Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: Jeremy Roussak on August 18, 2007, 02:52:46 pm
-
I'm about to get a MacBook Pro. The internal hard disk options are 160GB (5400rpm), 160GB (7200rpm) and 200GB(4800rpm).
I don't think I need the extra 40GB. The 7200rpm 160GB disk costs £100 (that's about USD200 at current exchange rates) more than the 5400 one.
The applications I use which might benefit from a faster HD are Lightroom (hence this forum), PS3 and Xcode.
Any opinions? Would I notice the difference, assuming (not necessarily correctly) average perception and patience?
Jeremy
-
That is a lot to pay for an upgrade to 7200.
You will get better performance from a 7200 RPM 3.5 inch external drive connected by firewire 800 than from the internal 2.5 inch drive.
-
I'm about to get a MacBook Pro. The internal hard disk options are 160GB (5400rpm), 160GB (7200rpm) and 200GB(4800rpm).
I don't think I need the extra 40GB. The 7200rpm 160GB disk costs £100 (that's about USD200 at current exchange rates) more than the 5400 one.
The applications I use which might benefit from a faster HD are Lightroom (hence this forum), PS3 and Xcode.
Any opinions? Would I notice the difference, assuming (not necessarily correctly) average perception and patience?
Jeremy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134022\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You are paying way too much - although I guess that goes with Macs. For reference, I got a 10,000 RPM WD Raptor for my PC for about the £100...
The RPMs make a huge difference, especially if you're using the disk for swapping. 10-20% performance boost doesn't sound like a lot, but think how much time you spend each day waiting for swapping, opening and writing files, and cut that by a fifth, and you have an idea. Then again, the price differential is outrageous, so it's a tough call.
-
It's a ton - less than the cost of a half decent night out with the missus. I could understand the agonies if it were a grand, but a ton? If you really want to save cash don't buy the mac, buy a PC laptop.
And if you don't think you need the extra 40GB, just wait until you start running out of disc. I long ago chewed up all the disc space on my MacBook Pro and now have to carry external disk drives when I travel with it. I've largely stopped travelling to the US and now only go there when I can't avoid it, but if you'd been caught up in the customs queues behind me while I tried to explain patiently to a trogolodytic official what these external disks were, you wouldn't find it funny.
Faster and more RAM is more important than disk speed - even in heavy read/write operations a decent amount of RAM will buffer the data and you'll not notice the difference in disk speed in normal operation.
-
Faster and more RAM is more important than disk speed - even in heavy read/write operations a decent amount of RAM will buffer the data and you'll not notice the difference in disk speed in normal operation.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134071\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Excellent point about the RAM, which I neglected to mention. When building a system - as much as that's possible with a Mac or a PC laptop - one should always look for most bang for the buck. And (fast) RAM is definitely more bang for the buck than any HDD space for photography use.
-
Excellent point about the RAM, which I neglected to mention. When building a system - as much as that's possible with a Mac or a PC laptop - one should always look for most bang for the buck. And (fast) RAM is definitely more bang for the buck than any HDD space for photography use.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=134083\")
Read [a href=\"http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/apple/memory/iMac_and_Mac_mini_memory_performance_testing/]this test[/url] about how RAM can affect performance. It's about iMacs but MacBook Pros should enjoy similar performances.
Here is another article with benchmarks about installing an Hitachi 7200rpm 200GB drive in a MacBook Pro (here (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2007-07-10/#6989)). And finally, some benchmarks about a 250GB in a MacBook Pro - in French - (here (http://www.macbidouille.com/articles/233/page5/)).
HTH
-
It's a ton - less than the cost of a half decent night out with the missus. I could understand the agonies if it were a grand, but a ton? If you really want to save cash don't buy the mac, buy a PC laptop.
And if you don't think you need the extra 40GB, just wait until you start running out of disc. I long ago chewed up all the disc space on my MacBook Pro and now have to carry external disk drives when I travel with it. I've largely stopped travelling to the US and now only go there when I can't avoid it, but if you'd been caught up in the customs queues behind me while I tried to explain patiently to a trogolodytic official what these external disks were, you wouldn't find it funny.
Faster and more RAM is more important than disk speed - even in heavy read/write operations a decent amount of RAM will buffer the data and you'll not notice the difference in disk speed in normal operation.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134071\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I wasn't agonising - just wondering if the money could be better spent (on half a good night out, for example).
I agree about the RAM, of course: but I'm certainly not about to pay Apple's price for it (4GB v 2GB adds £440!).
Thanks for all the responses, anyway. I stuck with the 160GB 5400. I've just spent the afternoon setting it up: it's a hell of a lot faster than my PowerBook G4!
Jeremy