Ideal and overkill Mac configuration for Capture One Pro 9

Daniel Wisniewski

August 03, 2016 16:24

Assume minimum 'CO' requirements .

That said, since Mac's are built upon 'certain' components - upgrade where you need to. I know SSD's will help. I really can't find anything else except from for a list of supported graphic cards.

The benchmark numbers depend on your graphics card, number of CPU cores and speed of your SSD disk.

I don't know what CO test's with.

TL;DR - I don't really know. Latest/greatest that you can afford.

cheers!
dan

0

vvkozmenko

August 03, 2016 16:54

Hi, Dan,

Thank you for the reply. With the way Apple releases and prices their Macs, I am thinking if I should switch back to PC.

If I go with the latest and greatest iMac today, it would be an i7 processor with 32 GB RAM and whatever video card for $4K.

For the same money, I could get a much more powerful PC configuration. I am a long time Mac user but all the releases after Mountain Lion are barely upgrades and add one small feature at a time that have no value for me. Also, Apple's obsession with cloud does not excite me as well. So, I am more and more often looking at PCs as they provide more hardware choices and at Linux (unfortunately, CO does not work on Linux).

So, If going beyond the specs that currently most advanced iMac can provide will still increase performance using CO, maybe switching to a PC would make sense. Any thoughts on this?

Again, thank you for the reply to my post.

0

Daniel Wisniewski

August 03, 2016 17:09

Sorry, can't help you there. I see best-builds for gaming etc. You may to lurk over on the Windows forums. A quick return from - returns many results.

You would also have to check CO's site to see what Graphics Cards they support. Speaking of graphics cards, Nvidia Titan X was recently put out there ( was $1200) and the specs blew me away. But again, it was targeted more at games & VR.

And then you are going to have to watch your driver version/windows version - what works/breaks. Run your virus checks all the time - I have a late 2011 27" iMac ( upgraded to 32Gb RAM ( and still debate whether it makes any difference ). I run vmware & have windows 10 anniversary & Fedora workstation running on the system. And YES, when I fire up CO I generally experience the slowness everyone has. As everybody 'hopes' - CO will do something with their sqlite db.

I'm not an expert CO person / nor a power user. I'm not a cloud user either.

All that being said, go lurk in the windows user section and see what people are saying.

best of luck.
dan

0

vvkozmenko

August 03, 2016 19:38

Hi, Dan,
I have a late 2010 iMac 27" (i5 with 8 GB RAM). Still contemplating if I should upgrade the RAM. It is getting slow with many applications. To delay the need for upgrade, I've got myself a MintBox Mini to run Linux Mint for my routine computer needs.
Currently, I use iMac almost exclusively for CO and other photo tasks and for programming.
My previous plans were to keep using this iMac for another 2-3 or more years as long as it keeps doing its job with photo editing. I wonder if buying a new iMac at the time when an upgrade is needed is the best option. It could be but I am trying to identify all the alternative options.
Again, thank you for your feedback.
Val

0

Christian Gruner

August 04, 2016 12:40

It all depends on where the bottleneck of the machine is, and what files you are using, and what you are doing in Capture One. Different operations saturate different parts of the hardware.

0

Eric Nepean

August 04, 2016 16:54

I just recently upgraded my iMac to a late 2015 model (from late 2009), and upgraded my COP to 9.2.1 from 8.3.4.
With the asistance of PhaseOne support I have tried a number of configurations to see what affects a very slow Filters Tool beheviour.

Here is what I think I have learned.

Graphics Card: COP9 does not use the OPENCL features of the latest 5K iMacs

I have seen a number of comments that COP9 runs pretty fast on a Mac Pro and 6 cores. I note that the GPUs configurable for the Mac Pro are not on the COP9 supported list either. I am also not going to invest $1000s to optimise a $300 piece of SW that does not fully support the HW platform.

My new iMac is the midrange model of the late 2015 series, with i7 4GHz and 1 TB Fusion drive, and I have increased the RAM to 24GB. I got a good deal buying it Apple refurbushed.

The image library is 16000 images with many file types, and may keywords.

