Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

External Hard Drive Question?

  • 25-03-2009 11:02pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,218 ✭✭✭


    Do ones you plug in to the mains work faster than ones you dont?
    Thanks


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭BrokenArrows


    off the top of my head im not sure.

    what you should be looking at is the speed of the drive in the first place not whether it has power or not.

    A good fast drive has a speed of 10,000rpm.

    example
    http://www.expansys.ie/d.aspx?i=162021
    this HD's speed is 5400rpm and is usb powered.

    http://www.expansys.ie/d.aspx?i=161999
    this is 7200rpm and is AC power supplied

    i havnt actually been able to find a 10000rpm external hard drive. humm.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,218 ✭✭✭padocon




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,706 ✭✭✭Voodu Child


    A large 3.5" drive (as used in the bigger external drives requiring a PSU) should be faster than a small USB powered 2.5" external.

    However, USB 2.0 is usually the bottleneck with external drives, rather than the drive's actual capabilities. You can shove the fastest possible drive in an external enclosure, but its never going to read or write faster than ~20-30MB/s (give or take) due to the limitations of USB 2.0.

    So if it's speed you're after, go with an esata drive, it should be at least 2x or 3x faster in real world applications. Obviously, you need an esata port, but these can be added quite easily to both desktops and laptops.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭Amalgam


    Please don't flame me over this statement, but I've always got better overall and more reliable throughput using Firewire. USB 2 is faster on paper, but in real world use it is far from perfect, it also uses CPU resources.

    I was under the impression cache counts for a lot with Hard Drives, internal or external, hence the trend for that getting larger and larger.

    As voodoo_child said, your interface with the computer will be the bottleneck.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 263 ✭✭alansweeney100


    A large 3.5" drive (as used in the bigger external drives requiring a PSU) should be faster than a small USB powered 2.5" external.

    However, USB 2.0 is usually the bottleneck with external drives, rather than the drive's actual capabilities. You can shove the fastest possible drive in an external enclosure, but its never going to read or write faster than ~20-30MB/s (give or take) due to the limitations of USB 2.0.

    So if it's speed you're after, go with an esata drive, it should be at least 2x or 3x faster in real world applications. Obviously, you need an esata port, but these can be added quite easily to both desktops and laptops.

    +1
    Check out the table at the bottom of the page comparing speeds between USB, firewire and esata and others
    I have this drive connected to my PC via esata and its very fast, would reccommend it.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement