Windows 7: How Fast is Your USB?

According to PCMag, and retold in HD detail on Tech in Hiding, the results may surprise you.

Not so Super Speed USB 3.0 | Tech in Hiding

Yep...pretty surprising when you look at a REAL resource instead.

Early look at USB 3.0 X25-M SSD performance versus USB 2.0, eSATA and more Early look at USB 3.0 X25-M SSD performance versus USB 2.0, eSATA and more :: TweakTown

A quick first look at USB 3.0 performance - The Tech Report - Page 1

I get insanely fast writes over USB2.0 to my WD externals.
A friend just bought the WD My Book 3.0 and I installed the card in his PC and tested it out really quick and it was twice as fast using USB3, but it was 50% slower than my 1TB black in a My Book USB2 case.

Also, there is a different connector on the Drive so you need a special cable right now for USB3 devices. the other end is a standard looking USB end that plugs into any USB port on your pc.

Case to post HDTune benchmarks for proof of that?

I'll try and run HD Tune at his place when I bring his drive back and get a USB3 speed.
We just timed the transfers and used the Windows transfer speed.

Here are 3 HD Tune Benches for 3 external drives on USB2 on my machine that I just ran and they all look like they run about the same speed,
500GB WD My Book
1TB Black in a My Book case
My Book 3.0 1TB

Pretty much standard USB 2.0 speeds...

That Western Digital MyBook 3.0 needs to be plugged into the USB 3.0 PCIe card FYI. It will work in a USB 2.0 port but at reduced speed (obviously).

Here's proof of that: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/rev...my_book_30_1tb

First off, I just wanted to say that's a bit of a nasty tone of voice you got there. PCMag is a trusted and accredited source for computer information.

Secondly, I ran some of my own tests. While yes, HD Tune will give you a rate of about 33mb/s, HD Tune is not real world testing, which was what was performed in the article in question. HD Tune is benchmarking, what they did was a simple file copy test, what normal people do. After doing my own tests in a similar manner to theirs, I was surprised to find that yes, you do achieve speeds of about twice their reported speeds, in my case on a USB 2.0 line I received 27mb/s average while transferring about 1gb of data in the form of small files such as MP3's, and large program files such as .iso's.

One lurking variable that I have not tested yet may be hard drive caching. In the reported study they moved 26gbs of data, in the form of 16,000 files. I have not done this yet, but when I do the results may be interesting.

My only other guess would be that the device that they used in testing, a PCI Express slot card, created a hidden variable unforeseen. I am currently trying to get in contact with the writer of the original article to verify this possibility.

Thank you for pointing out the possible error in this study. I'll update the article as soon as I can receive some confirmation.

We were looking at this number and timing the transfers, but I will run HD tune at my friends place with the new drive since I installed the card in his PC.
My 1TB Black


My Book 500GB

How can you tell "tone" in black and white text? If you can figure that out you might want to pass it along to the first deaf person you see.

I merely pointed out that the benchmarks are fraudulent. I have provided proof from 3 different resources.

PCMag is not a trusted and accredited anything. They are just a group of people that got together to produce a magazine that doesn't even really sell. Half of the magazine is fed with advertisements just so they can make some sort of money. Look, I'll even give you ANOTHER resource showing PCMag to be false: USB 3.0 Drive Smackdown - Performance - HD Tune Write Benchmarks

HDTune is one of many HDD benchmark utilities and is quite accurate in showing actual transfer rate across the entire drive itself. In regards to USB 2.0 it is very reliable in showing the limitations of USB 2.0 transfer speed. With USB 3.0 the hard drive itself is the bottleneck.

Windows transfer rates are not reliable because it's based upon buffered transfers between drives/partitions.

These again? Look, you already proved that actual transfer rate of your 1TB WD Black over USB 2.0 is a normal 33.1MB/s. Windows transfer rates aren't going to exceed the throughput limitation of the drive itself nor the limitation of the interface (USB 2.0).

Also, again, you might want to think twice before putting your pirated movie information up on public forums.