At first I had all image files and catalog files on the main hard drive, then I moved them to a Samsung 850EVO 500GB SSD, connected to a USB3 port on the iMac.

I observed a noticeable speedup in making this change. The data write rate maxes out at about 225 MB/s, which is about half what the 850EVO is capable of. Perhaps that is a limitation of the cheap USB3 SSD enclosure. A thunderbolt driven SSD enclosure could be very interesting.
I also notice that in the external configuration, COP9 seems to make heavier use of all the CPU cores.

I still observe that the Filters tool works dog-slow. I have moved it to it's own tool tab and almost never use it. Everything else is now pretty fast.

To sum up,
I would say that if you buy a Mac you should get a one with the fastest possible CPU (i7 4GHZ), since COP does not use OPENCL of the GPUs in iMacs
There may be a bottleneck in disk access if the disk is slow or is the main drive. I would get an external SSD to store the image and catalog files.

0

George Barron

August 04, 2016 23:01

It seems that Phase One's lack of OpenCL for current iMacs is kind of funny since many of their advertisements feature 27" iMacs.

I also think speed is relative to many things including expectations, work needs, file sizes, what you have been used to in the past, etc.

I am no expert in the matter but it is my understanding that for a program like CO the video card is not the most important link in the chain and that RAM and hard drive speed are where the biggest gains are to be had.

Having said all that I just purchased a midrange 27" iMac 5k Retina display, 3.2 Ghz Intel Core i, 8gb RAM, 1TB Fusion drive, AMD Radeon M390 graphics card. I'm using COP 9.2.1. I feel like the speed with images from my Nikon D750 (approx 32mb files) is fine. I would not call it blazing fast but not slow either. Adjustments are brisk. I have not run filters on large numbers of images so can't comment on that. I keep my preview sizes pretty large and occasionally if I'm quickly advancing through full screen images it will sometimes take a second or less to 'draw' the image. I'm not a professional and have no time constraints so I am satisfied. I doubt I will spend the money on a large SSD but I will very likely upgrade the RAM since it is cheap and easy to do. I'm not sure what the maximum is but will almost certainly go for that. (Getting the RAM upgrade from Apple is way more expensive than doing it yourself.

Editorially, I think it can drive you crazy obsessing about speed, especially if you're not a pro and your time _isn't_ money and I have friends who seem more concerned about speed than image quality. I try to avoid that trap as it is expensive and in a few years there will be something faster out there no matter how much you spend now.

0

Eric Nepean

August 05, 2016 04:04

[quote="N80" wrote:
Editorially, I think it can drive you crazy obsessing about speed, especially if you're not a pro and your time _isn't_ money and I have friends who seem more concerned about speed than image quality. I try to avoid that trap as it is expensive and in a few years there will be something faster out there no matter how much you spend now.

Last year I spent a month or more to transfer my 9 years old Aperture Library to CaptureOnePro 8 - only to find that it was so slow it was unusable. It was fine when I only loaded in 100 or 1000 images, but when the images went over 10000 it was ridiculous. Literally a 100 second hang between between each clicks and keystrokes. Imagine typing in the advance search window for keyword "Wildlife"

Mouseclick - wait 100s - W- wait 100s - i - wait 100s - l - wait 100s - d -wait 100s --- get angry and quit.

So then a lot of effort to try and fix that and no real success. PhaseOne Support says "Yes a 2 minute loading time for a large catalog soounds about right"

Having been burnt badly once, I am now extra careful about bugs and reasonable speed with a full size catalog before I accept any software.

0

Christian Gruner

August 05, 2016 08:15

Eric, there are sadly quite a lot of false conclusions in your post. Let me try to explain:

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
COP9 does not use the OPENCL features of the latest 5K iMacs

The 5k iMac IS supported, openCL wise. To me it sounds like you are either using a file-type like mraw, sraw, xtrans, which are not supported by OpenCL, or there is a problem with initializing OpenCL, in which case you should contact Support.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
COP doesn't support OPENCL for any of the GPUs in the latest 5K iMacs - they all use an AMD Radeon R9 M3xx type video card.

