usb 3.0 Transfer Speed Very Slow

Look at it like this: Just because your car speedometer might say 200 doesn't mean it will GO 200. True speed is what it will in real life GO. Not what they say it *could* go. If GM says their chevy will go 200 but only tops out at 120, is this a lie? If it were, then is that fraudulent? Of course it is fraudulent. And that is the fraud that manufacturers are spewing regarding speeds.

zolar1 said:

alphanumeric said:

SATA 2.0 is 3 Gb/s or 300 MB/s
SATA 3.0 is 6 Gb/s or 600 MB/s
Serial ATA - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Those are theoretical limits and not true speeds. If you want to know the true speed and not the lies the manufacturer spews out, do the tests I mentioned. 'Up to' x-amount of transfer speed is a lie because it is impossible due to many factors. One being the transport overhead. 2 the quality and design of the device being used. Also, USB 3.0 has a max theoretical limit of only 5.0 Gb/s. SATA III is 6Gb/s. There is a difference. Every speed rating you hear about is an outright lie because none of them are attainable. For example. Connect a USB 3.0 flash drive on a USB 2.0 port. 'theoretically' the drive should be able to handle any data up to the theoretical limits of usb 2.0. BUT, it still is not possible. If you connect a SATA III drive on an SATA I cable, you would think that the speed would be the advertised limit. Nope. You still cannot reach the advertised limit no matter what tweaks you do. Connect an SATA I device onto an SATA III cable and you still cannot reach the advertised SATA I speed. The best possible speed for a given set up is pure text files (highly compressable). This is due to the way the data is written to the flash device. And best to have any data evenly divisible into blocks of 4096 bytes. Partitioning is important too. And NTFS has a LOT of overhead thus slowing down writes even further. The nice thing about FAT and FAT 32 is they don't have much if any overhead for writes. I did read that Linux EXT4 is better suited for flash memory. I can't tell a difference because no matter which I choose (ntfs or EXT4) my transfer speed (writes) are slower than snot on a cold day. I tried a test folder with mised items. I transfer back and forth in windows, then again in linux. Many times linux is slower than windows and Linux lies about having the transfer done. The data is still in the cache when it says done, waiting to be written. As I keep saying, do the tests yourself. roughly 50mb/s transfer speed to flash drive (typical) for USB 3.0/3.0 is awful. Of course that is for incompressible data like movies and ISO's. Oh, I have seen writes go down to UNDER USB 1.0 speeds. Suggestion. Don't write more than one thing at a time. Meaning, you can write a whole folder of items is OK, but while that is being done, don't start writing anything else until that is complete. Seems to choke the device.

Yes I know that, see post #2 and #4. My post was in response to post #7 (For 2.0 it's 480 MB/s and for 3.0 it's 5 GB/s.) I should have done a quote.

I just copied 34GB of movies to flash drive. Speeds went down to 8mb/s. Took over an hour....