External Harddrive: improve quality?
-
Kariudo
- Twilight prince
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:08 pm
- Status: 1924 bots banned and counting!
- Location: Los taquitos unidos
- Contact:
-
Zarxrax
- Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2001 6:37 pm
- Contact:
Are you sure your laptop was using usb 2.0?Kariudo wrote:it's better than having no space, but my laptop with an Athlon64 3200+ took roughly 20-25 minutes to index a disk worth of .vobs when they were stored on my 7200rpm external USB2.0 (as opposed to about 7 minutes on my 4200rpm internal)
I thought my old pc had it, but it really didn't. When I got my new pc built and started transferring files to usb, they were going like 100x faster, and I was like O_O
-
Willen
- Now in Hi-Def!
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 1:50 am
- Status: Melancholy
- Location: SOS-Dan HQ
eSATA > FireWire 800 > FireWire 400 > USB 2.0 > USB 1.1
And for some older systems (mainly Apples) you have SCSI, which is found more often used with professional servers and workstations. Also used is Fibre Channel and Serial Attached SCSI (SAS), not to mention Networked Attached Storage (NAS) which isn't really an external drive but a file server (which can itself be connected to external drives) but provides similar functions.
USB 2.0 (aka. Hi-Speed USB) can have speeds vary quite wildly. I have a memory card reader/floppy disk drive combo unit, a portable memory card reader that plugs directly into a USB port (no cable needed), and of course my digital camera (Sony DSC-V3). All of them are USB 2.0 High Speed devices, but reading the same Memory Stick, the camera is the fastest, followed by the plug-in card reader, with the built-in combo floppy/media reader bringing up the rear.
Even different computers can have different results due to the type of chipset/controller that is used, the drivers installed, and other design factors. It's possible that on the same computer, you might get better transfer speeds from certain USB ports than others due to them using a better USB controller. Many older motherboards had USB 1.1 built-in with the board's chipset and USB 2.0 added on with a secondary chip. Usually Windows XP will warn you if your USB 2.0 device is plugged into a USB 1.1 port.
And for some older systems (mainly Apples) you have SCSI, which is found more often used with professional servers and workstations. Also used is Fibre Channel and Serial Attached SCSI (SAS), not to mention Networked Attached Storage (NAS) which isn't really an external drive but a file server (which can itself be connected to external drives) but provides similar functions.
USB 2.0 (aka. Hi-Speed USB) can have speeds vary quite wildly. I have a memory card reader/floppy disk drive combo unit, a portable memory card reader that plugs directly into a USB port (no cable needed), and of course my digital camera (Sony DSC-V3). All of them are USB 2.0 High Speed devices, but reading the same Memory Stick, the camera is the fastest, followed by the plug-in card reader, with the built-in combo floppy/media reader bringing up the rear.
Even different computers can have different results due to the type of chipset/controller that is used, the drivers installed, and other design factors. It's possible that on the same computer, you might get better transfer speeds from certain USB ports than others due to them using a better USB controller. Many older motherboards had USB 1.1 built-in with the board's chipset and USB 2.0 added on with a secondary chip. Usually Windows XP will warn you if your USB 2.0 device is plugged into a USB 1.1 port.
Having trouble playing back videos? I recommend: 