Thunderbolt for MacBooks, Mini and iMac. The Pro has PCI slots. The coming Pro will also have Thunderbolt.Originally Posted by Bob Sanders
Can we move further discussions to the Mac vs. PC thread to keep this one clean?
Thunderbolt for MacBooks, Mini and iMac. The Pro has PCI slots. The coming Pro will also have Thunderbolt.
Can we move further discussions to the Mac vs. PC thread to keep this one clean?
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
What a mess...
zeker weten
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
And my old(ish) iMac has Firewire 800, I currently have 4* x 2TB drives on that bus. No speed problems whatsoever.
* I can connect more if I wish.
Bob - why do you need to know all this? You don't have a Mac, AFAIK...
(Edit: Sorry, CG, I answered the posts on page 2, saw your #51 later...)
The iMac is an ideal computer for Canada - a great space heater
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
Absolutely!
If you want to edit video, FW 800 is as good as it needs to be. If, on the other hand, you want to get into pissing contest about speed, get thunderbolt and piss all over the believers.
The Korova milkbar sold milk-plus, milk plus vellocet or synthemesc or drencrom, which is what we were drinking. This would sharpen you up and make you ready for a bit of the old ultra-violence.
There is no such thing (that I know of) as a "thunderbolt drive". You have to use a thunderbolt interface to connect a sata drive..... so it's not faster than sata.
Get the Samsung and forget the iphone!
http://www.macworld.com/article/1165...available.html
The Korova milkbar sold milk-plus, milk plus vellocet or synthemesc or drencrom, which is what we were drinking. This would sharpen you up and make you ready for a bit of the old ultra-violence.
Pure curiosity. Just want to know how a mac user handles expanding drives. Clearly it's a complicated and expensive issue.
Get the Samsung and forget the iphone!
Interesting. Thank you.
Get the Samsung and forget the iphone!
Bob, a SATA drive won't be able to saturate a Thunderbolt pipeline. That's why Thunderbolt doesn't make sense for a single drive, but shines in a RAID setup.
Some speed comparison: http://www.macworld.com/article/1161...ltvsesata.html
BTW, Thunderbolt is not from Apple, but from Intel. Apple just got the rights to use it a bit earlier than others. Sony is using it meanwhile too.
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
No, Bob, it is not expensive. FW 800 drives are pretty cheap and work even with the 50mbps streams from my XF. Thunderbolt RAID is meant for the professional market that needs a higher throughput. You make the mistake to compare these RAID cabinets to your average BestBuy purchase. I gave you a link with cabinets to compare which you wiped aside with your usual ignorance.
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
But please move this discussion to the MAC vs. PC tread... or even to the tavern right away.
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
How's it complicated? You attach a thunderbolt cable, just as you would a FW or USB.
Expensive? Yes, for the time being. Besides I doubt anyone chooses a Mac on price. Cheap people buy PCs
The Korova milkbar sold milk-plus, milk plus vellocet or synthemesc or drencrom, which is what we were drinking. This would sharpen you up and make you ready for a bit of the old ultra-violence.
Correct!
Apple invested in the R&D of thunderbolt and in return got exclusivity for a year or so. This might give Apple an edge over the PC, but it also keeps the price of thunderbolt devices high (economies of scale). It's possible that once thunderbolt is available for the PC, the price will come down as the demand increases.
The Korova milkbar sold milk-plus, milk plus vellocet or synthemesc or drencrom, which is what we were drinking. This would sharpen you up and make you ready for a bit of the old ultra-violence.
Huey, it is available from Sony already for quite a while. The first third-party cables are also available already at Amazon et al. Apple had a six months grace period.
Thunderbolt is meant as a universal port, as it can be used (with the right active adaptor) for about any in- or output. It's Intel's replacement for the old Universal Serial Bus. It won't be cheaper though until Intel opens up the glass fibre option. Then there won't be a need for that many active components in controller and cables anymore, driving prices down. Right now it is only meant for high-end solutions.
Right now it is actually a pretty cheap alternative to SAS glass fiber XSAN.
Last edited by cgbier; 2012 May 9th at 09:21.
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
Is it possible that test machine has poor sata drivers? Because those results don't make sense, the numbers for eSata are far too low. I was getting ~290MB/sec on very cheap Rocket Raid controller hooked to an external raid case via eSata back when I used to use an external raid unit. Either something is wrong with their test results, or the eSata Smartstor DS4600 is a very poor product because a $25 Raid card will massively ourperform it. Heck nevermind that, even onboard cheap motherboard raid will massively outperform it!
Last edited by joker454; 2012 May 9th at 13:16.
Ok I thought about it some more, the only way those benchmark results in that link make any sense is that the Smartstor DS4600 is just a terrible device. We know even an average hdd on it's own can serve up data at 100MB/sec, and better drives can hit almost 190MB/sec today. We also know that eSata2 can support around 300MB/sec, double that for eSata3. Finally we know that via raid data gets read off multiple hdd's at once. So the only way that DS4600 can be offering such terrible benchmarks must be because it's raid implementation is downright horrible, hence why it can only muster ~120MB/sec reading from four hdd's. I don't think that benchmark is a reflection on eSata at all, because a single drive hooked up via eSata would smoke that device in throughput. I think what the review is more showing is how terrible their older raid implementation was on their older eSata based devices compared to their newer Thunderbolt devices. Or perhaps that device is so old that it's only using a ~150MB/sec eSata implementation. In either case, you can get eSata raid that is far faster than what is shown in the benchmark, for very little money.
And a good replacement it will be...... when the prices come down. Until then however sata is the best way to go. The HDD's are cheap and sata heads plentiful (on a pc that is).
Get the Samsung and forget the iphone!
Yeah... thunderbolt is faster.... but those are pretty sad sata numbers. Not sure why they're using such low numbers for comparison??
Get the Samsung and forget the iphone!
Yeah no clue there, it's a strange comparison. They should have compared it to raid in the same price range. I googled and saw that the Promise Thunderbolt unit is about $2200, so they should have compared to say the Qnap TS-879-PRO which offeres 1000+MB/sec for the same $2200 price. And because its a 10gbe networked device it's easier for every machine in your business to access it. Synology has some 1000+MB/sec models as well. If you are looking in that price range you may as well get a much faster 10gbe unit that is more flexible as well and offers more storage options.
EDIT: I googled some more and did find that Promise unit in the $2200 range with 12tb hdd's included, so that does make it cheaper than the Qnap. Still though, if you want multi user you're much better off getting a Qnap or Synology 10gbe that the company can all share and it would be faster and expandable as well. For single user I'd say it's better to get an old Areca raid card for ~$750, that will give you ~2000MB/sec throughput if you really need that kind of speed.
Last edited by joker454; 2012 May 9th at 18:33.
Time to upgrade: A USB 3.0 port and compatible device should take care of all that; eSATA port otherwise.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote