TeraCopy slower + not copying all the files ?

jackinthebox · 13 Oct 2011

I've just purchased a Seagate FreeAgent goflex ultra portable drive 1 TB usb 3.0 which I'm using it on my usb 2.0 port on the back of the computer. I've a front usb ports but its not giving it enough power so it's only working on the back side.

I'm trying to copy some files using TeraCopy from my old transcend 500gb drive into this new seagate goflex 1TB drive. But its only giving me speed between 15-22 mb/sec on usb 2.0, without TeraCopy its even much slower. Both drives are connected on usb 2.0 on windows 7. Why is it not giving me atleast 30 mb/sec ? Should I return this drive and buy some other brand like Western digital or transcend ? Which external hdd get atleast 30-35 mb/sec on usb 2.0 ?

Another problem is that the folders which I dragged and dropped into TeraCopy originally has 106,301 files inside them but TeraCopy says it is copying only 106,277 files. Why would it not copy all the files ?

My system specs:
Intel core 2 cpu 4400 @ 2.00ghz
windows 7 SP1 32 bit home premium
4gb ram

Here's the screenshot:

logicearth · 13 Oct 2011

It is because both drives are USB and that doubles the overhead plus the CPU cost. USB is a shared BUS and shared CPU. Its going to take a while regardless.

jackinthebox · 13 Oct 2011

logicearth said:

It is because both drives are USB and that doubles the overhead plus the CPU cost. USB is a shared BUS and shared CPU. Its going to take a while regardless.

I also tried the seagate 1tb drive on my laptop which has windows xp, it gave write speed of only around 17-22 mb/sec

Corazon · 13 Oct 2011

You'll only reach the maximum speeds if you copy few very large files (and the drives are reasonably defragmented). Copying more than 100K files suggests many of them are very small, the added overhead will slow the transfer down. What you're seeing is quite normal.

As for why Teracopy seems to copy all but 24 files, I'm guessing that these 24 files are hidden in the Recycle Bin and/or System Information folders. You wouldn't be able to copy what's in these folders anyway, nor have any need to.

MilesAhead · 13 Oct 2011

If you have a free PCIexpress slot I would recommend getting a USB 3.0 dual port card. I have an SIIG in both my dual core and quad HP PCs. Before my USB 3.0 docking stations arrived I tried my Seagate USB 2.0 drive in the USB 3.0 port. (This drive has a power supply. It's not powered by the USB port.) I got about a 15% write increase just by plugging it in to the SIIG card. I have SIIG USB 3.0 docking stations with WD Caviar Black 6 Gb/s drives. They run at full speed. My drives in the docks are faster than the internal system drives. Great for muxing/demuxing video.

Crystal Disk Mark Sequential Write numbers are in the 130s. Buying External drives you are paying for the boxes.

jackinthebox · 14 Oct 2011

Okay I just tested it again. I tested it by creating a random 3 gb file and copying it from my internal hdd to both of my external hard drives.

My old 500 gb transcend drive gave max speed of 22mb/sec on windows explore and gave max speed of 25 mb/sec when I tried copy it from a 3rd party tool like(fast copy)

My new drive which is seagate goflex 1 TB portable jumped straight to 70mb/sec for couple of seconds then got down to 29-32 mb/sec on windows explorer (I dont know if its accurate) but on fastcopy software it gave constant 25.X mb/sec speed while I was copying that 3GB dump file.

So I think fastcopy results are accurate that is both drives seems to be giving 25mb/sec on usb 2.0. But while I copy large number of small files, speed goes slower to 12-19 mb/sec. So I think its okay.

Maybe there might some tweak to optimize the speed on usb 2.0

Corazon · 14 Oct 2011

Nope, no tweak. This is as good as you get - with many small files it will always slow down. Your numbers are perfectly fine.

MilesAhead · 14 Oct 2011

Corazon said:

Nope, no tweak. This is as good as you get - with many small files it will always slow down. Your numbers are perfectly fine.

+1. With lots of little files there's a lot more overhead. Create the file, write hardly anything into it, close it. I only get a few MB/s copying lots of tiny files even on USB 3.0.