or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › HTPC - Linux Chat › External USB 3.0 HDD that works OK with Linux?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

External USB 3.0 HDD that works OK with Linux?

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
External USB 3.0 HDD that works OK with Linux?

If yes, my interest is 2.5" external HDD.

Is an external USB 3.0 Toshiba 2.5" likely to be seen OK by a current Linux?
post #2 of 26
I haven't used an external hard drive, but I have used a USB to internal hard drive adapter. It has worked great with no problems.
http://inlandproduct.com/usb20toides...er08412-1.aspx
post #3 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ericglo View Post

I haven't used an external hard drive, but I have used a USB to internal hard drive adapter. It has worked great with no problems.
http://inlandproduct.com/usb20toides...er08412-1.aspx

Looks more like a cable.

It's also USB 2.0, and not USB 3.0

Interesting nonetheless, and thanks for the response.

A bit more info: this past Friday I got an external 7200rpm 2.5" 500GB Hitachi Touro Mobile Pro HDD. It's USB 3.0 and supposedly also compatible with USB 2.0

Windows 7/64 sees it, no worries.

Ubuntu 11.10 32bit doesn't see it. Gparted 11.0-7 also doesn't see it. Fedora16 doesn't see it, but Fedora is Red Hat's buggy trial area so no big surprise.

But Debian 6.0.3 32bit (Gnome desktop) does see it. Go figure.

So I think I can use this external Touro drive.

It comes pre-formatted with a single NTFS partition.

1st thing I want is to delete the partition and reformat a smaller NTFS partition at ~200GB, which I'm confident Windows 7 File Management will likely let me do (but haven't done it yet).

2nd thing is to format the rest of the drive (~260GB) as fat32 which Windows won't do.

Hence my question/post; since if I couldn't get any Linux to see the drive I was thinking I'd return it to newegg.

I am still interested in input from Linux users here who've successfully used external USB 3.0 HDDs with Linux.

Which Linux versions and which HDD brands/names?
post #4 of 26
I have a USB 3.0 device working in Kubuntu 11.10 64 bit. It's a 2TB Fantom Gforce (the speeds are great). It's possible that the your USB 3.0 chipset isn't supported in the kernel you are running in Linux. I purposely bought a mobo that I knew had working USB 3.0 in linux. What motherboard are you using? Do you see USB 3.0 devices from the output of lspci?
post #5 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by newlinux View Post

I have a USB 3.0 device working in Kubuntu 11.10 64 bit. It's a 2TB Fantom Gforce (the speeds are great). It's possible that the your USB 3.0 chipset isn't supported in the kernel you are running in Linux. I purposely bought a mobo that I knew had working USB 3.0 in linux. What motherboard are you using? Do you see USB 3.0 devices from the output of lspci?

mobo is Gigabyte 990XA-UD3; a very new AMD socket AM3+ mobo with a very new FX-6100 cpu; running latest F9 BIOS; see: http://www.gigabyte.us/products/prod...px?pid=3901#ov

So far a fair number of different latest Linux distros have failed to boot via CD/DVD boot disc (from iso download); only Ubuntu 11.10, and Debian 6.0.3 (w/Gnome desktop), have booted (running from the CD); Debian is the only one (so far) that actually sees the external drive, whereas Ubuntu boots but doesn't see the drive. I didn't try running lspci in a terminal on Ubuntu, but out of honest curiosity I'll try that tomorrow afternoon.

FWIW I just also gave a try to booting Xubuntu 11.10 and Kubuntu 11.10 and they failed during boot process. Didn't pay any attention to which kernel any of them is using.

The fact that Debian 6.0.3 sees the drive makes me think that I can reformat the drive as I want.

I'll have to get on this as the clock is ticking if it turns out that I decide to return it (i.e. take a restocking loss).
post #6 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by newlinux View Post

Do you see USB 3.0 devices from the output of lspci?

You may need to use lsusb instead.
post #7 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterhead View Post

You may need to use lsusb instead.

There doesn't seem to be any "lsusb" command in Debian 6.0.3 (loaded live from bootable DVD, as opposed to having installed it to normal IDE/SATA HDD and running it from there).
post #8 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by newlinux View Post

Do you see USB 3.0 devices from the output of lspci?

