Slow dvd read speed in windows 7

[januaryabc]

My config:
Mainboard: GA-MA69G-S3H
DVD drive : Pioneer DVR 116 (IDE )
Harddisk : Hitachi 2TB (Sata Ahci)

When I copy file (~1gb) from DVD to harddisk , the speed only range from 4mb to 10mb, never go above 10mb. The disc is clean and no scratch. Test on CD Speed shown the drive can go up to 16x. Confirmed the drive is run in UDMA mode, not PIO mode.

But it is absolutely normal in file transfer between harddisk and usb flash drive. Problem exist only in DVD read.

Tried command in dos mode like xcopy , robocopy, but speed is just the same as copy in windows explorer.

Also I tried the trick of uncheck the remote differentiate compression, uncheck superfetch, uncheck windows search, and close the index service. Cannot solve the problem.

Any one experience the same as me and is it a common problem that need Micorsoft to solve?

 

[Victek]

My config:
Mainboard: GA-MA69G-S3H
DVD drive : Pioneer DVR 116 (IDE )
Harddisk : Hitachi 2TB (Sata Ahci)

When I copy file (~1gb) from DVD to harddisk , the speed only range from 4mb to 10mb, never go above 10mb. The disc is clean and no scratch. Test on CD Speed shown the drive can go up to 16x. Confirmed the drive is run in UDMA mode, not PIO mode.

.
A quick google search suggests there may be a firmware upgrade for your drive.

 

[Night Hawk]

Welcome to the Se7en Forums! januaryabc

With the OS drive being 2tb in size that will tend to see slower transfer rates as well as what read/write speeds the optical drive itself sees. Moving up from a pair of 16x dvd burners into a pair of 22x burners one ide and one sata they both realize faster transfers while large files or large numbers of files being moved or simply transferred always tend to slow things down a bit.

This is more commonly labeled hardware limitations rather then which version of Windows is being run as well as other OSs. Optical drives as well as hard drives other then SSDs are still limited by the ATA standards to the greater extent.

 

[januaryabc]

The 2TB harddisk is not OS drive and is just a separate disk for keeping some file. I also tested to move file from DVD to another harddisk (80gb size) which is on IDE port. But the result is still frustrating.

I remembered when I was using winxp there is no such problem and copying 1 dvd should always finish within several minutes. But now it need at least 8 minutes or more.

 

[CommonTater]

My config:
Mainboard: GA-MA69G-S3H
DVD drive : Pioneer DVR 116 (IDE )
Harddisk : Hitachi 2TB (Sata Ahci)

When I copy file (~1gb) from DVD to harddisk , the speed only range from 4mb to 10mb, never go above 10mb. The disc is clean and no scratch. Test on CD Speed shown the drive can go up to 16x. Confirmed the drive is run in UDMA mode, not PIO mode.

.
A quick google search suggests there may be a firmware upgrade for your drive.

If the drive behaves normally, no i/o errors, no strange clicks or buzzes... there is absolutely no reason to flash his firmware...

Flashing a drive (printer, bios, etc.) is a very risky thing to do. If it gets wrong in even the slightest way you've just converted a perfectly good device into landfill. Because of this risk --and it does happen!-- flashing firmware should be the absolute last resort before you trashcan the thing. It should never be the frontline advice given when nothing else has even been tried.

 

[CommonTater]

My config:
Mainboard: GA-MA69G-S3H
DVD drive : Pioneer DVR 116 (IDE )
Harddisk : Hitachi 2TB (Sata Ahci)

When I copy file (~1gb) from DVD to harddisk , the speed only range from 4mb to 10mb, never go above 10mb. The disc is clean and no scratch. Test on CD Speed shown the drive can go up to 16x. Confirmed the drive is run in UDMA mode, not PIO mode.

But it is absolutely normal in file transfer between harddisk and usb flash drive. Problem exist only in DVD read.

IDE is naturally a bit slower than SATA...

Ok that said... what's running in the background?
For example, do you have an Anti-Virus tool watching file creations? If so part of that slowness is probably the AV scanner checking files. The simple check for this is to temporarily disable the AV and see what happens...

 

[Victek]

If the drive behaves normally, no i/o errors, no strange clicks or buzzes... there is absolutely no reason to flash his firmware...

Flashing a drive (printer, bios, etc.) is a very risky thing to do. If it gets wrong in even the slightest way you've just converted a perfectly good device into landfill. Because of this risk --and it does happen!-- flashing firmware should be the absolute last resort before you trashcan the thing. It should never be the frontline advice given when nothing else has even been tried.

.
I have to disagree. Certainly caution should be used when upgrading firmware, but I don't hesitate when it corrects problems or adds important functionality. Putting up with substandard performance because of fear of firmware flashing is unnecessary. Instead of telling people to be afraid I think it's better to tell them how to do things carefully.

 

[CommonTater]

I have to disagree. Certainly caution should be used when upgrading firmware, but I don't hesitate when it corrects problems or adds important functionality. Putting up with substandard performance because of fear of firmware flashing is unnecessary. Instead of telling people to be afraid I think it's better to tell them how to do things carefully.

That's all fine and good with *your own machine* but it's not a risk you want to take with someone else's hardware. When we give advice here we are absolved of the "punch in the face" responsibility for the screwups we cause and it's very easy to lose track of precaution in that scenario. When you have to replace someone's MOBO out of your own pocket because you flashed it for no other reason than a newer version is available... you'll get the idea.