These GPU's are indeed supported. During CO 9.2.0 development we used a 5k iMac intensively, OpenCL included.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
COP support have told me that they feel the video card in the 5K iMac is underpowered considering the size of the screen. I don't understand why this should matter since the GPU is not being used for video.

For the resolution, the GPU is indeed underpowered. Compared to the previous generation of 27" iMac's, the amount of pixels are 4 times higher, but the GPU is not even double as fast as the old one. So a performance-penalty has to be expected in terms of frames per second, compared to the older iMac's.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
I observe that when I enable COP9 to use OPENCL on my R9 M390 GPU, there is no change in performance

If you don't see a change in performance, openCL is not running. Please see my advice from the previous point.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
and 1 TB Fusion drive

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
then I moved them to a Samsung 850EVO 500GB SSD,

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
I observed a noticeable speedup in making this change

A fusion disk is basically a rotational disk with a (very) small portion as an SSD, so it a very bad performer compared to modern SSD's (and especially M.Fast/M2 disk)

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
To sum up,
I would say that if you buy a Mac you should get a one with the fastest possible CPU (i7 4GHZ), since COP does not use OPENCL of the GPUs in iMacs
There may be a bottleneck in disk access if the disk is slow or is the main drive. I would get an external SSD to store the image and catalog files.

To Sum up:
Get the fastest/largest of everything, CPU, GPU, disk and RAM, that you can afford.
If possible, use internal SSD's. The internal SATA interface is still faster than USB3, and more reliable (as it has got no easily removable connectors)

0

Eric Nepean

August 05, 2016 14:32

Thanks for the response Christian. It's good to have discussion on these topics.

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
Eric, there are sadly quite a lot of false conclusions in your post. Let me try to explain:
[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
COP9 does not use the OPENCL features of the latest 5K iMacs

The 5k iMac IS supported, openCL wise. To me it sounds like you are either using a file-type like mraw, sraw, xtrans, which are not supported by OpenCL, or there is a problem with initializing OpenCL, in which case you should contact Support.

KB1720 does not include the graphics cards from the latest (late 2015) iMacs: R9 M380, R9 M390, R9M395, R9 M395x. Nor does it list the graphics cards from the previous generation iMac R9 M290, R9 M290X. I think my conclusion was not unreasonable in view of the fact that I saw no performance change.
I've never heard of those file types - I've checked my system and do not have any. My image file types are RW2, JPG, ORF, CR2 and NEF.

Before I open another support case, I'd like to start with the best possible information. Could you please provide guidance:
If one enables Open CL for processing, which types of COP functions would I expect to see a performance improvement on? Browsing and search? Or?
(It's OK to be technical - I am an engineer and SW systems designer in my work life)

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
COP doesn't support OPENCL for any of the GPUs in the latest 5K iMacs - they all use an AMD Radeon R9 M3xx type video card.

These GPU's are indeed supported. During CO 9.2.0 development we used a 5k iMac intensively, OpenCL included.

Then I suggest you list the R9 M380, R9 M390, R9M395, R9 M395x in KB1720, and perhaps also for the 2014 iMacs if that is appropriate. This will help your customers.

I note that the first two support Open CL1.2 and the latter two Open CL 2.0.
I wonder which video card one you used in development, and which versions of OpenCL you support?

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
COP support have told me that they feel the video card in the 5K iMac is underpowered considering the size of the screen. I don't understand why this should matter since the GPU is not being used for video.

For the resolution, the GPU is indeed underpowered. Compared to the previous generation of 27" iMac's, the amount of pixels are 4 times higher, but the GPU is not even double as fast as the old one. So a performance-penalty has to be expected in terms of frames per second, compared to the older iMac's.

I agree the frames per second capability should be less. But I don't play video games nor watch full screen video.
I note that in normal use the GPU is running at about 6-8 frames per second and is not maxed out.
I wonder how this would affect the COP9's use of the OpenCL capability?

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
I observe that when I enable COP9 to use OPENCL on my R9 M390 GPU, there is no change in performance

If you don't see a change in performance, openCL is not running. Please see my advice from the previous point.

