Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Which is faster: copying from mounted AOMEI image or from external HD via USB 2?

(1/2) > >>

dr_andus:
I need to copy over a few hundred Gigs of data back onto my PC's hard drive and was wondering which is faster:


* copying from mounted AOMEI image or
* from external HD via USB 2.0?
I'm currently copying via the mounted image, and some 200+ Gigs are predicted to be copied over in about 2 hours.

Am I correct to assume that via the AOMEI image should be faster, as it's done internally and there is less hardware, wires etc. involved, which should make it faster than external HD, USB 2.0 cable etc.?

tomos:
I dont know.
You could try figuring it out --

* USB2 has a 60MB a second limit -- but the problem is it often only reaches ~30 maximum -- will depend on your external drive and file sizes
* 1GB is 1,000MB ....
* Aomei's 100GB per hour would be ~28MB.p.s. if I'm correct
I wouldnt bother starting again - would probably be about the same rate.

dr_andus:

* Aomei's 100GB per hour would be ~28MB.p.s. if I'm correct-tomos (September 22, 2015, 08:39 AM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks. I just checked in the Dopus popup and for the AOMEI transfer it says

* average: 11.5 MB/s
* peak: 39.3 MB/s
I'm waiting to do another batch, so I'll do that via the USB 2.0 and compare.

dr_andus:
OK, this was a bit counterintuitive, but it looks like the USB 2.0 transfer was quicker for some reason:

* average: 15.9 MB/s
* peak: 38.6 MB/s

tomos:
OK, this was a bit counterintuitive, but it looks like the USB 2.0 transfer was quicker for some reason:

* average: 15.9 MB/s
* peak: 38.6 MB/s-dr_andus (September 22, 2015, 10:18 AM)
--- End quote ---

good to know :up:
it's possibly because Aomei is trying to get the files out of a compressed image

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page