On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:10:07 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Tim Cook wrote:
> 
>> Added a 1 TB external USB drive.  Cost:  $209.11 incl. shipping.
> 
> IME, USB harddrives are drastically slower than even the lamest IDE
> one...

I dunno, I've got two 1 TB USB drives; on USB 1.1 it's painful, but on 
USB 2.0 it's not too bad.  I tend to use them for archival purposes more 
than anything, but when I do the transfers in the office (local backup of 
materials since I work from home most of the time), the performance isn't 
bad.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Tim Cook wrote:
> 
>> Added a 1 TB external USB drive.  Cost:  $209.11 incl. shipping.
> 
> IME, USB harddrives are drastically slower than even the lamest IDE one...

About 7x faster to read from internal than write to external USB at what 
it's currently doing, but it should be getting 47 MB/s the way it 
started out instead of plodding along at 13...but even at 13 MB/s it's 
enough to transfer a 23-minute video in 15 seconds.  Considering I got 
it to expand my archival space, I am content.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.digitalartsuk.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>
>> IME, USB harddrives are drastically slower than even the lamest IDE 
>> one...
> 
> About 7x faster to read from internal than write to external USB at what 
> it's currently doing, but it should be getting 47 MB/s the way it 
> started out instead of plodding along at 13...but even at 13 MB/s it's 

Actually, 47MB/s outrun even UDMA-channel (33MB/s).

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 22:54:30 +0200, Eero Ahonen  
<aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> Actually, 47MB/s outrun even UDMA-channel (33MB/s).

Except that (P)ATA-UDMA goes up to 133 MB/s (though some manufacturers  
stick to ATA/100) and USB drives typically come nowhere near 47 MB/s.


-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:

> About 7x faster to read from internal than write to external USB at what 
> it's currently doing, but it should be getting 47 MB/s the way it 
> started out instead of plodding along at 13...

Disk fragmentation?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Tim Cook wrote:
>
> > Added a 1 TB external USB drive.  Cost:  $209.11 incl. shipping.
>
> IME, USB harddrives are drastically slower than even the lamest IDE one...
>
> --
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Why not use eSATA?

Post a reply to this message

Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> 
> Except that (P)ATA-UDMA goes up to 133 MB/s (though some manufacturers 
> stick to ATA/100) and USB drives typically come nowhere near 47 MB/s.
> 

Later UDMA's yes, but the original (first) UDMA was slower than the 
47MB/s, which Tim got at the beginning. Practically this proves the 
possibility to find a USB/IDE -diskpair, where the USB-disk performs 
better than the IDE-one.

Just splitting some hairs...

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Aydan wrote:
> 
> Why not use eSATA?
> 

BTW, is eSATA a one-device-per-channel -bus, or can it be used to hook 
n+1 drives via one cable?

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Tim Cook wrote:
> 
>> About 7x faster to read from internal than write to external USB at 
>> what it's currently doing, but it should be getting 47 MB/s the way it 
>> started out instead of plodding along at 13...
> 
> Disk fragmentation?

Or memory buffering, depending on how much RAM you have. I regularly 
wind up in the situation where I make 10 gig of changes in a short 
timeframe on the machine with 16G of RAM, and the (say) untar finishes 
in 40 seconds, and running 'sync' afterwards takes another 90. :-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:12:01 +0200, Eero Ahonen  
<aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> BTW, is eSATA a one-device-per-channel -bus, or can it be used to hook  
> n+1 drives via one cable?

http://www.serialata.org/portmultiplier.asp


-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message