I will check again, and then check with my utility that shows GPU usage.
I am wondering if COP did the development with the R9 M395 GPU, which has Open CL 2.0, and if the M380 and M390 which have OpenCL 1.2 have not been checked.

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
and 1 TB Fusion drive

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
then I moved them to a Samsung 850EVO 500GB SSD,

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
I observed a noticeable speedup in making this change

A fusion disk is basically a rotational disk with a (very) small portion as an SSD, so it a very bad performer compared to modern SSD's (and especially M.Fast/M2 disk)

My analysis as well. The 1 TB fusion has only 24GB SSD, so for larger files it is essentially a magnetic (rotating) hard drive.
The 2TB and larger fusion drives have 128GB SSDs which should give much better performance.

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
To sum up,
I would say that if you buy a Mac you should get a one with the fastest possible CPU (i7 4GHZ), since COP does not use OPENCL of the GPUs in iMacs
There may be a bottleneck in disk access if the disk is slow or is the main drive. I would get an external SSD to store the image and catalog files.

To Sum up:
Get the fastest/largest of everything, CPU, GPU, disk and RAM, that you can afford.

For those of us without bottomless wallets, it comes down to a discussion of cost vs performance - If I spend an extra $500, what performance improvement do I get? Should I spend $500 on an internal SSD or on improving the GPU. Or on improving the CPU? It's hard to get information for this kind of decision. If I buy an iMac loaded it would have changed a $2800 purchase into an $5200 purchase. If had that much to spend, the I should perhaps be considering a Mac Pro instead. Where to draw the line?

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
If possible, use internal SSD's. The internal SATA interface is still faster than USB3, and more reliable (as it has got no easily removable connectors)

I agree with your analysis of the USB3 speed. However switching from the refurbished model I got to an internal SSD of 500GB would add $500 (if I could find it as refurb) or add $1000 if had to buy new.
As it is, buying a $200 external SSD results in quite fast performance, even without the GPU.

I think the SSD access could be considerably improved if I used a Thunderbolt interface to access the SSD.

0

photo by FA

August 05, 2016 15:13

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
COP support have told me that they feel the video card in the 5K iMac is underpowered considering the size of the screen. I don't understand why this should matter since the GPU is not being used for video.

For the resolution, the GPU is indeed underpowered. Compared to the previous generation of 27" iMac's, the amount of pixels are 4 times higher, but the GPU is not even double as fast as the old one. So a performance-penalty has to be expected in terms of frames per second, compared to the older iMac's.

I agree the frames per second capability should be less. But I don't play video games nor watch full screen video.
I note that in normal use the GPU is running at about 6-8 frames per second and is not maxed out.
I wonder how this would affect the COP9's use of the OpenCL capability?

As a iMac 5K user, I couldn't understand this as well. CO9 is not a video edit program, nor requires high frame rates. If Apple has approved this system to show a UHD movie clip on Retina screen, then it is powerful enough to show a movie without any issue. Not need to mention that Final Cut Pro X has been approved to be used on this system.

Like previously I have mentioned, while you draw a mask when the show mask function is on, it is lagging heavily if you decide to use OpenCL.

So I still think CO9 has some problems. It doesn't cause huge problems to me, but sometimes I'd like to work on full screen and see what mask I am drawing, and then I see problem.

Cheers,

Fatih

0

Eric Nepean

August 05, 2016 17:46

Hi fatihayoglu, I am curious to know what GPU you have (you can find it under "about this Mac")

0

photo by FA

August 05, 2016 20:08

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
Hi fatihayoglu, I am curious to know what GPU you have (you can find it under "about this Mac")

Hi Eric,

Mine is with AMD Radeon R9 M395X with 4GB, with 32 GB Ram, 512 GB SSD and 4GHz processor, so it is really top of top of the line.

Having said that, any iMac with any GPU is been approved to watch 4K movies, edit 4K movies. These are really application where heavy use of GPU occurs. I don't understand why CO9 can't show smooth drawing of a mask as the refresh rate isn't as high as a movie.

Cheers,

Fatih

0

Christian Gruner

August 06, 2016 19:47

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
KB1720 does not include the graphics cards from the latest (late 2015) iMacs: R9 M380, R9 M390, R9M395, R9 M395x. Nor does it list the graphics cards from the previous generation iMac R9 M290, R9 M290X. I think my conclusion was not unreasonable in view of the fact that I saw no performance change.

The KB is a good starting point, but not a definitive list of compatible adapters. Your lack of gained performance most likely have other causes (which I will come back to below).

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
I've never heard of those file types - I've checked my system and do not have any. My image file types are RW2, JPG, ORF, CR2 and NEF.

mraw and sraw are small canon raw-files, contained in .CR2. Xtrans is Fuji's special color array pattern, contained in .raf.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
If one enables Open CL for processing, which types of COP functions would I expect to see a performance improvement on?

Processing to file and viewer update performance, when adjusting images. Also note that the choices are named "Auto" and "Disable". "Auto" is not a force enable. Auto means that OpenCL will be used, if possible. If not possible, the CPU-pipeline will be used instead.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
I note that the first two support Open CL1.2 and the latter two Open CL 2.0.
I wonder which video card one you used in development, and which versions of OpenCL you support?

We use both versions of OpenCL during development and testing. OpenCL 2.0 is currently only available on Windows, as the OSX drivers are still running OpenCL 1.2. There is roughly a 3-5 % performance gain in running OpenCL 2.0.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
I agree the frames per second capability should be less. But I don't play video games nor watch full screen video.
I note that in normal use the GPU is running at about 6-8 frames per second and is not maxed out.
I wonder how this would affect the COP9's use of the OpenCL capability?

Playing video is a completely different thing from what is going on inside the GPU when i.e. processing with CO. Playing a 4:2:0 4k video is a walk-in-park for all modern GPU's. Regarding refresh-rates in CO, then remember it is not always just about the raw image modification calculation, but also things like color managemant that takes up time. We will continue to improve performance constantly, and not everything magically gets faster by running it on the GPU. Some action are not suited for execution of the GPU.

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
Should I spend $500 on an internal SSD or on improving the GPU. Or on improving the CPU?

In your case, I would improve the SSD (from fusion to entirely SSD) first, then GPU, and then CPU.

[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
If Apple has approved this system to show a UHD movie clip on Retina screen, then it is powerful enough to show a movie without any issue.

Please see my answer above.

[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
Like previously I have mentioned, while you draw a mask when the show mask function is on, it is lagging heavily if you decide to use OpenCL.

We will continue to improve masking (and performance in general), and we have already done so with the introduction of CO 9.2.0.

0

photo by FA

August 06, 2016 22:20

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
Like previously I have mentioned, while you draw a mask when the show mask function is on, it is lagging heavily if you decide to use OpenCL.

We will continue to improve masking (and performance in general), and we have already done so with the introduction of CO 9.2.0.

Well, I have to admit, with 9.2, many problems have been solved, the issue with 5K iMacs are much better, and as a user who has tried beta version (thank you for the privilege), I have contacted PO regarding to this issue and as Christian said, they will be working on this more. It is not great but it is much much better and will be better with the new editions. Ian's far as I know, CO is a much younger program than LR and PO is much smaller team than Adobe. But they read every support ticket, reply most of them and more importantly they try correct all of them at some degree.

Long story short, PO did heck of job between 9.1 and 9.2 in regards of iMac 5K GPU issue, I can say that much.

Cheers,

Fatih

0

Eric Nepean

August 06, 2016 23:38

[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
Like previously I have mentioned, while you draw a mask when the show mask function is on, it is lagging heavily if you decide to use OpenCL.

We will continue to improve masking (and performance in general), and we have already done so with the introduction of CO 9.2.0.

Well, I have to admit, with 9.2, many problems have been solved, the issue with 5K iMacs are much better, and as a user who has tried beta version (thank you for the privilege), I have contacted PO regarding to this issue and as Christian said, they will be working on this more. It is not great but it is much much better and will be better with the new editions. Ian's far as I know, CO is a much younger program than LR and PO is much smaller team than Adobe. But they read every support ticket, reply most of them and more importantly they try correct all of them at some degree.

Long story short, PO did heck of job between 9.1 and 9.2 in regards of iMac 5K GPU issue, I can say that much.

Cheers,

Fatih

Agreed, it's been a notable improvement an appreciated effort. After my experience with COP8 I was on the verge of moving to an other product, 9.2.1 is what prompted me to stay.

0

John Doe

August 07, 2016 00:12

[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
CO is a much younger program than LR

Actually it's not. 😊

0

vvkozmenko

August 08, 2016 19:43

Hi, guys,

It is very interesting to listen to your discussion and learn from it. Looks like I will be sticking with my current Mac and when I have to upgrade I would have to buy the top configuration of the 27 inch iMac 5K.

Thank you,

Val

PS A little off topic, and probably not the most appropriate for this forum, but still have to ask, no trolling at all. What would be the best RAW converter for Linux? I realize that COP is the best currently existing. The reason why I ask it here - it sounds like people know what they are talking about on this forum. When I searched for the answer on the Linux forums, a lot of answers was like "if one knew how to use all the features of GIMP they would never pay for the software." Any comment is appreciated.

0

Daniel Wisniewski

August 08, 2016 20:39

[quote="vvkozmenko" wrote:
Hi, guys,

I What would be the best RAW converter for Linux? I realize that COP is the best currently existing. The reason why I ask it here - it sounds like people know what they are talking about on this forum. When I searched for the answer on the Linux forums, a lot of answers was like "if one knew how to use all the features of GIMP they would never pay for the software." Any comment is appreciated.

Look at , they just released 5.0.0 a few days ago. Or - your mileage may very..

An older write-up is here

And yes, GIMP has been around for a long time.. Still great.
cheers!
dan

0

Jeffrey Jakucyk

August 09, 2016 15:17

This is a terrible time to buy a Mac with the possible exception of a maxed-out iMac or the 1-port MacBook (which you won't be doing any photo editing on anyway). All other products are so woefully out-of-date at this point that making a purchase right now that isn't absolutely necessary due to a previous computer dying or a new employee coming or whatever is simply a bad idea since Apple hasn't reduced prices either. If you can hold out a few months to see what they do to the product line, you should.

0

Wesley

August 10, 2016 21:07

[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:

[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
Should I spend $500 on an internal SSD or on improving the GPU. Or on improving the CPU?

In your case, I would improve the SSD (from fusion to entirely SSD) first, then GPU, and then CPU.

Is it faster to have sessions on the same SSD with the OS and programs or should I go internal SSD (OS/Programs) and external SSD (sessions) via thunderbolt/USB3?

0

Eric Nepean

August 14, 2016 02:39

Here are some test results with DiskMark.

The SSD is a Samsung 850EVO 512GB drive in a Startech ESATA & USB3 enclosure.
The Internal Fusion drive is a 1TB Fusion with a 24GB SSD, in a 5K iMac
I am using a Caldigit Thunderbolt dock.
The SSD enclosure is either connected directly to the iMAc (USB3) or coneccted to the Thunderbolt Dock (USB3/TB or ESATA/TB)
Rates are in MB/s

Drive......Connection....SeqRead...SeqWrite...RanRead...RanWrite
Internal..N/A............... 751 ........ 277 ........ 4.9 ......... 4.1
SSD........ESATA/TB...... 384 ........ 330 ........ 48 .......... 27
SSD........USB3.............. 430 ....... 333 ......... 36 .......... 24
SSD........USB3/TB........ 345 ........ 270 ......... 24 .......... 20

DiskMark reads and writes data for a few seconds, so I think the write rates for the Internal drive are representative of the magnetic drive; the read rate is probabaly more representative of the SSD.

I note that best performance for random reads and writes is from the ESATA connection, although these rates with the USB3 connection directly to the iMac is not far behind.

I guess that an internal SSD will about twice as fast as an external SSD, but the rates with the external SSD with USB3 or ESATA connections are definitely faster than any external or internal magnetic hard drives.

0

Comments