2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Buy Macintosh Now?, …or is it better to wait?
Ivan Milenkovic
post Sep 22 2008, 03:41 PM
Post #21


Instructor
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 25.396
Joined: 20-November 07
From: Belgrade, Serbia
Member No.: 3.341



QUOTE (OrganisedConfusion @ Sep 22 2008, 04:36 PM) *
It's actually better to have 3 500GB than 1.5TB however for performance.


I agree, 1.5TB disks are "lazy" compared to 3x500GB disks. Also there are RAID combinations that can lift the performance even more.


--------------------
- Ivan's Video Chat Lesson Notes HERE
- Check out my GMC Profile and Lessons
- (Please subscribe to my) YouTube Official Channel
- Let's be connected through ! Facebook! :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Marcus Lavendell
post Sep 22 2008, 04:15 PM
Post #22


Instructor
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 2.537
Joined: 27-May 07
From: Gothenburg, Sweden
Member No.: 1.927



QUOTE (Jakub Luptovec @ Sep 22 2008, 04:41 PM) *
However, for Mac PRo, they are waiting for Nehalem platform, which will be much stronger, faster and coming next spring/summer.

Well, I can't wait until spring/summer. Are you sure it will take that long?
Thanks Jakub!


--------------------
I use Elixir® Strings

Check out my video lessons and instructor board!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jakub Luptovec
post Sep 22 2008, 05:14 PM
Post #23


Learning Tone Guru
*

Group: Members
Posts: 790
Joined: 15-July 07
From: Ostrava
Member No.: 2.318



Well... Apple's marketing is kinda tricky thing to predict.. they made unexpected things too many times for me, to be sure about anything..

But as of yet, I havent heard of any Mac (not MacBook) event going around - I ve been scanning the web all day long for last 3 months - all i found was some fake pictures of Macbook Pros, Macbooks and iPod Shuffles - only those got upgraded, even though at MacRumors, they were sure that the september event will unveil both new Macbooks and both new iPods...

Another thing is, that new Mac Pros would mean new iMacs and new MacBooks as well.. so this would be a rather large event. That means:

1) It would be known at least month in advance
2) Looks most suitable for MacWorld 2008 - thats in 3 months. I am 99% sure, it wont be earlier than that. That 1% is, that they would "unleash" it for christmas crowds.

Those are my thoughts:)

What others think?smile.gif

This post has been edited by Jakub Luptovec: Sep 22 2008, 05:14 PM


--------------------
my youtube account with riffs and ideas: https://www.youtube.com/user/Phoenygzus
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blindwillie
post Sep 22 2008, 05:52 PM
Post #24


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.533
Joined: 28-March 07
From: Luleå, Sweden
Member No.: 1.434



QUOTE (OrganisedConfusion @ Sep 22 2008, 04:36 PM) *
It's actually better to have 3 500GB than 1.5TB however for performance.



QUOTE (Ivan Milenkovic @ Sep 22 2008, 04:41 PM) *
I agree, 1.5TB disks are "lazy" compared to 3x500GB disks. Also there are RAID combinations that can lift the performance even more.


Well, I was replying with regards to most storage for the money.

I understand the reasoning behind this but there are more factors to weigh in. Each generation harddisk is more advanced than the one before. How many discs there is, how many heads and so on. Is it for use from the same computer or will it be shared on a network? So I would disagree. You can't say generally that a smaller disk have better performance.

I haven't tried the 1.5TB disks yet so I won't speak for them because I don't know. They might have extremely bad design but generally speaking I'd say most of the time the biggest issue isn't the difference between individual disks, the main concern is space. Both on disk and in your computer/cabinet, you only have this amount of hw-slots and that amount of cool air to blow between the disks. Heat reduce the life of the disk dramatically. Another important thing is the need of continous space, having 20GB left on each of the three disks is more depressing than having 60GB free on one disk. Also, the more data you put onto a disk the slower each access will be, and when a disk reaches above 50-60% fill rate, access starts to get REALLY slow. So having 480GB stored on a 500GB disk would most likely be drastically slower than 480 GB on a 1.5TB disk if the disks are otherwise comparable.

If I had to choose between putting four 750GB SATA disks in a computer or two 1.5TB SATA I would definitly choose 2 SATA. And if speed was my main concern I would stripe them. Now reliability is more important to me so I wouldn't do that.

With harddware RAID solutions you can get better performance with 3 (or more) disks, but that goes for bigger disks too tongue.gif

I have never regretted buying as big disk as possible. I have many times regretted bying to small disks. In the long run it get's too expensive and a hassle to replace small disks with bigger.

/edit: I managed to double quote

This post has been edited by blindwillie: Sep 22 2008, 05:57 PM


--------------------

Schecter C1 Hellraiser EMG 81/85, replaced with JB/Jazz (SH4/SH2n) w. coilsplit
Schecter Revenger HB-105, replaced with EMG 81/85
Stratocaster Deluxe Players Noiseless
Ibanez 2550z
Blackstar HT5H, Blackheart BH5H w. BH112, Laney LX35D, Line6 Pod XT, Marshall MS-2
Headphones: Sennheiser RS120

Stay tuned...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd January 2017 - 09:40 AM