crwdns2934065:0crwdne2934065:0: 13
1
2
Hello,
I see that Mac mini Late 2012 have a Hitachi HTS545050A7E362 HDD
What kind of SATA connection have that Hitachi HDD?
And what kind of SATA connection have Mac mini Late 2012? SATA II or SATA III?
Regards
crwdns2934109:0crwdne2934109:0
crwdns2934065:0crwdne2934065:0: 479,4crwdns2936485:0crwdne2936485:0
35
329
971
Boy Nick you got good eyes! Did you figure out what HD just by the presentation and Apple web site info? Assuming that is correct:
Looking at the Hitachi web site Hitachi TravelStar HD's All of their current drives are SATA III (6GB/s) so it's likely the custom Apple HD Hitachi makes is a SATA III. Beyond that it's anyones guess until iFixIt does a tear down or someone does a guide for it.
crwdns2934105:0crwdne2934105:0
Hello,
I see it in the iFixit Guide: in the HDD and in the System Profiler capture at the end of the guide:
http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/iDJYl...
http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/Ln6nI...
Hitachi Travelstar Z5K500 family have both: SATA II (3Gb/s) and SATA III (6Gb/s)
Regards
I should have guessed the iFixIt team had already done a teardown on it! Wow that was fast! This drive is not a Fusion drive (the Fusion for this model is a 1GB unit) so we don't know who is making it (yet).
As to the data rate best to post a note in the teardown page asking the question. Maybe they will know.
crwdns2934065:0crwdne2934065:0: 1
3
The Mid-2011 Minis have SATA-III (6GB/s), so I'd expect these do too.
crwdns2934105:0crwdne2934105:0
You are right, since 2011 Mac mini (and iMac) have SATA III, only remains to know if the HDD are SATA III too
According to the linked spec sheet, the transfer rate off the platters is the same, significantly below what even SATA-II supports. Probably need a 7200RPM drive for it to matter.
I/O of the disks them selves is not the same as the SATA I/O spec. You forgot about read/write caching which effects the drives true I/O. And, don't forget the difference between Bits Vs Bytes here when you read a spec sheeet.
Caching doesn't help if you're streaming huge files-- eventually you top out at the rate you can get the bits off the platters. In the other case where you do lots of random reads/writes, cache size is of limited help. Don't get me wrong, caching helps a lot of the time, but if everything else is the same, a 7200RPM drive will generally outperform one spinning at 5400RPM.
I didn't confuse bits/bytes. The disk I/O is less than SATA-II.
Yes, your right caching doesn't help as far as the drives throughput when your reading/writing large chunks of data. My point here was on the other side of things the SATA I/O side. Here is where the I/O is burst across due to caching which is why you need to set the I/O of the device to match the I/O of the bus. Which was the point I was making not the throughput aspect. Granted a faster RPM drive allows faster read/writes, which is why I always go for the 7200 drives when ever possible.
crwdns2936751:024crwdne2936751:0 0
crwdns2936753:07crwdne2936753:0 3
crwdns2936753:030crwdne2936753:0 18
crwdns2942667:0crwdne2942667:0 29,874
