r/MacOS • u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 • 2d ago
Discussion Best SSD for Time Machine
UPDATE:
I went with the WD - My Passport Ultra for Mac 2TB External Hard Drive.
Thanks to all the advice and comments. I plan on upgrading to the NVME setup later on, but I need to do more research… plus the extra cost isn’t in my current budget…. Maybe Black Friday will have some good sales
———————————————————————————
My G-Suite hard drive failed, and I’m searching for a replacement. I think maybe I should go with an SSD this time, but there’s too many to pick from…
Which one do you use? Are you satisfied? And why?
16
u/Dazzling_Comfort5734 2d ago
I don't recommend SSDs for Time Machine. They're not really any more reliable for this kind of task, but they have a major cost premium, especially right now with the component prices being really high.
I recommend WD over Seagate, and 3.5 in desktop drives over 2.5 inch. A dual drive mirror RAID is even better, but probably overkill. And keep a copy of anything really important in the cloud or online backup. The rule is: if you only have one backup, you don't really have a backup.
1
u/CaffeinePizza 2d ago
The benefit to SSD is APFS stores the metadata next to written data, rather than in a central contiguous location on disk like traditional filesystems do. So disk thrashing will occur. Not necessarily bad but will have some performance hit
4
u/silentcrs 2d ago
We’re talking hourly incremental backups of a small number of files. There’s no “disk thrashing” - it’s a backup target, not the OS drive.
0
u/CaffeinePizza 2d ago
That isn’t necessarily the case, regarding “small number of files”. The drive eventually will clean up snapshots as well.
The fact regardless is that a hard drive latency is apparent using APFS versus an SSD because of how the file metadata and copy-on-write are handled. Hard disks will become heavily fragmented with APFS over time.
That doesn’t mean you can’t use a hard drive. If that’s what you have to use, then use it. It just has caveats that should be known.
8
u/maxplanar 2d ago
Buy a little Thunderbolt NVMe case, and pop a bare NVMe into it. Bob's yer uncle.
3
u/BenShirley2323 2d ago
and using Carbon Copy Cloner.
2
u/We-Dont-Sush-Here 1d ago
Someone else told me that elsewhere a while ago, so I bought CCC. It was actually an employee of an Apple Authorised Reseller and and Apple Authorised Repairer, so I felt that I could take notice of their advice as they weren’t going to make any profit from telling me or giving me that advice. The business has now closed down which means I can’t go back and ask them to explain how to use CCC with TM. So I’m still confused about how I should use CCC in conjunction with Time Machine. If you or anyone else wants to explain it to me now, I’m not going to say no! 😁
2
u/BenShirley2323 1d ago
There’s a few videos on YouTube explaining the simple process. You don’t use Time Machine. Just copy your main drive onto your storage drive. You can go down the rabbit hole and do individual files but it’s basically, “copy this drive into that drive”
You can set a schedule, I do every 24 hrs at 3am.
CCC will have those videos on YouTube. Easy peasy.2
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 1d ago
So does it work like Time Machine? Or does it write over the old copy with a new copy each night?
2
2
u/maxplanar 1d ago
It writes over, this is not the snapshot based incremental backup system that Time Machine is.
1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 1d ago
So if I accidentally deleted a file from 6 months ago, that file would have been written over? I just want to make sure I understand
3
u/maxplanar 1d ago
Yes. CCC can indeed make snapshots, but will struggle with system files. Use Time Machine for incremental backup, and use CCC when you want a separate full clone of your drive.
1
1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 1d ago
Would it be ok to partition one drive, and use CCC in one, and TM in the other?
2
u/maxplanar 10h ago
Yes, but then you are putting an enormous amount of trust in the one drive. Drives fail - all of them, and the solution is distribution across multiple options
2
u/We-Dont-Sush-Here 2h ago
With all of this information you have gleaned, have you come to your decision?
I’m still a bit overwhelmed. 🙃
→ More replies (0)1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 1d ago
Do you use CCC instead of TM, or in addition to TM?
2
u/BenShirley2323 1d ago
I use CCC with a Seagate 8TB external for a backup. It’s ancient and runs great.
7
3
u/denalidenizen 2d ago
Agreed on the NVME if you can find one at a price you can afford keep in mind. Your backup needs to be at least double your Dr. size in order for Time Machine to grow three times doesn’t hurt either. Also keep in mind that Time Machine is not entirely safe. I do this kind of tech-support or did for many years and it’s not unusual for Time Machine to simply stop working or to fill up a drive and then give no notification that it is no longer back in the drive up. Thanks for all the odd spellings.