Maybe not? i.e. may only see USB 2.0 devices?

Meaning I may have plugged the external HDD into a USB 2.0 rear outlet yesterday.

This morning for sure I plugged the external HDD into a USB 3.0 rear outlet, and Debian 6.0.3 now doesn't see the device; so I need to try again this afternoon. I've other things to do for the next 5 hours.

I did run lspci this morning, here's the captured text from that:

user@debian:~$ lspci

00:00.0 Host bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RD890 PCI to PCI bridge (external gfx0 port B) (rev 02)

00:00.2 Generic system peripheral [0806]: ATI Technologies Inc Device 5a23

00:02.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RD890 PCI to PCI bridge (PCI express gpp port B)

00:04.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RD890 PCI to PCI bridge (PCI express gpp port D)

00:09.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RD890 PCI to PCI bridge (PCI express gpp port H)

00:0a.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RD890 PCI to PCI bridge (external gfx1 port A)

00:11.0 SATA controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 SATA Controller [IDE mode] (rev 40)

00:12.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 USB OHCI0 Controller

00:12.2 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 USB EHCI Controller

00:13.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 USB OHCI0 Controller

00:13.2 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 USB EHCI Controller

00:14.0 SMBus: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 SMBus Controller (rev 42)

00:14.1 IDE interface: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 IDE Controller (rev 40)

00:14.2 Audio device: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 Azalia (Intel HDA) (rev 40)

00:14.3 ISA bridge: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 LPC host controller (rev 40)

00:14.4 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 PCI to PCI Bridge (rev 40)

00:14.5 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 USB OHCI2 Controller

00:15.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Device 43a0

00:16.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 USB OHCI0 Controller

00:16.2 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB700/SB800 USB EHCI Controller

00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Device 1600

00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Device 1601

00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Device 1602

00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Device 1603

00:18.4 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Device 1604

00:18.5 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Device 1605

01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation Device 1081 (rev a1)

01:00.1 Audio device: nVidia Corporation Device 0e09 (rev a1)

02:00.0 USB Controller: Device 1b6f:7023 (rev 01)

03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller (rev 06)

04:00.0 USB Controller: Device 1b6f:7023 (rev 01)

user@debian:~$
post #9 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherSongs View Post

Maybe not? i.e. may only see USB 2.0 devices?

Meaning I may have plugged the external HDD into a USB 2.0 rear outlet yesterday.

This morning for sure I plugged the external HDD into a USB 3.0 rear outlet, and Debian 6.0.3 now doesn't see the device; so I need to try again this afternoon.

Yup, Debian 6.0.3 Live sees the external Touro HDD as a USB 2.0 device, but not as a USB 3.0 device.

Likely the mobo USB 3.0 chip(s) is too new.

No worries as I just needed some confidence as to having at least one Linux distro, with easy install options, being able to see the drive so that I can reformat and put both a small NTFS partition and a big fat32 partition on it.

Interestingly Debian/Gnome 6.0.3 (1.1GB iso download) starts off with 8 boot choices, including Live and Live 686. The Live 686 hangs; likely due to the very new AMD FX-6100 bull-dozer cpu. Fortunately the Live option works.
post #10 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherSongs View Post

There doesn't seem to be any "lsusb" command in Debian 6.0.3 (loaded live from bootable DVD, as opposed to having installed it to normal IDE/SATA HDD and running it from there).

I think you need to install something, I think it's called usb-utilities. You can install programs when booted into a liveCD, it just won't save the changes.
post #11 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherSongs View Post

External USB 3.0 HDD that works OK with Linux?

If yes, my interest is 2.5" external HDD.

Is an external USB 3.0 Toshiba 2.5" likely to be seen OK by a current Linux?

Seems like a bit of overkill for a 2.5" drive since most of those can barely saturate USB 2.0.

I have a Samsung Storybook 2TB USB 3.0 drive and I've had some "interesting" issues with it.

When I first started to try to load a bunch of files on it, I was getting a bunch of errors. Then the OS wouldn't recognize the drive at all.

