Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

nycdunz · Mar 28, 2007, 01:14 AM

I prefer speed over space, but is the speed increase from a 7200rpm BTO on the new MBP noticeable? I am a designer and use Adobe CS apps the most and if it benefits from the faster drive, I will probably head towards the 7200rpm route.

Paul Eva · Mar 28, 2007, 01:39 AM

When I upgrade to MBP from my Powerbook I will definately go for the 7200 RPM Disk.

I have three external drives and they are all 7200 RPM and connect through Firewire 400. Access times are fantastic! Backing up data is a breeze too....or in this case more like a windrush!

As for running apps, it all depends on the app now running in Universal Binary. I'm hoping for quicker response times for Aperture as my Powerbook, even with 2Gb RAM, does creak under the strain and iMovie even more.

I'll be stumping up the cash for a configured MBP with the 3Gb RAM once the new OS is available and may wait a little longer for iLife 07 to be included.

mfbernstein · Mar 28, 2007, 08:47 AM

If speed is your primary concern, you'll have better results with a fast 3.5" drive and an FW800 or e-SATA external enclosure.

OreoCookie · Mar 28, 2007, 09:36 AM

I went for the 100 GB@7,200 rpm Segate drive (instead of the larger 120 GB@5,400 rpm model for the same price) and I can't feel much of a difference compared to the 80 GB Fujitsu drive I've had before. It's surprisingly silent, though, not much louder than the 80 gig harddisk.

If I had the choice now, I'd rather get the larger drive.

wingdo · Mar 28, 2007, 11:52 AM

A 7,200 RPM 2.5" drive is not going to give you the same throughput as a 7,200 3.5" drive connected via FireWire. The external drive will still be faster by quite a lot. I upgraded my PowerBook's internal drive to a 7,200 and was disappointed in the performance. My external drive still blew it out of the water.

SierraDragon · Mar 28, 2007, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by nycdunz

I prefer speed over space, but is the speed increase from a 7200rpm BTO on the new MBP noticeable? I am a designer and use Adobe CS apps the most and if it benefits from the faster drive, I will probably head towards the 7200rpm route.

• Most important for CS apps is the use of a second physical disk for scratch. Assigning scratch to the same physical drive as PSCS creates a major bottleneck regardless of how fast the drive is. I use a FW800 RAID 0 external with my MBP; eSATA would be even better. MCE's Opti-bay allows two hard drives internal, but I chose external for backup reasons.

• Hard drive throughput is a function of how full the hard drive is. More full, less throughput speed. 7200 RPM drives are smaller, hence fill up sooner and slow down accordingly. In my quest for an optimum 17" C2D MBP I went with the 5400 RPM internal.

-Allen Wicks

alex_kac · Mar 28, 2007, 02:21 PM

nycdunz · Mar 28, 2007, 03:26 PM

so getting the 7200rpm 100gb drive for the MBP is a waste then? If so I'll just stick to the 5400rpm 120GB. Since you guys say there's no noticeable differences.

OreoCookie · Mar 28, 2007, 03:34 PM

Yes, especially if you have an external drive already.

tinkered · Mar 28, 2007, 03:51 PM

Here is a review:

MacBook Pro - various drives compared

b1NARY73 · Mar 31, 2007, 02:00 AM

My Powerbook 15" had a 7200 Seagate Drive, replaced the stock 80GB 5400 RPM Drive. I noticed a difference in boot times, and application loading.... but that was it.

Rev2Liv · Apr 3, 2007, 02:11 AM

Hi,

I'm with SierraDragon on this one. I went with a 160GB 5400RPM Travelstar 5K160 since I like to keep data on the internal and 100GB would have filled up too fast for me (especially with BootCamp) negating any speed advantages of a 7200rpm drive.

Take into account that OSX uses the internal HD as a scratch disck for VM which if slowed down, will bog the entire system down.

When a Travelstar 7200RPM 160GB comes out, I will reconsider.

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

• Most important for CS apps is the use of a second physical disk for scratch. Assigning scratch to the same physical drive as PSCS creates a major bottleneck regardless of how fast the drive is. I use a FW800 RAID 0 external with my MBP; eSATA would be even better. MCE's Opti-bay allows two hard drives internal, but I chose external for backup reasons.

• Hard drive throughput is a function of how full the hard drive is. More full, less throughput speed. 7200 RPM drives are smaller, hence fill up sooner and slow down accordingly. In my quest for an optimum 17" C2D MBP I went with the 5400 RPM internal.

-Allen Wicks

urzsite · Apr 3, 2007, 10:21 AM

Seagate has already announced new 160GB 7200RPM Momentus drives, but to be delivered this month.

There is also a 160GB 5400RPM with Flash Memory to help booting (im not sure if Flash memory will help in Mac OS X, since it is only advertised as supported by MS Vista)...

Hmm I guess the price will depend on which one I will get, since there is not a whole lot to gain with the 2200 RPM advantage according to tests (barefeats etc)

SLiMeX · Apr 3, 2007, 12:10 PM

Has anyone heard of Seagate releasing a 200GB laptop drive? If so, do you think that it'll just be 4200RPM? I hope not, I need more space and a faster HDD in my Macbook.

mfbernstein · Apr 3, 2007, 12:45 PM

Toshiba already has a 200GB 4200RPM drive that'll fit in a MacBook. I'm sure Seagate will get around to it, but it'll take time. If you wait a few months, the new 160GB 7200 RPM will be available in stores too (currently, the only place I've seen them announced is for special Dell laptops).

Even at 4200RPM, a 200GB drive will for most purposes be as fast as a 100GB 5400RPM on account of the denser data storage due to larger capacity.

urzsite · Apr 3, 2007, 03:40 PM

And in a few months Leopard will be out, so perfect timing for a complete new install, on a new seagate (or whatever is hot in 2-3 months time

)

cschmelz · Apr 22, 2007, 02:51 AM

Just remember data density on the platter is just as important as rotational speed--- 200gb disk at 5400rpm is likely faster than a 80gb disk at 7200 as there is just as much DATA density going under the read/write heads each millisecond.

mfbernstein · Apr 22, 2007, 10:39 AM

Question's somewhat moot now. 7200RPM 160GB drives are now shipping. Though they're a bit pricey, they're indisputably the fastest notebook drives shipping.

Javizun · Apr 24, 2007, 08:09 PM

ocw have the 160gb 7200 drive for like 240 bucks + shipping.

i been thinking about buying it and plucking down on the mac blu-ray drive but i dont think mac have blu-ray compatible players do they?

mfbernstein · Apr 24, 2007, 09:42 PM

Transintl has the same drive for $40 less. FastMac has a BluRay drive, for _only_ $800. Given that you can't actually watch BluRay videos yet on OS X, I'm not sure who'd want one (not to mention the insane prices), but...

silver · Apr 25, 2007, 11:47 PM

Hi All-
Samsung announced that they will be releasing a 200gig 7200 2.5 HD. I read it on xlr8yourmac.com a few days ago. So two of these in a MBP w/ opti bay would be very cool, for CS apps, video work and in my case 3D work.

silver