Can't wait to get mine. The only thing I am worrying about is 4TB SSD and how much it will add up.
Ok, please explain to me why you want that much SSD storage. I am trying to see the rationale for that amount of storage since MacOSX and several professional applications don't take more than 400 GB of space and I always think it's a good idea to use external drives for data. I mean, if speed is a concern, get Thunderbolt 3 drives which can theoretically go up to 5 GB per second. The latest SSD doesn't even reach that speed yet as for as I know.
Have you seen the price of say a 2 disk TB3/USB-C storage container (with no disks)? I've looked and the price of half decent ones is more than a 1TB SSD. I currently have my Photo Archive on a Drobo. that is more than 3TB of data. I'm not saying that I want it all on an iMac local storage but moving to USB-C/TB3 at the moment is going to be a costly operation. I'm looking at a normal iMac at the moment but the storage transition is going to be a major operation. Having a big internal SSD (rotating rust is so 1990's) is one way to go. Time Machine backups are going to also need some serious storage. It all adds to the cost of moving forward with the technology.
You looked where? Not Amazon.
http://a.co/gZDbD17 - Two drive (up to 15mm) RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $99. About 1/3 the price of a 1TB SSD ($289).
For 4TB of RAID 1 storage (total 8TB worth of disk) the total cost is $400. Without redundancy you can make a 4.5TB Fusion drive (4TB HDD + 512GB SSD) using that enclosure for the same price (you'll have to buy the drives yourself).
http://a.co/0ZVpQtt - Two drive (up to RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $72
Can't wait to get mine. The only thing I am worrying about is 4TB SSD and how much it will add up.
Ok, please explain to me why you want that much SSD storage. I am trying to see the rationale for that amount of storage since MacOSX and several professional applications don't take more than 400 GB of space and I always think it's a good idea to use external drives for data. I mean, if speed is a concern, get Thunderbolt 3 drives which can theoretically go up to 5 GB per second. The latest SSD doesn't even reach that speed yet as for as I know.
Have you seen the price of say a 2 disk TB3/USB-C storage container (with no disks)? I've looked and the price of half decent ones is more than a 1TB SSD. I currently have my Photo Archive on a Drobo. that is more than 3TB of data. I'm not saying that I want it all on an iMac local storage but moving to USB-C/TB3 at the moment is going to be a costly operation. I'm looking at a normal iMac at the moment but the storage transition is going to be a major operation. Having a big internal SSD (rotating rust is so 1990's) is one way to go. Time Machine backups are going to also need some serious storage. It all adds to the cost of moving forward with the technology.
You looked where? Not Amazon.
http://a.co/gZDbD17 - Two drive (up to 15mm) RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $99. About 1/3 the price of a 1TB SSD ($289).
For 4TB of RAID 1 storage (total 8TB worth of disk) the total cost is $400. Without redundancy you can make a 4.5TB Fusion drive (4TB HDD + 512GB SSD) using that enclosure for the same price (you'll have to buy the drives yourself).
http://a.co/0ZVpQtt - Two drive (up to RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $72
USB-C is more than fast enough. And the meme that HDDs is so 1990s is simply dumb.
Seriously? I would never, EVER consider trusting my data to some cheap, Chinese knockoff junk like this. That's the problem with people that base their decisions solely on price. What's the support and warranty on these? I know, close to nothing.
My Promise 12TB, 6-bay Thunderbolt2 RAID system costed a mint, but was worth every penny.
Seriously, are you going to now recommend the $2 iPhone chargers too because certainly they must be as good as the real thing!
Can't wait to get mine. The only thing I am worrying about is 4TB SSD and how much it will add up.
Ok, please explain to me why you want that much SSD storage. I am trying to see the rationale for that amount of storage since MacOSX and several professional applications don't take more than 400 GB of space and I always think it's a good idea to use external drives for data. I mean, if speed is a concern, get Thunderbolt 3 drives which can theoretically go up to 5 GB per second. The latest SSD doesn't even reach that speed yet as for as I know.