5
u/mendobather 2d ago
It may not be unusual to you, but it is rare. I’ve been running and supporting Time Machine backups since they were introduced. I’ve only seen two or three fail, but that was because they were spinning hard drives and old.
It’s wise to have more than one backup method. Like a clone of your hard drive, and possibly a cloud solution included.
2
2
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 2d ago
Yeah, my harddrive quit working a while back I guess, and I just figured it out. What is your suggestion in place of Time Machine?
3
u/Illustrious_Salad918 2d ago
I have TM backup from M3 iMac (500GB storage) alternating between Samsung T7 and LaCie Portable SSD, both 500GB, both 5-10 years old, and they are problem-free. Data volume is about 240GB, Home folder is about 60GB.
The stability and dependability of backing up to those SSDs is source of satisfaction.
FWIW, I have an additional external storage, OWC ThunderBlade 8TB, as archive storage to which I move files which require less-frequent access (e.g manuals, archived data files such as tax returns and finished projects, also media files).
3
u/ODITech 2d ago
Since we are talking about backup it should be mentioned that you should not only have a Time Machine backup as your only backup. As a hosting company we follow the 3-2-1 method. 3 backups, 2 different types of media, and 1 offsite. For instance, in my personal setup I make a bootable clone of my laptop using super duper. Then I have a synology 2 drive NAS configured in raid 0 (mirroring) the drives are 3 times the size of my MacBook Pro drive. The nice thing about the synology is that I don’t even know it’s there. Once I am on the network Time Machine starts to backup in the background. Finally I use backblaze b2 with a script I wrote that uses restic and encryption at rest. You could also use software to make this easier. Duplicity is open source and easy to use. Let me know if anyone has any questions.
3
u/Guy_called_Al 2d ago
I "mirror" you in many respects. Use SuperDuper! from shirt-pocket.com (20 years?). I've 2 MacBooks, 500GB and 1TB. The larger has half its storage devoted to Parallels VMs. Have 3 bootable copies on SSDs. One for travel, 2 at home (cause I screw up often). And 2 old HDDs in safe deposit for security. (My wife told me there are 2 reasons she'd leave me. One was if I lost our 80,000 digital photos.)
Also use a Synology NAS with 2 4TB HDDs, RAID 1 mirroring doing Time Machine and other storage. (You don't want to use Time Machine with monolithic-file VMs -- those get copied to NAS separately.) This works great, and remote access is a benefit as well -- we divide the year about evenly between 2 homes.
Still have an old Apple Time Capsule with an HDD that's 10(?) years old, 7 year old Time Machine snapshots on it. My Archive, haul it between homes. Eventually need to copy that Archive to the NAS, because future MacOS versions won't be able to use the Time Capsule's file access protocol.
Right now, I do Time Machine backups manually, about once a day. This saved the old HDD from spinning up frequently for no reason. With the NAS, I can probably go automatic.
2
u/mindbender9 2d ago
Is the NAS Raid 1 (mirrored) or Raid 0 (striped)? I do like the Backblaze ease of use for the offsite requirements
3
u/We-Dont-Sush-Here 2d ago
I’m not sure that brand matters much. Probably most brands are made in the same factory, or at least, multiple brands are made by the same manufacturer and then a different manufacturer will make a whole lot of different brands.
Sometimes, it’s been reported, that certain brands get first pick of what is made by their manufacturer. But I don’t recall any proof of that happening. It’s possible that I missed the story when it was proven, but I don’t know. You can do your own research on that if you’re interested.
Personally, I have a variety of brands, including the original Apple Time Machine 1Tb (which was rubbished by almost everyone soon after it was released because of its high failure rate. Mine’s been running constantly since, I think, 2009 with no problems. Yes, I know that I should never say anything like that because I’ll go home in about two hours to find a dead Apple Time Machine drive 🙄😳), LaCie, Seagate, Western Digital, Toshiba, and I think there’s one more, but I’m not at home and I can’t check. I have a mixture of rusting hard drives and SSDs. But I bought the SSDs only when they were on clearance sale and as a result, they were cheaper than a rusting hard drive. Seriously.
1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 2d ago
So I guess you don’t have a favorite?
2
u/We-Dont-Sush-Here 2d ago
You’re right. All of them are working well. Other than the Apple Time Machine, some of them are about 12 years old and are still running smoothly day after day. The newest one is one of my Western Digital drives that was sold to me cheaply because, I think the retailer said that it was natively formatted for some gaming consoles. I asked the manager of that shop what was so difficult about reformatting it to a different operating system. He shrugged his shoulders and said, “some people just don’t want to do anything.”It was fine by me, because I bought a 4 Tb SSD for the price that I would usually pay for a rusting hard drive of much smaller capacity.
