• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

USB 3.0 vs eSata 3 Gb/s (disappointing results)

13Gigatons

13Gigatons

Diamond Member
Sadly it looks as if current eSata is the better choice. I wonder how well eSata 6Gb/s would do?

USB 3.0 vs eSATA

2095.png


2093.png



----
 
Last edited:
Those benchies seem meaningless to me as far as USB3 vs eSATA is concerned. If they aren't testing the same devices with the different mediums, then we have no idea why there's a difference in transfer rates. It could be the controller, the cache or the RPMs. There are just too many variables. A more scientific test would suffice.
 
Arsynic said:
Those benchies seem meaningless to me as far as USB3 vs eSATA is concerned. If they aren't testing the same devices with the different mediums, then we have no idea why there's a difference in transfer rates. It could be the controller, the cache or the RPMs. There are just too many variables. A more scientific test would suffice.
Click to expand...


The test was done with equipment you can buy in the real world to get an idea of what results to expect. He did use SSD drives for both read and write drives so no RPMs.

Anyways I will laugh at the whole USB 3.0 5Gbps marketing hype.
 
13Gigatons said:
The test was done with equipment you can buy in the real world to get an idea of what results to expect. He did use SSD drives for both read and write drives so no RPMs.
Click to expand...
Who really cares if the "test" isn't indicative of USB3.0's benefits. Serious system builders didn't build USB3 systems for today, but for tomorrow.
 
More than twice as fast as USB2, and just as fast as eSATA for large file transfers such as music and media files. Sounds like an excellent upgrade from USB2 to me.

I'm curious how often people will transfer large amounts of data made up of small files. That is:
- If small files are usually in small total transfers, the speed difference doesn't matter (4 seconds vs. 2 for nnn MB, eek, 2 extra seconds!)
- If large total transfers are dominated by large files, there is no speed difference.

This is for external storage, so it's not like booting or running Windows where thousands of small files are read and written.
 
DaveSimmons said:
More than twice as fast as USB2, and just as fast as eSATA for large file transfers such as music and media files. Sounds like an excellent upgrade from USB2 to me.

I'm curious how often people will transfer large amounts of data made up of small files. That is:
- If small files are usually in small total transfers, the speed difference doesn't matter (4 seconds vs. 2 for nnn MB, eek, 2 extra seconds!)
- If large total transfers are dominated by large files, there is no speed difference.

This is for external storage, so it's not like booting or running Windows where thousands of small files are read and written.
Click to expand...

I mostly move large files like .tib's but sometimes move my mp3 collection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top