Have you seen the price of say a 2 disk TB3/USB-C storage container (with no disks)? I've looked and the price of half decent ones is more than a 1TB SSD. I currently have my Photo Archive on a Drobo. that is more than 3TB of data. I'm not saying that I want it all on an iMac local storage but moving to USB-C/TB3 at the moment is going to be a costly operation. I'm looking at a normal iMac at the moment but the storage transition is going to be a major operation. Having a big internal SSD (rotating rust is so 1990's) is one way to go. Time Machine backups are going to also need some serious storage. It all adds to the cost of moving forward with the technology.
You looked where? Not Amazon.
http://a.co/gZDbD17 - Two drive (up to 15mm) RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $99. About 1/3 the price of a 1TB SSD ($289).
For 4TB of RAID 1 storage (total 8TB worth of disk) the total cost is $400. Without redundancy you can make a 4.5TB Fusion drive (4TB HDD + 512GB SSD) using that enclosure for the same price (you'll have to buy the drives yourself).
http://a.co/0ZVpQtt - Two drive (up to RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $72
USB-C is more than fast enough. And the meme that HDDs is so 1990s is simply dumb.
Seriously? I would never, EVER consider trusting my data to some cheap, Chinese knockoff junk like this. That's the problem with people that base their decisions solely on price. What's the support and warranty on these? I know, close to nothing.
My Promise 12TB, 6-bay Thunderbolt2 RAID system costed a mint, but was worth every penny.
Seriously, are you going to now recommend the $2 iPhone chargers too because certainly they must be as good as the real thing!
Promise had issues early on with some of their units and I've seen issues with every brand up to the high end EMC and NetApp stuff. The Oyen has a ASMedia ASM1352R.
If you want to spend more you can but for a RAID 0 high speed work disk it's a non-issue and for RAID 1 also a non-issue. There are enclosures for more money using the same chipset.
What SanDisk doesn't tell you is that it's two SanDisk Ultra II SSDs in RAID-0. But you probably wouldn't know or care because of the brand name. Enjoy your now obsolescent RAID array. And if you're going to be a brand snob paint me unimpressed with Promise over Areca.
Keep a spare if it bothers you. OP claimed these don't exist at a reasonable price. He's wrong.
And his Drobo certainly isn't safer and Oyen is about the same quality level as OWC which I've had issues in the past.
Can't wait to get mine. The only thing I am worrying about is 4TB SSD and how much it will add up.
Ok, please explain to me why you want that much SSD storage. I am trying to see the rationale for that amount of storage since MacOSX and several professional applications don't take more than 400 GB of space and I always think it's a good idea to use external drives for data. I mean, if speed is a concern, get Thunderbolt 3 drives which can theoretically go up to 5 GB per second. The latest SSD doesn't even reach that speed yet as for as I know.
Have you seen the price of say a 2 disk TB3/USB-C storage container (with no disks)? I've looked and the price of half decent ones is more than a 1TB SSD. I currently have my Photo Archive on a Drobo. that is more than 3TB of data. I'm not saying that I want it all on an iMac local storage but moving to USB-C/TB3 at the moment is going to be a costly operation. I'm looking at a normal iMac at the moment but the storage transition is going to be a major operation. Having a big internal SSD (rotating rust is so 1990's) is one way to go. Time Machine backups are going to also need some serious storage. It all adds to the cost of moving forward with the technology.
You looked where? Not Amazon.
http://a.co/gZDbD17 - Two drive (up to 15mm) RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $99. About 1/3 the price of a 1TB SSD ($289).
For 4TB of RAID 1 storage (total 8TB worth of disk) the total cost is $400. Without redundancy you can make a 4.5TB Fusion drive (4TB HDD + 512GB SSD) using that enclosure for the same price (you'll have to buy the drives yourself).
http://a.co/0ZVpQtt - Two drive (up to RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $72
USB-C is more than fast enough. And the meme that HDDs is so 1990s is simply dumb.
Seriously? I would never, EVER consider trusting my data to some cheap, Chinese knockoff junk like this. That's the problem with people that base their decisions solely on price. What's the support and warranty on these? I know, close to nothing.
My Promise 12TB, 6-bay Thunderbolt2 RAID system costed a mint, but was worth every penny.
Seriously, are you going to now recommend the $2 iPhone chargers too because certainly they must be as good as the real thing!
Promise had issues early on with some of their units and I've seen issues with every brand up to the high end EMC and NetApp stuff. The Oyen has a ASMedia ASM1352R.
If you want to spend more you can but for a RAID 0 high speed work disk it's a non-issue and for RAID 1 also a non-issue. There are enclosures for more money using the same chipset.
What SanDisk doesn't tell you is that it's two SanDisk Ultra II SSDs in RAID-0. But you probably wouldn't know or care because of the brand name. Enjoy your now obsolescent RAID array. And if you're going to be a brand snob paint me unimpressed with Promise over Areca.
Keep a spare if it bothers you. OP claimed these don't exist at a reasonable price. He's wrong.
And his Drobo certainly isn't safer and Oyen is about the same quality level as OWC which I've had issues in the past.
You seem to know a thing or two about this stuff, maybe you can help me understand an issue I'm having.
I've got a LaCie RAID connected to the Mac mini in my living room via USB3. Transfer speed between those two devices is about 235 Mb/s.
The Mac mini is connected to a current model Airport Extreme with CAT6 (WiFi on the mini is turned off).
Each day I offload stuff from my MacBook Pro to the RAID. I disable WiFi on the laptop and hard-wire it with a Belkin USBC-Ethernet adapter over CAT6 connected to the same Airport Extreme as the mini. This configuration manages only about 70-ish Mb/s. Just for giggles I tested the speed to the internal SSD in the mini and got similar results, which suggests the network connection is the limiting factor.
Is that all the speed one should expect from a Gigabit ethernet connection, or does this sound like a configuration problem? Or is the Airport Extreme just not a good choice in this application?
Even if they start adding secure enclave to new Macs, I think it'll be a long time before Apple disables macOS on machines that don't have ARM chips.
What I'd love to see would be them starting to include higher end ARM chips, like the A10X as co-processors. The iPad Pro can already work faster in Affinity Photo than a quad core i7. I'm not sure how difficult it would be to have two processors functioning with the OS at the same time (granted there's already GPUs and CPUs) but if Apple could start putting ARM co-processors that can actually handle large tasks, into the high end, that would mean that they could also start making the MacBook line using ARM chips instead of Intel's. At which point Apple can both save a ton of money, plus be far more in control over when they get new chips, especially given how Intel has been slowing down lately.
They already have ARM processors in the touch bar MacBook Pros, though if I understand correctly those ones are about as strong as the ones in an Apple Watch.
So ... no rumors yet on CPUs for next Mac Pro? O did I miss that?
The yet unannounced Mac Pro or the iMac Pro? The later will have options for at least 8-core, 10-core, and 18-core. I assume those model numbers are available but I haven't seen anyone list them.
I still don't know why Apple is putting server class CPUs in a pro desktop computer. Why not an 8 core i7 or up to 18 core i9? That 8 core i7 costs $600. Apple should be able to fit that into a $3000 iMac. The Xeon's main advantage over i7 and i9 CPUs is that it works in multi-CPU configurations (two, four or more CPUs on one computer) yet Apple has no plan for iMacs with more than one CPU. This looks to me like an excuse to charge more for the computer but offers no advantages to the buyer.
I still don't know why Apple is putting server class CPUs in a pro desktop computer. Why not an 8 core i7 or up to 18 core i9? That 8 core i7 costs $600. Apple should be able to fit that into a $3000 iMac. The Xeon's main advantage over i7 and i9 CPUs is that it works in multi-CPU configurations (two, four or more CPUs on one computer) yet Apple has no plan for iMacs with more than one CPU. This looks to me like an excuse to charge more for the computer but offers no advantages to the buyer.
..it's because SMBs (small/medium sized businesses) need ECC memory, thermal durability, rapid external storage connectivity and scalability that the Xeon processors and chipsets are built for.
I can see that it might make sense to lock Xeon-compatible macOS to a secure enclave in the ARM/ASIC if it means the entry-level model is only $5K and they're making their real profit on the models with many more cores, but again, I would hope they ship a "maker kit" (maybe A10X based) or a low-cost NUC-sized MacMini and maybe bring Xserve back or offer a iCloud instance or AMI (to use GCD, CoreML, etc. in server apps, etc) if they kill Hackintosh like that.
What does Apple owe the Hackintosh crowd? Free copies of macOS?
In my experience, hackintosh is a pretty effective gateway to entice people to move from their winboxes to macs. The OS is good enough that, once you get used to it, Windows just isn't good enough, despite the broader application/game base. I have to believe Apple is consciously letting that community exist, and even thrive.
Purley was assumable from before - they had a slide up at WWDC that said 2x wide AVX instructions, that means AVX-512, that means Skylake-EP, and the codename for that platform was Purley.
Mikey Campbell, what are the caveats to the new XENONS versus the base model chips?
You will recall that H.264 encoding is slower on the existing Mac Pro (Xenons) that current iMacs due to the lack of a hardware encoder in the XENON chip. Will we have similarly silly problems with the new XENONS that are to be used in the iMac Pro?
You seem to know a thing or two about this stuff, maybe you can help me understand an issue I'm having.
I've got a LaCie RAID connected to the Mac mini in my living room via USB3. Transfer speed between those two devices is about 235 Mb/s.
The Mac mini is connected to a current model Airport Extreme with CAT6 (WiFi on the mini is turned off).
Each day I offload stuff from my MacBook Pro to the RAID. I disable WiFi on the laptop and hard-wire it with a Belkin USBC-Ethernet adapter over CAT6 connected to the same Airport Extreme as the mini. This configuration manages only about 70-ish Mb/s. Just for giggles I tested the speed to the internal SSD in the mini and got similar results, which suggests the network connection is the limiting factor.
Is that all the speed one should expect from a Gigabit ethernet connection, or does this sound like a configuration problem? Or is the Airport Extreme just not a good choice in this application?
I looked into this for you. I don't own the latest AEBS but evidently the wired router portion isn't the best, however you should still be seeing far better than 70Mb/s. That you get the same speeds between both the external and internal drives indicates that you are correct: you are most likely network bound.
There are some obvious possibilities:
You have a bad cable (most likely).
You have an exceptionally bad AEBS.
You have a bad ethernet port/dongle on either the mini or MBP.
To do speed testing between two macs there are multiple options but iPerf (free but requires brew) and MacGems (mac app store $1.99) seem to be recommended.
You can take a peek at network utility to see what the ethernet speed thinks it is but it probably says 1Gbit/s.
Mikey Campbell, what are the caveats to the new XENONS versus the base model chips?
You will recall that H.264 encoding is slower on the existing Mac Pro (Xenons) that current iMacs due to the lack of a hardware encoder in the XENON chip. Will we have similarly silly problems with the new XENONS that are to be used in the iMac Pro?
Xeon, Xenon is the Xbox 360s processor :P
That could explain why Mickey Campbell never replied to that question from me.
Then again, Mikey Campbell could have assumed what CPU I was referring to and given us the courtesy of a reply anyway. But that didn't happen. Mr. Campbell, here's another chance. Thanks.
You seem to know a thing or two about this stuff, maybe you can help me understand an issue I'm having.
I've got a LaCie RAID connected to the Mac mini in my living room via USB3. Transfer speed between those two devices is about 235 Mb/s.
The Mac mini is connected to a current model Airport Extreme with CAT6 (WiFi on the mini is turned off).
Each day I offload stuff from my MacBook Pro to the RAID. I disable WiFi on the laptop and hard-wire it with a Belkin USBC-Ethernet adapter over CAT6 connected to the same Airport Extreme as the mini. This configuration manages only about 70-ish Mb/s. Just for giggles I tested the speed to the internal SSD in the mini and got similar results, which suggests the network connection is the limiting factor.
