We’ve found the biggest difference in USB 3.0 transfer performance to be with the cable/connection to the external drive (lots of USB 3.0 cables out there which generate errors on the line), and then the USB 3.0 SATA controller and firmware. I couldn’t tell from the Tom’s hardware review how they measured those numbers - could you tell? Hi Bri - configuration improvements can help, but there are limits. Sorry USB 3.0 may not be able to deliver as big a jump as you hoped. Hope that helps in terms of expectations. In the case of hard drives, there are bottlenecks at a number of layers. Of course, a typical scenario will be a mix of seq/dyn reads and writes. I know you’re not using our USB 3.0 SATA dock, but on it we use a LucidPort USB300 chipset ( …) in “BOT” mode (that is, using the standard Windows USB mass storage drivers), and here’s LucidPorts prior tests on performance in that scenario vs. 40 MB/s sounds a little slow, but not too out of the ballpark in terms of a real-world throughput for typical mix of operations to a SATA drive.Īlthough USB 3.0’s theoretical peak is 10x USB 2.0’s theoretical peak, neither gets the whole way there even in the best case.Īnd, at least for now with USB 3.0, the bottleneck is usually on the USB 3.0->SATA bridge controller side and to the drive itself.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
February 2023
Categories |