Why is my SATA backup slower than my USB 3 backup?

[techmanc]

long story short I just did 2 backups using Acronis True Image 2018 hereby will call it ATI for short and I was surprised to see a much faster backup speed of my 1tb SSD and time for full backup went from 4hrs on the slow sata connected drive and about 2hs on my USB 3 external drive.

ATI show the backup speed in mbs as well

The backup on USB 3 drive was 1092 mbs and time was 1 hr 2 5min.
SATA backup was 492mbs and time was 3 hr 35 mins.

I am happy the USB 3 backup was fast but not sure why my SATA connection.

I am using 3tb and 5tb seagate drive and the SATA has 7200 rpm as opposed to I think 5900 for the 5tb.

Posting for feedback/questions thanks.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

We'd have to know the model #s of the two drives, not just capacity and RPM. Would also need to know which drive was connected to which interface. (That's not clear from your post.)

Would also need to know if the drives had other data on them, and how much. (Drive performance in a hard drive will vary depending on where the data is written - faster sections get written to first, and sequential performance will tend to drop off gradually as you fill a drive.

~60MB/sec isn't slow, exactly - it'd be reasonable if a drive was using SMR, for instance.

 

[techmanc]

I have posed links of my equipment and got that no one wants to click on my links to see whats there and I no desire to dig out all the specs and manually post them as I cant type as it is and suffering from arthritis and pain due to car accident that left me disabled so how are people posting their specs and I will do the same.

 

[JackMDS]

While the back-up drives are connected to the computer and nothing is running use this Portable Free App to measure the read Write of each drive.

https://crystalmark.info/redirect.php?product=CrystalDiskMark


😎

 

[techmanc]

While the back-up drives are connected to the computer and nothing is running use this Portable Free App to measure the read Write of each drive.

https://crystalmark.info/redirect.php?product=CrystalDiskMark


😎

I am already using that but first time I looked quick at my SSD the SATA and USB drive I did not see any major increase drive speed I will test again later

How many test do I need to get good results as the default settings more test than are needed for quick checkup?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

I have posed links of my equipment and got that no one wants to click on my links to see whats there and I no desire to dig out all the specs and manually post them as I cant type as it is and suffering from arthritis and pain due to car accident that left me disabled so how are people posting their specs and I will do the same.

Nothing wrong with links. Not sure who would have given you crap for that unless you were in violation of a different forum rule (price checks, ebay auction links, etc.)

Posting the model number of the drives is sufficient - if somebody is curious enough to take a crack at figuring out your problem, they can quickly find the full specs of the drive with that. We'd obviously also need to know which one is connected via which interface.

As it stands, you haven't provided enough information to determine if there even is a problem, let alone what the problem might be.

 

[techmanc]

Ok I was finally able both drives fully here is results..

3tb drive

CrystalDiskMark 6.0.0 x64 (C) 2007-2017 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : https://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 bytes/s [SATA/600 = 600,000,000 bytes/s]
* KB = 1000 bytes, KiB = 1024 bytes
Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) : 165.946 MB/s
Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) : 156.585 MB/s
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1.036 MB/s [ 252.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1.087 MB/s [ 265.4 IOPS]
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 1.029 MB/s [ 251.2 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 1.046 MB/s [ 255.4 IOPS]
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 0.269 MB/s [ 65.7 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 1.112 MB/s [ 271.5 IOPS]
Test : 1024 MiB [E: 23.5% (657.2/2794.4 GiB)] (x5) [Interval=5 sec]
Date : 2018/02/15 11:44:09
OS : Windows 10 Professional [10.0 Build 16299] (x64)


5tb drive

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 6.0.0 x64 (C) 2007-2017 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : https://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 bytes/s [SATA/600 = 600,000,000 bytes/s]
* KB = 1000 bytes, KiB = 1024 bytes
Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) : 83.488 MB/s
Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) : 82.681 MB/s
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 0.462 MB/s [ 112.8 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 8.449 MB/s [ 2062.7 IOPS]
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 0.456 MB/s [ 111.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 8.566 MB/s [ 2091.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 0.418 MB/s [ 102.1 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 7.797 MB/s [ 1903.6 IOPS]
Test : 1024 MiB [F: 34.5% (1606.9/4657.4 GiB)] (x5) [Interval=5 sec]
Date : 2018/02/15 12:03:45
OS : Windows 10 Professional [10.0 Build 16299] (x64)


From what I see is the 3tb sata drive seem faster than the 5tb usb 3 drive but I only been using the first number in the test to determine that right?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

From what I see is the 3tb sata drive seem faster than the 5tb usb 3 drive but I only been using the first number in the test to determine that right?

It's faster than the 5TB across the board, not just the one sequential test. That said, the sequential benchmark is the closest thing to how the backup process works, so you're looking at the right number.

You're only using a 1GB hunk of test data, which might not give you an accurate representation. (I'd do at least 10x that) but it's still pretty obvious that the 3TB SATA drive should be faster than the 5TB USB drive.

Neither one is full enough for that to be a problem. The only other thing I can think is that there was something else running during the backup to the SATA drive that interfered with / stole time from the backup process. Maybe a virus scan? Or maybe the 3TB is in early-stage failure and is returning a lot of errors? (Check SMART status if you can.)

 

[JackMDS]

If you are using ATI that is installed on the computer's Drive.

Make a Boot USB (or CD) of ATI and use the Boot version.

https://kb.acronis.com/content/1526

In general making the image is much faster and accurate when the Drive to backup from is not OS Active (I.e, running Windows) when the backup is done.


😎

 

[techmanc]

It's faster than the 5TB across the board, not just the one sequential test. That said, the sequential benchmark is the closest thing to how the backup process works, so you're looking at the right number.

You're only using a 1GB hunk of test data, which might not give you an accurate representation. (I'd do at least 10x that) but it's still pretty obvious that the 3TB SATA drive should be faster than the 5TB USB drive.

Neither one is full enough for that to be a problem. The only other thing I can think is that there was something else running during the backup to the SATA drive that interfered with / stole time from the backup process. Maybe a virus scan? Or maybe the 3TB is in early-stage failure and is returning a lot of errors? (Check SMART status if you can.)

I just use my 3tb drive for my just backing up my 1tb SSD with about 700-800gb on it any I know I always been seeing this low backup speed even when starting with a fresh drive so thats not the problem. I was about 50% full on my 5tb when I did my backup yesterday as well.