Is that all the speed one should expect from a Gigabit ethernet connection, or does this sound like a configuration problem? Or is the Airport Extreme just not a good choice in this application?
I looked into this for you. I don't own the latest AEBS but evidently the wired router portion isn't the best, however you should still be seeing far better than 70Mb/s. That you get the same speeds between both the external and internal drives indicates that you are correct: you are most likely network bound.
There are some obvious possibilities:
You have a bad cable (most likely).
You have an exceptionally bad AEBS.
You have a bad ethernet port/dongle on either the mini or MBP.
To do speed testing between two macs there are multiple options but iPerf (free but requires brew) and MacGems (mac app store $1.99) seem to be recommended.
You can take a peek at network utility to see what the ethernet speed thinks it is but it probably says 1Gbit/s.
Thanks 1,000,000 for taking the time to help me with that! I really appreciate it.
It doesn't seem to be the cable (results are the same with another cable) so I'll look into the app you recommended.
As for a bad port or adaptor, is "slower than seems right" a symptom? Isn't a network connection the kind of thing that either works as advertised or fails completely? How would you go about checking the ethernet connection at each machine to make sure it's up to snuff?
Finally, what's "Network Utility?" Do you mean AirPort Utility or is there something else I'm overlooking?
Thanks again. I'm now actually looking forward to seeing if I can improve this setup.
Wow guys. There is a lot of hate for the Hackintosh community. Why! Also.. you want thinner, really! I would definitely swap thinness on a desktop for more poweeeer especially in the graphics arena or simply just in the thermal headroom so when you push the machine it doesn't have to slow down.
I'm thankful to these guys for some of the reverse engineering and work they do, it seems a lot of the community have Mac's but need something else. Some of the methods of increasing the 5,1 Mac Pro's abilities for internal power and GPU's have come from people in the Hackintosh community who also own a Mac. They just haven't been able to continue their work on hardware from 2010.
Don't see the need for the hate at any rate.
Good news Apple you are turning this around in the Computer arena!
I seem to recall seeing pretty much the same app in *nix GUIs, so I wonder if it's mostly a port with Apple's Aqua UI applied. Regardless, it's been around for a long time.
Nifty, thanks! It didn't occur to me to use Spotlight to search for it. I mistakenly thought if it wasn't in either Applications or Utilities it was absent.
Looks like it provides some useful information, though I have no idea what any of it means! Maybe that's why it's not in plain view -- Apple might not want unqualified people drawing flawed conclusions based on seeing things they don't understand.
Like, for example, doing a port scan and seeing three open, one of which is associated with "microsoft-ds." I'm not aware of having any Microsoft product installed on my machine. Should I be worried?
Comments
http://a.co/gZDbD17 - Two drive (up to 15mm) RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $99. About 1/3 the price of a 1TB SSD ($289).
For 4TB of RAID 1 storage (total 8TB worth of disk) the total cost is $400. Without redundancy you can make a 4.5TB Fusion drive (4TB HDD + 512GB SSD) using that enclosure for the same price (you'll have to buy the drives yourself).
http://a.co/0ZVpQtt - Two drive (up to RAID 0/1/JBOD USB-C drive enclosure $72
One user reported these speeds:
Sequential Read : 773.286 MB/s
Sequential Write : 746.424 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 624.298 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 654.270 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 23.792 MB/s [ 5808.5 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 65.863 MB/s [ 16079.7 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 25.493 MB/s [ 6223.8 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 102.398 MB/s [ 24999.5 IOPS]
USB-C is more than fast enough. And the meme that HDDs is so 1990s is simply dumb.
My Promise 12TB, 6-bay Thunderbolt2 RAID system costed a mint, but was worth every penny.
Seriously, are you going to now recommend the $2 iPhone chargers too because certainly they must be as good as the real thing!
