Transfer speed test - eSata vs USB 3.0

Luckystar · 25 Jan 2011

Hey peeps,

I have a request to you all.

Now first off - I know each HDD has different speeds but i am after an average.

What i would like is for people on this forum to do a test for me to help me decide.

If you have eSata or USB 3.0 and an external HDD connected, could you copy a 1gb folder/file and a 200mb folder/file from your Windows drive to the ext device and then copy back again and possibly do a complete move of those folders/files as well.

I want to know how long each takes.

Please post with your results.

I want to see what is faster out of the two interfaces.
If you have a Western Digital drive, that will help no end but it does not have to be.

Many thanks in advance
Lucky

HonorGamer · 25 Jan 2011

Well i have USB 3.0 and eSata with my new motherboard, but i do not have a external HDD. I will get one soon, and get back to you.

pparks1 · 25 Jan 2011

Source Drive: Seagate ST9160411ASG. 160GB Seagate Momentus 7200.3, 7200RPM Laptop hard drive.
Ext. Drive: Samsung SpinPoint HD204UI, 2TB 5400RPM drive in ThermalTake BlacX dock (Amazon.com: Thermaltake BlacX eSATA USB Docking Station: Electronics)

My Source Files (sorry, not exactly the size you asked for, but as close as I could easily get with what I had on hand)
1). 2,327,937,024 byte ISO file
2). 299,660,232 byte ISO file
3). 310,038,999 bytes in 73 files and 8 folders

Testing over eSATA to Dell E6400 Laptop with internal eSATA port
My test results
Copy 1st source to external drive. 35 seconds. Avg 66,512,486 bytes per second
Copy 2nd source to external drive. 5.4 seconds. Avg 55,490,783 bytes per second
Copy 3rd source to external drive. 8.2 seconds. Avg 37,809,634 bytes per second

Copy 1st source back to C drive. 34.5 seconds. Avg 67,476,436 bytes per second
Copy 2nd source back to C drive. 5.8 seconds. Avg 51,663,833 bytes per second
Copy 3rd source back to C drive. 6.8 seconds. Avg 45,593,970 bytes per second

Move from Laptop HD to Ext. 1st source. 37.5 seconds. Avg of 62,078,320 bytes per second
Move from Laptop HD to Ext. 2nd source. 6.7 seconds. Avg of 44,723,915 bytes per second
Move from Laptop HD to Ext. 3rd source. 7.8 seconds. Avg of 39,748,589 bytes per second.

Cr00zng · 25 Jan 2011

Well, I have an eSATA drive with Seagate 1TBs SATA II drive in the case. The copy results from the C300 SSD drive to the eSATA has various results and I am not sure that Windows copying is accurate, at least in my tests.

Here are three copy test results:

1,023,386,131 bytes in 37 seconds, 2,185 files, 506 folders, 28 MB/s
2,824,436,924 in 22 seconds, 17 files, 128 MB/s
1,048,576,000 in 4 seconds, 1 file, 264 MB/s

The transfer rate depends on the number of files, but the numbers look out of whack. The ATTO benchmark shows this for the eSATA drive:

Transfer speed test - eSata vs USB 3.0-attogb.jpg

I am not sure as to why Windows shows different numbers? While the Seagate does have 32MB cashe, I doubt that it would impact the transfer rate that much.

essenbe · 25 Jan 2011

Sorry I can't help right now, my MB is rma'd. If this helps - Macrium backup approx 25GB on a Vertex2. To External Samsung hd103SJ 7200 in a Rosewill esata case takes 3:40. Same backup to 7200 rpm Seagate usb 3.0 external 6:05. My specs will show a sata 6Gb/s sata and USB 3.0 MB.

BTW: The same backup to an internal drive is the same time as the eSATA external. The internal drive is a SATA3, the external is an eSATA2. My experience shows that eSATA will always be faster than USB. FWIW, I was told that eSATA is transmitting a sata signal to a sata drive. A USB is transferring a different type of signal and has to be converted to sata causing a bottleneck for the usb.

Cr00zng · 25 Jan 2011

The signal/protocol is changed for the USB 3.0 devices, it is using the same 8b/10b encoding as the SATA does. Presumably, this will eliminate the bottleneck related to the conversion of the signals.

Keep in mind that in addition to the USB 3.0 port and devices, the USB 3.0 cable is also required. The latter one has two additional pairs of wires for high speed transfers, next to the standard USB 2.0 and the power wires.

The USB 3.0's nominal speed of 5Gbs is still slower than eSATA 3.0 speed of 6.0Gbs. With mechanical hard drives, that cannot reach SATA 2.0 speed, it's not an issue; both types of interfaces should have the same speed for the given drive. In the case of the external SSD drive, the USB 3.0 interface could be a limiting factor and depends on the SSD drive's specifications.

Luckystar · 25 Jan 2011

This is fantastic stuff guys. Please keep it up.

@cr00zng - So basicly either way eSata is still faster than USB overall for a HDD then?

Lucky

essenbe · 25 Jan 2011

Luckystar said:

This is fantastic stuff guys. Please keep it up.

@cr00zng - So basicly either way eSata is still faster than USB overall for a HDD then?

I am not who you addressed the question to, but I said earlier that it was. I have and use both, and in my experience eSATA is faster. That's my story and I'll stick to it.

whs · 25 Jan 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqlqCoQMLsQ
http://www.barefeats.com/hard136.html

Cr00zng · 25 Jan 2011

whs said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqlqCoQMLsQ
http://www.barefeats.com/hard136.html

Thanks for the links whs...

Well, I doubt that the guy in the video had any problems with cooling that system

What he was doing is comparing transfer speeds of the USB 3.0 and eSATA 2.0 interfaces, presumably the internal connection was to the SATA 2.0 port. All of his SSDs drives had SATA 2.0 interfaces as well. His assumption that the OCZ Vertex read speed (275MBs) is faster that any of the interfaces (300MBs for SATA 2.0 and 400MBs for USB 3.0) was just wrong.

While the test setup is questionable, the results speak for themselves. The USB 3.0 has barely eclipsed the performance of the eSATA 2.0. For all practical purposes, you could call this a tie knowing how knowledgeable this guy was

I am not sure if there's much conclusion can be drawn from the MAC link. They've also used SATA 2.0 drives and interfaces, in addition to the USB 3.0. The latter one isn't "officially" supported by Apple as of yet AFAIK, accordingly the results should be viewed as such.

It seems that for the time being, or until all of the bugs are removed for the USB 3.0, even the eSATA 2.0 interface is faster. That should take about a year plus the time it takes to gain popularity to spread the USB 3.0 around. Until then, and just like essenbe had experienced, the eSATA will be faster...

While Intel motherboard currently don't support eSATA 3.0 interface, it is available with a PCIe x4 card which will support throughput of 600MBs. It doesn't seem at this point that the eSATA 3.0 interface will be integrated into the Intel motherboard anytime soon for number of reasons...