polar opposite; the Fusion drive performance is amazing. Firing up Photoshop is a jaw dropping experience for my co-workers that don't have a Mac w/Fusion drive. I'm really excited about getting a Fusion Drive option for my home iMac, when I'm due for an update.


     


    I have to wonder if you have a lot of apps open when you put your Mac to sleep and the wake process takes a lot to restore the memory image. Even, then, I wouldn't expect that to be a problem - seems like you might have an odd, but solvable, situation.

  • Reply 16 of 55
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    ireland wrote: »
    I debated making that comment because I expected responses like yours. Waking from sleep is about 5X slower. I use screen sharing from my iOS devices a lot, it's mega-annoying. Like I say, I'll never recommend Fusion.

    Given that there are differing impressions, have you contacted Apple about it? It might be an issue that can benefit from a servicing.
  • Reply 17 of 55
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post



    Apple's upgrade pricing is a rip off. I bought a 500gb flash drive at Fry's for $300.


     


     


    You can find deals for sure, but on Amazon 256 GB drives cost over $200, and some 512 GB drives cost over $400. Apple is charging you to install the drive, which in the case of the new iMacs might be something worth paying more for.  Where it seems like a rip off is you don't get credit for the drive Apple is swapping out, which Apple doesn't give you. 

  • Reply 18 of 55
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    ireland wrote: »
    I debated making that comment because I expected responses like yours. Waking from sleep is about 5X slower. I use screen sharing from my iOS devices a lot, it's mega-annoying. Like I say, I'll never recommend Fusion. Sometimes if I wake from sleep and immediately open Safari it'll say "you're not connected to the internet" etc. It's so annoying that it takes that time to connect. Slow. Considering my previous iMac was 5.5 years old I didn't expect things like this to be much slower, I thought they'd be faster. Anyway, that's my story.

    1) Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Why assume this is because of Fusion and not something else going on?

    2) Have you tried turning off Computer Sleep and unchecking 'Put hard disks to sleep when possible' in Energy Saver?

    3) Have you checked your hibernation settings in Terminal? If you used Migration Assistant from a notebook this parameter could have been changed.
    pmset -g | grep hibernatemode
    

    • 0 means normal sleep (default for desktops)
    • 1 means hibernate mode (default for pre-2005 notebooks)
    • ?3 means safe sleep (default for post 2005 notebooks)

    To change it use this command where n equals the appropriate value:
    sudo pmset -a hibernatemode n
    


    4) Bottom line: Did you put in any effort to see if you iMac isn't performing properly or did you simply resort to bitching about it?
  • Reply 19 of 55


    "Separately, for those interested in going portable with a MacBook Pro with Retina display, MacMall is offering the high-end 13.3-inch model with an Intel Core i5 2.5-gigahertz processor, 8 gigabytes of RAM and 768 gigabytes of flash storage for just $1839.99, or $1,159 off the suggested price."


     


    The 13.3" retina MacBook Pro with 768 gb of storage (with either the 2.5 or 2.6 gigahertz processor) is $2,399 (oddly, the price is the same for either processor after you upgrade the storage to 768).  So this is a savings of $559 off the suggested price.  Quit using the prices from before the February update and price drop -- it's incredibly misleading.  


     


     


  • Reply 20 of 55
    irelandireland Posts: 17,751member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    1) Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Why assume this is because of Fusion and not something else going on?



    2) Have you tried turning off Computer Sleep and unchecking 'Put hard disks to sleep when possible' in Energy Saver?



    3) Have you checked your hibernation settings in Terminal? If you used Migration Assistant from a notebook this parameter could have been changed.


    Code:

    pmset -g | grep hibernatemode



    • 0 means normal sleep (default for desktops)


    • 1 means hibernate mode (default for pre-2005 notebooks)


    • ?3 means safe sleep (default for post 2005 notebooks)



    To change it use this command where n equals the appropriate value:


    Code:

    sudo pmset -a hibernatemode n





    4) Bottom line: Did you put in any effort to see if you iMac isn't performing properly or did you simply resort to bitching about it?


     


    You're doing a lot of assuming yourself there. Yes I did check it out before bitching, as you so eloquently put it.

Sign In or Register to comment.