If you want to spend more you can but for a RAID 0 high speed work disk it's a non-issue and for RAID 1 also a non-issue. There are enclosures for more money using the same chipset.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1066188-REG/cru_dataport_36020_3010_0100_toughtech_duo_enclosure_3sr.html?c3api=0980,144904813854&gclid=CLqL14DP1NQCFcaFswodfSEN9Q
As well as drives:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01127E6RM?tag=anandtech01-20&ascsubtag=[site|anand[cat|NA[art|10245[pid|B01127E6RM|NA[bbc|manual
What SanDisk doesn't tell you is that it's two SanDisk Ultra II SSDs in RAID-0. But you probably wouldn't know or care because of the brand name. Enjoy your now obsolescent RAID array. And if you're going to be a brand snob paint me unimpressed with Promise over Areca.
Keep a spare if it bothers you. OP claimed these don't exist at a reasonable price. He's wrong.
And his Drobo certainly isn't safer and Oyen is about the same quality level as OWC which I've had issues in the past.
I've got a LaCie RAID connected to the Mac mini in my living room via USB3. Transfer speed between those two devices is about 235 Mb/s.
The Mac mini is connected to a current model Airport Extreme with CAT6 (WiFi on the mini is turned off).
Each day I offload stuff from my MacBook Pro to the RAID. I disable WiFi on the laptop and hard-wire it with a Belkin USBC-Ethernet adapter over CAT6 connected to the same Airport Extreme as the mini. This configuration manages only about 70-ish Mb/s. Just for giggles I tested the speed to the internal SSD in the mini and got similar results, which suggests the network connection is the limiting factor.
Is that all the speed one should expect from a Gigabit ethernet connection, or does this sound like a configuration problem? Or is the Airport Extreme just not a good choice in this application?
I can see that it might make sense to lock Xeon-compatible macOS to a secure enclave in the ARM/ASIC if it means the entry-level model is only $5K and they're making their real profit on the models with many more cores, but again, I would hope they ship a "maker kit" (maybe A10X based) or a low-cost NUC-sized MacMini and maybe bring Xserve back or offer a iCloud instance or AMI (to use GCD, CoreML, etc. in server apps, etc) if they kill Hackintosh like that.
Xeon, Xenon is the Xbox 360s processor :P
There are some obvious possibilities:
- You have a bad cable (most likely).
- You have an exceptionally bad AEBS.
- You have a bad ethernet port/dongle on either the mini or MBP.
To do speed testing between two macs there are multiple options but iPerf (free but requires brew) and MacGems (mac app store $1.99) seem to be recommended.You can take a peek at network utility to see what the ethernet speed thinks it is but it probably says 1Gbit/s.
Then again, Mikey Campbell could have assumed what CPU I was referring to and given us the courtesy of a reply anyway. But that didn't happen. Mr. Campbell, here's another chance. Thanks.
It doesn't seem to be the cable (results are the same with another cable) so I'll look into the app you recommended.
As for a bad port or adaptor, is "slower than seems right" a symptom? Isn't a network connection the kind of thing that either works as advertised or fails completely? How would you go about checking the ethernet connection at each machine to make sure it's up to snuff?
Finally, what's "Network Utility?" Do you mean AirPort Utility or is there something else I'm overlooking?
Thanks again. I'm now actually looking forward to seeing if I can improve this setup.
I'm thankful to these guys for some of the reverse engineering and work they do, it seems a lot of the community have Mac's but need something else. Some of the methods of increasing the 5,1 Mac Pro's abilities for internal power and GPU's have come from people in the Hackintosh community who also own a Mac. They just haven't been able to continue their work on hardware from 2010.
Don't see the need for the hate at any rate.
Good news Apple you are turning this around in the Computer arena!
I seem to recall seeing pretty much the same app in *nix GUIs, so I wonder if it's mostly a port with Apple's Aqua UI applied. Regardless, it's been around for a long time.
Looks like it provides some useful information, though I have no idea what any of it means! Maybe that's why it's not in plain view -- Apple might not want unqualified people drawing flawed conclusions based on seeing things they don't understand.
Like, for example, doing a port scan and seeing three open, one of which is associated with "microsoft-ds." I'm not aware of having any Microsoft product installed on my machine. Should I be worried?