7 Replies Latest reply: Apr 5, 2013 11:51 AM by Bmachine
Bmachine Level 1 (0 points)

Since the 21 inch iMac has been available for a little bit now (and maybe some lucky ones may have received their 27 already..) I wonder if someone who also ordered the Fusion drive option has had a chance to see what it does to Aperture in daily use.


To be accurate, one would obviously need to do the same operations on a machine with and then one without the SSD.  And since it would be mostly the app residing on the SSD and not the actual images, I kind of doubt it will make much difference.  But this is not a cheap option so any initial impression would be useful for those about to place an order.





Safari, OS X Mountain Lion (10.8.1)
  • Bmachine Level 1 (0 points)

    While waiting for someone to chime in, I noticed that in the spec page on the Apple store it says this about the Fusion drive:


    "... importing photos are up to 3.5 times faster.* Over time, as the system learns how you work, Fusion Drive makes your Mac experience even better. All while letting you store your digital life on a traditional, roomy hard drive.

    *Testing conducted by Apple in October 2012 ... with Aperture 3.4.1 using RAW images. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of iMac.

  • Bmachine Level 1 (0 points)

    Well, based on that last little bit of info on the Apple store page, I I placed my order for a 27 with the fusion drive.  The delivery is set to a very vague "In January"...

  • Frank Caggiano Level 7 (25,722 points)

    Well given the traffic in this post, looks like you'll have the honor of both being the first to try it out and to be the one who answers this post if you place the order now

  • Bmachine Level 1 (0 points)

    Frank Caggiano wrote:


    Well given the traffic in this post, looks like you'll have the honor of both being the first to try it out and to be the one who answers this post if you place the order now


    Ha!  Exactly Frank!


    The tumbleweeds were hurting my ears...  ;-)

  • Bmachine Level 1 (0 points)

    Just got a notice that my machine was shipped from Shanghai yesterday.  Should arrive on the 25th.


    So it was about a month from order to delivery.


    I expect to see a serious increase in speed but I wont be able to make an objective comparison since my current machine is a rather tired iMac 24 with CoreDuos...

  • nusbaum Level 1 (0 points)

    I installed a SSD in my macbook pro and configured a fusion drive manually. I keep my images (referenced) on a slowish external drive (WD passport studio) and my library is on my fusion drive. Starting Aperture and browsing images is noticably faster, so I'm assuming the thumbnails and at least some the previews have made their way to the SSD. Initial loading of the full files isn't much faster, but I wouldn't expect it to be. Working with images once they are loaded seems quicker as well, perhaps some of the full sized images are cached for some about of time after their inital load. My overall impression has been quite favorable so far.

  • Bmachine Level 1 (0 points)

    Dang, I completely forgot to update this thread.  Apologies for that.


    By now many people have had the machine so it is not much of a news item anymore.  But anyway, here are my first impressions in moving from a 2007 iMac 24 (6G ram)  to a 2012 iMac 27 (8G ram)  w/ fusion drive in terms of Aperture use.


    In a nutshell:  Yes it is faster.  Of course it is.  But for a  5 years jump in technology I must admit that I am a bit underwhelmed.  Maybe my expectations were too high.  Unconsciously I was probably expecting some near instant response on opening the program and loading images.  I also use Photoshop and AutoPano Pro extensively on very large files and both are indeed faster but not blazing fast.  A totally unscientific measure would say they all feel about twice or three times faster than my old machine overall.  Not bad of course.  But if you work on large image files, there is stll a lot of data to go through no matter what.  I suppose this may be due to the fact that the data still lives on standard hard drives which have become a lot cheaper but not a lot faster.