Really... I don't mean to be argumentative or harsh with you (or anyone else) but after long experience in both electronics and computers I've learned that one BIG rule always holds true.... If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The OP's speed issues are most likely due to the IDE interface and windows7 treating it as "backward compatibility" in a SATA world. There might be a better chipset driver he could install... there may be issues with cabling or power... He reports normal behaviour under XP so it's NOT the drive itself.

 

[Victek]

That's all fine and good with *your own machine* but it's not a risk you want to take with someone else's hardware. When we give advice here we are absolved of the "punch in the face" responsibility for the screwups we cause and it's very easy to lose track of precaution in that scenario. When you have to replace someone's MOBO out of your own pocket because you flashed it for no other reason than a newer version is available... you'll get the idea.

Really... I don't mean to be argumentative or harsh with you (or anyone else) but after long experience in both electronics and computers I've learned that one BIG rule always holds true.... If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The OP's speed issues are most likely due to the IDE interface and windows7 treating it as "backward compatibility" in a SATA world. There might be a better chipset driver he could install... there may be issues with cabling or power... He reports normal behaviour under XP so it's NOT the drive itself.

.
I understand what you're saying and don't mean to be argumentative either. Regarding the OP's drive issue you may be right, but it's also possible a firmware upgrade was released to address performance/compatibility issues. I didn't check specifically - just suggested it was something to look at. You're correct that when we give advice online we are removed from the consequences. We are also unable to assess the user's skill level. It's good to make an effort to "do no harm", but there's some risk no matter what. At the end of the day we have to remind people that the buck stops with them.

 

[CommonTater]

I understand what you're saying and don't mean to be argumentative either.

Excellent.

Regarding the OP's drive issue you may be right, but it's also possible a firmware upgrade was released to address performance/compatibility issues. I didn't check specifically - just suggested it was something to look at.

That's fine... but maybe next time we should look first...

I'm not scared to upgrade firmware, I do it once in a while... But as I say it remains my last option before the garbage can...

You're correct that when we give advice online we are removed from the consequences. We are also unable to assess the user's skill level. It's good to make an effort to "do no harm", but there's some risk no matter what. At the end of the day we have to remind people that the buck stops with them.

Absolutely! But still, it's safer and ultimately smarter to toss out a couple of lines of caution on any procedure where we can't trust the person's ability to pull it off...

Now to be crystal clear... I'm not challenging the advice itself. That may ultimately be what he needs to do. I'm just more concerned about offering such advice in a cavalier, up front manner... because, as you point out we cannot know their skill level without at least a bit of conversation first.

Anyhow... no worries here... I just wanted to make sure the OP (and you ) understood the risks involved.

 

[Night Hawk]

I rarely flash any hardware especially any optical drives since they are simply easier to replace IF they don't seem upto par! like one model replaced on the present build that suddenly started making grinding sounds after it would no longer allow booting from any disk. Not worth the time fussing with any flashing.

Lately someone experienced even trashed his own main board with a bad flash! It shows how easy that can happen to anyone even when you take precautions. The method for the board here still sees an EZ Flash while the tool you can download is still the old type dos rename bin type. awdflash at own risk!

 

[januaryabc]

I checked with the firmware version and it is already the newest one. I also tried to close the anti-virus during the transfer and situation did not improve. Actually I think if anti-virus has such big impact then the same should happen in the file transfer between harddisks where now have no problem at all.

 

[Night Hawk]

What you are seeing there with the larger files being copied to the hard drive is similar to what is seen when going to burn a data or video dvd. But instead of a good load being placed on the cpu it's on the main explorer.exe process in Windows.

Instead of cpu time for feeding data through the lazer on the drive in the write process this is a reverse copy/transfer tying up W.Explorer for the most part.

Actually this is quite normal to see since HD to HD transfers are generally seen on the same bus like either two ide or two sata HDs with read/write heads while the optical drive uses a lazer lens to read from removable media then to the ide or sata bus. A two step rather then one step process overall.

One reason I run two storage drives here is save on time as well as backup the backup simply by copying or moving files from one drive to the next over the slower process of reading from removable sources. A few periodic data dvds are seen here to avoid a mountain of disks to go through!

 

[sparky123]

Re slow CD rom read

I think this is being worked on by microsoft at the moment
try this work around,go to control panel>Administrative Tools>Services,find windows search,right click turn it off and disable it. (this can speed up read from disk)

To disable Remote Differential Compression
1. Click Start>control panel>programs>turn windows features on or off
2. Uncheck "Remote Differential Compression" and click ok.
3. Restart the computer you should see an improved performance with copying files.

 

[logicearth]

To disable Remote Differential Compression
1. Click Start>control panel>programs>turn windows features on or off
2. Uncheck "Remote Differential Compression" and click ok.
3. Restart the computer you should see an improved performance with copying files.

Sorry, but Remote Differential Compression is for network services, and is only used by those services that make use of it. Only Offline Files does at this point and time. You will not see any improvement in performance concerning files.

Further more, to the OP. I don't know where you get the 1 GB takes 1 minute observation but pushing 1 GB from a optical disk to an HDD in 1 minute is not realistic. Optic drives are so slow compared to everything else, they can barely fill a SATA 1 connection. It also depends greatly on how the file is written to the disc.