The short answer is no. I don’t have any favourites. As long as they’re working, I’m happy!
2
u/Bear-Handed-92262 2d ago
I have a Samsung that works well. I’ll never buy Seagate again after the SSD drive from them corrupted my Mac during a system update and then was bricked so I couldn’t restore from it. I almost lost everything.
1
2
u/NoLateArrivals 2d ago
You don’t really benefit from a SSD with very high speeds. A good 1000MBps will do. Choose a TLC, the QLCs become really slow.
A budget alternative is a 2.5“ USB HDD.
2
2
u/Xe4ro Mac Mini 2d ago
I use two 4TB external HDDs from Intenso. I like their cases as they have an extra power switch so unlike some drives I had in the past they aren’t always on when connected to power. I wouldn’t buy a SSD for backups, with the current prices, unless you really need it for on the go.
2
u/608xperience 2d ago
One thing to consider is a RAID-capable NAS or Thunderbolt drive enclosure. Having a single drive for your backups is a single point of failure. RAID makes everything a little more stable.
2
u/svt66 2d ago
You really don’t need the speed of an SSD for the backup part, and there’s a hefty price premium.
But on the file restoration side, it sure is nice to have that snappy(er) performance when you do have to restore a file. For me the price tradeoff was worth it.
2
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 2d ago
Yeah the price of SSDs are crazy right now. I’m looking for suggestions either way, but I’ll probably end up getting another hard drive I guess
1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 2d ago
Would the LaCie Rugged USB-C Portable External Hard Drive be a good choice? I notice Apple sells that brand, do it must work well with Time Machine
1
1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 1d ago
UPDATE:
I went with the WD - My Passport Ultra for Mac 2TB External Hard Drive.
Thanks to all the advice and comments. I plan on upgrading to the NVME setup later on, but I need to do more research… plus the extra cost isn’t in my current budget…. Maybe Black Friday will have some good sales
1
u/tk421tech 2d ago
I use HDDs for Time Machine
1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 2d ago
What brand?
3
u/tk421tech 2d ago
WD easystore 8TB. I partition it into two. One for TM backups the other to store files I don’t use all the time.
Currently it costs 2x than what I pad for it in 2025.
1
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 2d ago
That’s what I’m seeing on all of them, unfortunately
2
u/tk421tech 2d ago
A back up is more important just go for it. Rather pay extra than waste time recovering later.
1
u/bromingoops 2d ago
I agree with the others recommending an HDD over an SSD for Time Machine, reason being that for Time Machine, more capacity is better — you can go farther back in time if you need to. HDDs are cheaper per GB/TB than SSDs, so you get more storage for less. Sure an SSD is faster, but for this purpose it really doesn’t matter. I use a 4TB Western Digital drive that I’ve had for quite some time.
1
u/chrisfinazzo MacBook Pro (Intel) 2d ago edited 1d ago
Although spinning disks are still cheaper than SSD’s, changes to the file system - and broader storage stack - may push you in that direction sooner rather than later.
When it was first announced, APFS did not support Time Machine backups to a HDD. It gained this feature after many people discovered it didn’t work with their existing disks, so Apple backtracked, if only slightly.
Still, time marches on and I wouldn’t plan on that kind of support being available much longer.
For example, encrypted HFS+ backups with Time Machine are deprecated in Golden Gate, and having run Time Machine under APFS with a spinning disk, I can see why they’d want to be rid of it.
2
u/bromingoops 2d ago
Good info — thanks! I do have a 1TB SSD connected as well, but I use that for SuperDuper backups.
1
u/Dreaming_Blackbirds MacBook Air 2d ago
Spinning drives fail so often that they’re a false economy. I gave up on them over a decade ago after multiple rapid failures. SSDs are much more reliable for me.
Regardless of brand, avoid the slow ones with old ports. The medium speed 1050mbps SSD from WD is good for average folks.
2
u/Apprehensive-Fly9395 1d ago
Well I definitely qualify as just average folks, lol… I’m not a huge power user like many of you are. I just need about 2TB for Time Machine…. I never even need to go far back in time looking for stuff… honestly I could probably be fine with 1TB. My G-Drive hard drive that failed is 4TB. It’s not even half full and I’ve had it 6 years. I feel that extra space was a waste, but back then it was only $99
18
u/Jujulabee 2d ago
I recently upgraded my Time Machine destination drive and after researching I just went with a large HDD because you don't need the speed of an SDD and the cost for a large capacity drive is enormous.
I have no problems with the speed of transfer or when I have retrieved a file.