Is 1.2MB/sec between hard drives slow transfer?

Toxteth_OGrady

bod1467 wrote: »

What's the advantage/disadvantage/relevance (delete as appropriate) of AHCI?

Not much really for a conventional disk, apart from it's another permutation to try, i.e. with both disks on the same bus/controller.

poppellerant

As mentioned earlier, check the harddrives with HD Tune and see which has the slowest speed. Such low speeds often indicate a failing harddrive, but it could also be either faulty cabling or installation.

almillar

Did I miss how the drives are connected? If they're both connected via USB, it'll be really slow. Connecting them both to the computer via SATA would be better.

sk240

If it really is millions of smaller files then it could slow down to that kind of speed, but it really would have to be millions

mrbuchay

That speed is far too slow...even with many smaller files/folders!

Have you tried disabling the Antivirus to make sure its not scanning individual files?

Could be a failing HDD as the transfer will only function as fast as the slowest drive write speed.

Johnmcl7

bod1467 wrote: »

What's the advantage/disadvantage/relevance (delete as appropriate) of AHCI?

(Yes, I can read a Wiki, but a "layman's" explanation may help).

Basically disabling AHCI improves compatibility potentially at the cost of performance as it makes a SATA drive behave like a PATA drive. It was more of an issue back when Windows XP was the standard as it didn't support SATA natively so you either had to slipstream the drivers (making a custom Windows XP disk with the SATA drivers added if the manufacturer didn't provide one) or load the drivers from a USB floppy drive (bizarrely you couldn't load the drivers from a USB flash drive or anything else). So sometimes the simpler solution was to disable AHCI which allowed you to install XP as normal however with Vista and 7 it's less of an issue as they support SATA natively and if they need a driver you can just stick in a USB disk during the install and it will pick up the driver from that.

Even if running in non-AHCI mode the performance shouldn't be anywhere near as slow as that, if both drives are connected internally via SATA I'd try read/write performance to each of them individually as recommended to see if it's one drive causing an issue or it's something system wide.

John

Nine_Lives

The size of the folder to be transferred is 46.91GB
There are a combined 69,659 files in a combined 242 folders within the parent folder.

I've just noticed/realised now that the HDD being transferred FROM is connected to the PCI card. All HDDs are connected via SATA, however i ran out of SATA connections on my MOBO. The one being transferred to is connected to the MOBO, however the one being transferred from is connected via SATA to the PCI card.

Would this make a difference? I'll need to run that program when i get a minute.

S0litaire

Is it possible to re-arrange the drives so that both are using the motherboard SATA connections or the PCI SATA connections?

Not sure how your system is set up but. You *might* get better throughput if they are both using the same connection.

esuhl

Rather than just copying the files manually, you could try something like FreeFileSync. I find it to be faster and more reliable than a straightforward copy.

Also... if the files are heavily fragmented, would it save time to defragment the source drive first...?

debitcardmayhem

esuhl wrote: »

Rather than just copying the files manually, you could try something like FreeFileSync. I find it to be faster and more reliable than a straightforward copy.

Also... if the files are heavily fragmented, would it save time to defragment the source drive first...?

How would that save time