My MB only has two USB 3.0 ports, so I switched to other port and have not experienced any errors on that port.

However, I still have a strange situation where the drive will not automount after a boot, so i have to manually mount it after every boot. I even tried adding it to the fstab file and still couldn't get it to mount at boot. I think it's an issue between the kernel drivers and the USB 3.0 controllers because these new USB 3.0 controllers seem to take a lot of time to negotiate with the device and decide whether the device is 3.0 or 2.0 (or even if a device is attached at all).

So I've had my share of hassles with USB 3.0.

OTOH, the speed is really seductive. I've had transfer rates of over 150 MB/s between that external drive and my internal SSD.


I've used several different USB 2.0 drives in the past. Including a couple of different 2.5" bus-powered drives and have never had any issues with them. So I'd recommend sticking with USB 2.0 for 2.5" spinning drives. The slightly greater speed you'll get from what is just a slow laptop drive just it's worth the all the hassles. Save the USB 3.0 hassles for 2.5" SSDs and fast 3.5" drives where you get a serious performance payoff.

Oh BTW I have an ASUS 890GX MB, so i think I have the same USB 3.0 controller that you have on that Gigabyte 990 board.
post #12 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterhead View Post

I think you need to install something, I think it's called usb-utilities. You can install programs when booted into a liveCD, it just won't save the changes.

In Ubuntu the package is named usbutils. It contains the lsusb command, but also one called usb-devices. It gives a more detailed listing of USB devices.
Code:
sudo apt-get install usbutils
post #13 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterhead View Post

You may need to use lsusb instead.

lspci output on my machines tells me whether or not I have USB 3.0, but lsusb certainly is a cleaner and better option. Out of habit when I'm checking on hardware I use lshw or lspci, and with USB devices when I'm checking on peripherals. I had completely forgotten lsusb is useful for giving information about your USB hosts as well .
post #14 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

Seems like a bit of overkill for a 2.5" drive since most of those can barely saturate USB 2.0.

Interesting thought.

This external Hitachi Touro is a 7200rpm 2.5" HDD, so maybe it gets into USB 3.0 speeds?

OTOH the Hitachi weasels provide little info on key data such as 1) number of platters for the 500GB and 750GB drives, and 2) amount of cache; see: http://www.hitachigst.com/external-d...uro-mobile-pro

The info at the site also slyly gives theoretical max values:
<"Data Transfer Rate:
USB 3.0: up to 5 Gbit/sec
USB 2.0: up to 480 Mbit/sec">

Hitachi also does not provide any software (as far as I can tell) to reformat the drive.

OTOH the single cable connection on the drive seems robust, and the unit does work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

I have a Samsung Storybook 2TB USB 3.0 drive and I've had some "interesting" issues with it.

"2TB" means that it's an external 3.5" HDD.

Meaning much heavier and bulkier than an external 2.5" HDD.

Why do you need so much space on an external HDD?

Given that it's "USB 3.0" does it run strictly from USB power?

Maybe that's why it doesn't run reliably on USB 3.0 port? Meaning that it takes/needs a bit too much power to work reliably with your mobo?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

When I first started to try to load a bunch of files on it, I was getting a bunch of errors. Then the OS wouldn't recognize the drive at all.

My MB only has two USB 3.0 ports, so I switched to other port and have not experienced any errors on that port.

Given my very recent experience with this Touro drive I have, the above does not surprise me.

I can add that I need to actually copy something like 50GB of data to this drive and then check that that data is OK. <> OK did that and it only took ~9 minutes to copy 29GB to the external Touro drive. Not bad. Copied my current high level CD directory of .flac album rips. Listening to it play back now via foobar2000; sounds great so I doubt that there are data errors, but I'll agree that it's hardly a strict test.

So that's xfer of 3.2GB/minute. When I do a full machine HDD to HDD clone backup (SATA to SATA via temp HDD connected at the side of the PC), I currently see xfer speed in the 6-to-7GB/minute bracket. So I'm happy with 3.2GB/minute with this external 2.5" USB 3.0 Touro drive within Windows 7/64.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

However, I still have a strange situation where the drive will not automount after a boot, so i have to manually mount it after every boot. I even tried adding it to the fstab file and still couldn't get it to mount at boot. I think it's an issue between the kernel drivers and the USB 3.0 controllers because these new USB 3.0 controllers seem to take a lot of time to negotiate with the device and decide whether the device is 3.0 or 2.0 (or even if a device is attached at all).

