From: Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Disappointing USB3 performance
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 20:02:45 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <j84g95$f99$1@dough.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: j8477v$etg$1@dough.gmane.org
On 2011-10-24, walt <w41ter@gmail.com> 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 :(
>
> After getting some unreliable results with hdparm, I settled on
> copying one 3GB file from one partition of the outboard drive to
> another partition of the same drive. These results are highly
> reproducible, and favor e-sata over USB3 by a large margin.
>
> 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.
Not surprising. Did you expect that adding a gateway device to the
communication path and another protocol layer on top of SATA would
make things faster?
> I used the same hard disk and the same pci-e slot in the same
> minimally-loaded machine for all the runs, and got very consistent
> results every time.
>
> Basically, the USB3/sata docking station gets the same throughput as
> the older sata 1 drives connected to the onboard pci sata controller,
> which is still pretty respectable for an outboard drive, I think.
Yep, SATA performs the same as SATA. AFAIK, eSATA and SATA are
identical apart from the physical specs for the connector, a few minor
voltage level differences (to imporove noise tolerance), and hot-plug
support.
> So, has anyone out there done similar tests on USB3 drives yet?
There are disk drives that talk USB3 natively and aren't just using
USB<->SATA gateways?
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! How many retured
at bricklayers from FLORIDA
gmail.com are out purchasing PENCIL
SHARPENERS right NOW??
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-24 20:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-24 17:28 [gentoo-user] [OT] Disappointing USB3 performance walt
2011-10-24 17:45 ` Michael Mol
2011-10-24 19:08 ` [gentoo-user] " Nikos Chantziaras
2011-10-24 19:57 ` [gentoo-user] " Paul Hartman
2011-10-24 20:02 ` Grant Edwards [this message]
2011-10-24 21:17 ` [gentoo-user] " Florian Philipp
2011-10-24 21:31 ` Grant Edwards
2011-10-24 21:41 ` Paul Hartman
2011-10-24 23:18 ` walt
2011-10-24 23:27 ` Michael Mol
2011-10-25 0:07 ` Allan Gottlieb
2011-10-25 4:35 ` Adam Carter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='j84g95$f99$1@dough.gmane.org' \
--to=grant.b.edwards@gmail.com \
--cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox