View Full Version : which is faster?
June 15th, 2012, 01:18 AM
I have two old HD on my G5 and i want to make one of the two to work as primary (so that it has OSX on), but i want to know which is faster so that the whole system works faster.
1. Is this thought correct?
2. Which of the two should i choose?
June 15th, 2012, 06:59 AM
Those two hard drives are essentially the same, except for capacity and manufacturer.
I doubt you would see any difference at all.
Keep in mind that your computer's speed is not much in your hard drive, but is a combination of the CPU, the RAM, the various buses (memory, system, I/O, etc), and finally, the perfomance of the hard drive. A HUGELY faster drive, such as an SSD, would make a very noticeable difference - but is perhaps more than you want to invest in a 7 or 8 year old computer.
A spinning hard drive is not that huge a difference, although a hard drive that is several years old could be changed out for a brand new hard drive. Very often, two identical hard drives, except for age - the newer hard drive will often "feel" faster.
One of your drives may simply be in better condition than the other. I usually "treat" an older hard drive to a full erase, writing zeroes to all blocks. You can do that through an option in your Disk Utility. That will probably give one of your hard drives some slight edge over the other. I couldn't say which one would respond the best, so you would have to try on both.
I would suggest, for your best results, to replace one with a new drive. The system boot drive works much harder than a storage drive, and you would likely see some benefit with a new hard drive for that.
And, you would see more speed (and more expense) by putting an SSD in for your system drive.
June 16th, 2012, 08:56 PM
I'd have to second the advice of buying a new HD. Your computer is rather old, but one of the true strengths of a Mac is that they age somewhat slower than other computers. Both RAM and hard drives are cheap, both are easy to upgrade.
If you haven't done it already, upping your RAM will give you a good boost.
An SSD wil give you a really fast HD, but that's somewhat expensive. In your place I'd go for a relatively cheap 1TB disc just for the increased space, then use both your small hard discs for target practice.
Sorry if that's not what you want to hear, but wether you go with your one disc or the other, you won't feel the difference.
June 17th, 2012, 01:47 AM
Thanx but its a corporate mac and i cant add anything on my own, i just have to use whats around, so im looking for my best options for that!
June 18th, 2012, 09:10 AM
You will notice next to 0 speed difference using either hard drive. Use whichever one you feel you need to.
June 18th, 2012, 03:42 PM
i see, at least can a matter of capacity help the speed? cause one hd is 80GB and the other is 140GB
June 18th, 2012, 03:51 PM
Nope. At least, not perceptibly.
June 18th, 2012, 05:05 PM
Of course, if the 80GB was nearly full, and the larger drive is not full, then it WOULD be faster, but mostly because there would be more space free...
June 19th, 2012, 07:41 AM
DeltaMac is right -- you should take into consideration how much space you intend on using on those drives. A bigger drive is always better, especially for a boot drive since your usage will continue to grow and grow over time.
As stated earlier in the thread, if you really want to see a massive speed boost (and I'm talking massive), replace those spinning-platter drives with an SSD. Your life will never be the same.
June 19th, 2012, 04:00 PM
i see, though ssd drives are still very expensive +the fact that i cannot put one in because its a corporate mac!
June 19th, 2012, 09:31 PM
I guess you mean - you don't want to spend your own money. Well, that's OK, too...
Do you have authority to install OS X on either hard drive? (Assuming that OS X is not installed on both) If not, how would you boot with the OTHER hard drive (you have two, correct?) if it does not have OS X installed?
June 22nd, 2012, 04:14 PM
OSX is installed in both one has Tiger and the other has Leopard!
June 22nd, 2012, 04:37 PM
Returning to your original question -
As previously stated, the two drives are not likely to be significantly different in speed, but the different operating systems should show a difference in performance. I would expect that the system booted to the hard drive with Tiger may be somewhat faster than the system booted to Leopard - but that depends on the mix of software you are using, and how much RAM memory is installed.
The other issues that would come up, will be that a lot of software no longer supports Tiger - internet browsers are a good example. You'll find quite a lot of internet sites that don't work too well anymore with browsers running in Tiger. SO - whether speed is an issue or not - I would recommend that you move to the Leopard system.
But - if you have older software that you already use (Adobe software is a good example) and runs very nicely in Tiger, some Adobe software may not work properly in Leopard (or not work at all) There's a long list of software from Adobe that can have serious problems in Leopard, and mostly all work very nicely in Tiger.
If you have basically the same setup of software on both systems, then that may not be an issue for you - and I would recommend going to Leopard (not necessarily because of any perceived speed issues)
June 22nd, 2012, 04:48 PM
1.i have a feeling too that in Tiger things might be faster
2. regarding Adobe apps well i work with them in both Tiger and Leopard and i haven't seen any issues!