My hunch is that a newer Linux distro will solve that; at least at some point in the near future.

Given the command line flexibility of Unix/Linux, odds are it can be fixed now. Sorry that my Unix/Linux is so rusty that I can't even give a hint on how to approach that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

So I've had my share of hassles with USB 3.0.

OTOH, the speed is really seductive. I've had transfer rates of over 150 MB/s between that external drive and my internal SSD.

On USB 2.0?

.150GB/s * 60s/m = 9GB/m. Noway!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

I've used several different USB 2.0 drives in the past. Including a couple of different 2.5" bus-powered drives and have never had any issues with them.

Brand names?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

So I'd recommend sticking with USB 2.0 for 2.5" spinning drives.

Too late for me!

And so far I think I can reformat it to my needs via Debian Linux or even Gparted (on another older AMD AM3 socket mobo).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

The slightly greater speed you'll get from what is just a slow laptop drive just it's worth the all the hassles. Save the USB 3.0 hassles for 2.5" SSDs and fast 3.5" drives where you get a serious performance payoff.

Oh BTW I have an ASUS 890GX MB, so i think I have the same USB 3.0 controller that you have on that Gigabyte 990 board.

Then don't buy a Hitachi Touro external USB 3.0 HDD in the next 6 months!

Interesting that you're an AMD owner. Your AMD AM3 mobo isn't cheap; quick newegg newegg check shows "ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3 AM3 (socket)" at:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...k=ASUS%20890GX
post #15 of 26
I have multiple UBS3 Seagate "Expansion" drives working on multiple linux configurations with Ubuntu 11.10 (Oneiric). The trick was to upgrade to a very recent kernel - 3.2.0. The stock Oneric kernels had lots of problems with the seagate drives, the biggest one was that if the drive ever spun down on its own, the kernel did not know how to spin it back up properly, requiring a reboot in order to access it again (unplug/replug was not enough) and often filesystem corruption.

But with the 3.2.0 kernel backported from the testing release of ubuntu 12.04 (precise pangolin) the drives have been rock-stable and fast, I get those 150MB/s+ speeds too.
post #16 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryW View Post

I have multiple UBS3 Seagate "Expansion" drives working on multiple linux configurations with Ubuntu 11.10 (Oneiric). The trick was to upgrade to a very recent kernel - 3.2.0. The stock Oneric kernels had lots of problems with the seagate drives, the biggest one was that if the drive ever spun down on its own, the kernel did not know how to spin it back up properly, requiring a reboot in order to access it again (unplug/replug was not enough) and often filesystem corruption.

That's useful info. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryW View Post

But with the 3.2.0 kernel backported from the testing release of ubuntu 12.04 (precise pangolin) the drives have been rock-stable and fast, I get those 150MB/s+ speeds too.

150GB/s * 60sec/min = 9GB/min.

Even with USB 3.0 there's no chance of actually transferring 9GB/minute. At least as far as I know.

As I said to Mac The Knife, I get xfer of 3.2GB/minute with my external Hitachi Touro HDD when using a mobo USB 3.0 rear connector.

To me, a xfer of 3.2GB/minute is outstanding with an external 2.5" HDD.

Maybe you're misreading? Meaning maybe it's 150Gb/s?

Meaning you're not actually timing a large xfer of data with a stopwatch in your hand, right?

If I'm correct, exactly where are you getting this "150MB/s+ speeds" number from?
post #17 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherSongs View Post

That's useful info. Thank you.



150GB/s * 60sec/min = 9GB/min.

Even with USB 3.0 there's no chance of actually transferring 9GB/minute. At least as far as I know.

As I said to Mac The Knife, I get xfer of 3.2GB/minute with my external Hitachi Touro HDD when using a mobo USB 3.0 rear connector.

To me, a xfer of 3.2GB/minute is outstanding with an external 2.5" HDD.

...

