4 ms·
Meh, not defending Apple in any way but RPM isn't a very useful metric without other specs on the drive. Battery life and durability are better on 5400 drives.
by syn0byte 8y ago
Meh, not defending Apple in any way but RPM isn't a very useful metric without other specs on the drive.
Battery life and durability are better on 5400 drives. Performance is a tricky one too. Depending on use case, say a PC doing lots of large sequential data (Media)? 10/15k with high IOP and random access times don't actually help much when streaming home movies instead of serving up highly concurrent database records.
This is Apple doing Apple; very well-designed but midrange hardware with a premium price tag.
- dictum 8y agoThis is Dongle Inc. we're talking about. These days, hard drives should be outside the iMac chassis, and its internal storage should be SSD only. Fusion Drive is a hack.
- huffmsa 8y agoFusion with optane would be acceptable. Or even m.2. but not SSD and HDD at the prices they want.
- bluedino 8y agoHave you used a MacBook Pro (2012 or older) or iMac with a regular hard drive? You can't even surf the web with them and they take 2 minutes to boot up.
- Doctor_Fegg 8y agoI'm writing this from a 2010 Mac mini with a regular hard drive. It's fine. Not snappy, but fine.
- owenwil 8y agoHave you used the 5,400 RPM iMac? It's incredibly laggy out of the box. Even booting takes 1-3 full minutes. It crunches just opening apps. With all that other hardware, it's just a waste: you're drinking an i7 through a straw.