iMac 2013 HD - Poor Performance - a Problem?

In the spring of 2013, I switched to Apple computers, i.e. MBPro for me & an iMac for my wife w/ a 1TB fusion drive - both have been working fine - a while back a post on an app named iQuickMark was mentioned which evaluates a computer's hardware - well I just decided to test my two computers.

The results are shown below - the MBPro looks great (first bar graph), however, the HD on the iMac rates poorly according to this app (second bar graph) - I've ran this test several times and the current report is after running Onyx and also verifying the HD via the Disk Utility in Yosemite which stated an OK status.

Now, I have 1 year left on AppleCare on this iMac, so just wondering if this is a defective HD, especially since my wife has been using the computer successfully for two years? Has anyone else used this app to look at their iMac fusion drives? Thanks - Dave
.

Dave. If I reading things correctly. Your MacBook Pro has a 256gig SSD and your wife's iMac has a 1 terabyte Fusion drive. A 256gig SSD should have much better/faster performance than a Fusion Drive…so I would think that would explain the higher "Disk" results for your MacBook Pro.

Something you can do to double check this. Many times with benchmarking apps…the developer has a forum or website with a "database" section. Where users of the app can post their results.

If this results database exists for this app…maybe you can find results for other iMac's just like your wife has. Or at least…find other Apple models with a 1 terabyte Fusion installed for "Disk" scores.

HTH,

- Nick

pigoo3 said:

Dave. If I reading things correctly. Your MacBook Pro has a 256gig SSD and your wife's iMac has a 1 terabyte Fusion drive. A 256gig SSD should have much better/faster performance than a Fusion Drive…so I would think that would explain the higher "Disk" results for your MacBook Pro.

Something you can do to double check this. Many times with benchmarking apps…the developer has a forum or website with a "database" section. Where users of the app can post their results.

If this results database exists for this app…maybe you can find results for other iMac's just like your wife has. Or at least…find other Apple models with a 1 terabyte Fusion installed for "Disk" scores.

Click to expand...

Thanks Nick for the above comments - I knew the SSD in the laptop would be faster but was surprised at the slowness of the fusion drive despite the iMac working fine for 2 years.

Out of curiosity, I DL another free drive performance app called Black Magic Diskspeed Test and ran the test on both of my computers - the top pic below shows my iMac vs. the MBPro, so basically confirms the results of the previous program.

Now, I found an article HERE using the Black Magic app and comparing the author's two machines (lower pic below) - pretty much the same results that I am finding (not sure if the fusion drive vs. his standard 1TB drive makes a big difference?).

So, believe that I'm not going to worry about it at the moment - but if I do replace the iMac next year, will likely go w/ the higher resolution screen and probably get a 512 GB SSD - Dave
.

Hi Dave:

I think you're finding out that the Apple Fusion drives are a bit over rated as to what they bring in the way of performance. Several articles that I've read on line seem to agree. And yes, the next iMac I get, like you, will have a large SSD.

RadDave said:

...I knew the SSD in the laptop would be faster but was surprised at the slowness of the fusion drive despite the iMac working fine for 2 years.

Click to expand...

Dave. I guess I'm a little confused. Is this iMac's slowness "actual" real-world slowness (the computer is performing much slower than it used to)? Or is this slowness concern only based on what's being seen in these benchmarking apps?

If not "real world slowness"…I'm still thinking the difference in test values is the big performance difference between an SSD and a fusion drive.

It's also possible that the way these benchmarking apps test the drives…may test them in a way that's different from every day real world ways users actually use their computer. Since the fusion drive is a small SSD + a big traditional spinning HD. The testing method may run tests that write large blocks of info…that may minimize the effect of the fusion drives SSD. And thus…the fusion drive (to the testing app) is just basically a traditional HD.

- Nick

Dave there is no substitute for an SSD and fusions are there to grab extra bucks and make folk think they are getting all the speed advantages of an SSD.

Thanks Guys for all of your comments - as to Nick's question, our iMac is working fine and I just downloaded the disk performance app in my OP out of curiosity, so first time testing of the fusion drive's 'speed' and was just surprised but not that concerned - my followup post w/ the article link seemed to verify that the results are to be expected.

When I bought the iMac in spring of 2013, I choose the 'fusion drive' w/o doing much research, just seemed that 128 GB SSD 'up front' would help but seems no difference from the standard 1 TB HD that I could have bought @ a lesser price.

I've got a year left on Apple Care w/ this computer and wife insists on a lower (and not optimal) resolution on her screen, so irritates me to use the computer after being use to the retina screen of my MBPro - SO, bottom line - if I do upgrade next year, will look for higher resolution and a 512 GB SSD - thanks again for your input. Dave

RadDave said:

...our iMac is working fine and I just downloaded the disk performance app in my OP out of curiosity...

Click to expand...

Good deal. Glad to hear it's working fine.

- Nick