I'm not sure where you managed to run off the rails, but we certainly didn't say 150GB/s because 150GB/s * 60sec/min = 9TB/min. TERABYTES not MEGABYTES. Which is beyond the ability of USB3.0 and everything else. Even PCI-based SSDs max out at only 5.6GB/s.

As Jerry and I said, we both see 150MB/s sustained (yes MEGA not Giga and yes BYTES not bits), which is as fast as the typical consumer grade 3.5" spinning drive will perform even when connected directly to a SATA III (6Gb/s) port.

If you want to go any faster you need to get a VelociRaptor or an SSD. For example, here's a review of a USB 3.0 SDD

Super Talent Intros Storage POD Mini USB 3.0 External SSD


This external SSD features a max speed of over 260 MB/s when connected via a USB 3.0 interface.



Notice the max speed of 260 MEGABYTES/s. IIRC, the theoretical limit of USB3.0 is about 500MB/s and the theoretical limit of USB2.0 is about 50MB/s. But the practical limits are closer to 300 and 30 respectively.

At 3.2GB/minute (~ 53 MEGABYTES/sec) you're 2.5" drive is definitely a good performer. Most 2.5" drives struggle to break into the 40's.

But that still makes it about 3x slower than a typical 3.5" drive and about 5x slower than a USB3.0 SSD (which is pretty much maxing out the USB3.0 connection).

For comparison, the fastest SDDs hit about 500MB/s when connected to a SATA III connection, such as this Samsung model in from this AnandTech article:



This is pretty close to the theoretical max of 6Gb/s on SATA III, so the SATA connection has probably hit it's practical limit in this case.


So yea, we really meant 150MB/s and yeah, it falls right between the 53MB/s of your 2.5" drive and the 250MB/s of an SSD on USB3.0.

Hope this helps you get out of the rut you fell into on this issue.
post #18 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

Even PCI-based SSDs max out at only 5.6GB/s.

hehe ... to be pedantic, that's PCIe ... a PCI based anything would max out ~133MB/s

Quote:


As Jerry and I said, we both see 150MB/s sustained (yes MEGA not Giga and yes BYTES not bits), which is as fast as the typical consumer grade 3.5" spinning drive will perform even when connected directly to a SATA III (6Gb/s) port.

Yep. And while, of course, the context was sustained transfer rate, I'll note that cached hits (i.e transfers from the disks onboard cache memory across the sata interface) would likely see rates closer to the sata III limitations ... though obviously only bursts, and nonething sustained over broad swaths of data

Quote:


If you want to go any faster you need to get a VelociRaptor or an SSD. For example, here's a review of a USB 3.0 SDD

Super Talent Intros Storage POD Mini USB 3.0 External SSD


This external SSD features a max speed of over 260 MB/s when connected via a USB 3.0 interface.



Notice the max speed of 260 MEGABYTES/s. IIRC, the theoretical limit of USB3.0 is about 500MB/s and the theoretical limit of USB2.0 is about 50MB/s. But the practical limits are closer to 300 and 30 respectively.

Just a couple of points to add here. Those top speeds for the SSD in this case were for reads (the page mentions writes up to 174 MB/s). I don't know if that was independent tests or just the manufactures specs. I glanced at the first couple of seconds of the video quickly and saw that they were using atto...I suspect that it was the manufacturers specs. In which case, its going to be quoting for tests done with compressible data, so tests sets using incompressible data would result in even lower STR.

But regardless, given the right combination of performance factors (i.e. controller used, drive capacity, type of NAND used, chip configuration, controller channels, chips per channel interleaving etc) from those parts currently available for manu's to use, its likely that some manufacturer could (price no object) create a similar USB3 based SSD device that could saturate the ~300MB/s real world limit.

As for USB2.0 real world, I would have to wholeheartedly agree with it being ~30MB/s for most drive and controller combos (call it an average for argument sake)


Quote:


For comparison, the fastest SDDs hit about 500MB/s when connected to a SATA III connection.

Just noting again that this is for reads with compressible data.
post #19 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

I'm not sure where you managed to run off the rails, but we certainly didn't say 150GB/s because 150GB/s * 60sec/min = 9TB/min. TERABYTES not MEGABYTES.

