From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-130256-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1RIPul-0006Vv-Ai
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:10:27 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 76EE721C0A5;
Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:10:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292A121C225
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:08:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A54631B4016
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:08:51 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Score: -4.064
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.064 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.629, BAYES_00=-1.9,
FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.504,
T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL=0.01]
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id CNtn+Ou5Iags for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>;
Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:08:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E4321B400E
for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:08:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <lnx-gentoo-user@m.gmane.org>)
id 1RIPt3-0007gf-Qz
for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:08:41 +0200
Received: from athedsl-388583.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.69.229])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:08:41 +0200
Received: from realnc by athedsl-388583.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:08:41 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
From: Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@arcor.de>
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Disappointing USB3 performance
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:08:18 +0300
Organization: Lucas Barks
Message-ID: <j84d3e$rpg$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <j8477v$etg$1@dough.gmane.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-388583.home.otenet.gr
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111003 Thunderbird/7.0.1
In-Reply-To: <j8477v$etg$1@dough.gmane.org>
X-Archives-Salt:
X-Archives-Hash: 934248ef8e749b2113584718fa029327
On 10/24/2011 08:28 PM, walt wrote:
> I just bought an add-on USB3 adapter and outboard USB3/sata docking
> station, and I've been comparing the performance with my old e-sata
> outboard docking station. Not so good :(
>[...]
> Over at least six trials on each docking station I consistently
> get 105 seconds for USB and 84 seconds for e-sata, a 5:4 ratio
> in favor of e-sata.
Doesn't look surprising to me. The USB protocol doesn't compare
favorably with SATA. It's good for "dumb" data transfers, but lacks
stuff like native command queuing and DMA operations. Most features
supported by the actual hard disk can't be used when you connect it
though USB.