You are correct on it being 9TB/min.

My mistake

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

Which is beyond the ability of USB3.0 and everything else. Even PCI-based SSDs max out at only 5.6GB/s.

As Jerry and I said, we both see 150MB/s sustained (yes MEGA not Giga and yes BYTES not bits), which is as fast as the typical consumer grade 3.5" spinning drive will perform even when connected directly to a SATA III (6Gb/s) port.

Please don't bother with the theoretical max numbers, as it only muddies things.

It is the actual xfer numbers that one gets in the real world of use with home PC's that matter.

So OK, 150MB/s * 60sec/min = 9GB/min.

That's still way over the best (recent min/max of 3 to upper 6GB/min) that I've recently gotten with my best 3.5" HDD.

Where did you get the "150MB/s" from?

You clearly did not time it via a stopwatch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

If you want to go any faster you need to get a VelociRaptor or an SSD.

Totally agreed on both.

FWIW I've had VelociRaptor drives and don't plan to revisit those.

I've never (yet) had any SSD drives.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

Notice the max speed of 260 MEGABYTES/s. IIRC, the theoretical limit of USB3.0 is about 500MB/s and the theoretical limit of USB2.0 is about 50MB/s. But the practical limits are closer to 300 and 30 respectively.

At 3.2GB/minute (~ 53 MEGABYTES/sec) you're 2.5" drive is definitely a good performer. Most 2.5" drives struggle to break into the 40's.

But that still makes it about 3x slower than a typical 3.5" drive and about 5x slower than a USB3.0 SSD (which is pretty much maxing out the USB3.0 connection).



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

So yea, we really meant 150MB/s and yeah, it falls right between the 53MB/s of your 2.5" drive and the 250MB/s of an SSD on USB3.0.

Hope this helps you get out of the rut you fell into on this issue.

I'd still like to know where did you get the "150MB/s" from?

You clearly did not time it via a stopwatch.
post #20 of 26
Gnome reports transfer speeds during large operations.

The external drive is my dumping ground for videos that I haven't gotten around to watching when I need to free up space on my internal drive, so I've transferred a lot of large video files to that drive (some close to 20GB). I've also noticed that the total transfer time for large files matches that rate just by watching the system clock. So, in a sense, I have timed some of them with a stopwatch.

I'm guessing the reason I see higher speeds from this drive than you have seen from other drives might be because the 2TB Samsung drive has a much higher arial density than most drives on the market right now, so the sustained transfer speed is a bit higher than the norm.

[ed. plus the drive tends to stay fairly empty, so I'm almost always using the fastest outer tracks of the drive.]
post #21 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

Gnome reports transfer speeds during large operations.

Thank you for that info.

FWIW when I copy my boot drive, I subtract 6GB from the total due to space used by hiberfil.sys and pagefil.sys (Windows 7 hidden files in the root of the c:\\ partition) which AFAIK don't have any meaningful data in them and only the size info of them gets copied during the clone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

The external drive is my dumping ground for videos that I haven't gotten around to watching when I need to free up space on my internal drive, so I've transferred a lot of large video files to that drive (some close to 20GB). I've also noticed that the total transfer time for large files matches that rate just by watching the system clock. So, in a sense, I have timed some of them with a stopwatch.

Likely more reliable to only time really *large* transfers via a stopwatch yourself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

I'm guessing the reason I see higher speeds from this drive than you have seen from other drives might be because the 2TB Samsung drive has a much higher arial density than most drives on the market right now, so the sustained transfer speed is a bit higher than the norm.

My experience is that it's more a matter of how the source and target HDD match up with each other, including platter density, track-to-track head movement speed, cache size, and perhaps most importantly how fragged the data is on the source HDD.

For drives that aren't fragged, I've seen a recent surprise of a 2 to 1 timing difference where their specs suggested they'd have the same xfer rate of about 6GB/min but only gave 3GB/min for xfer of 60GB of data! This was with HDD#2 (of two) on my PC, so I'm pretty confident that all of the data on the two partitions (d:\\ and e:\\) were actually copied in entirety.

Your case HDD LED activity light provides good insight to this; meaning if it doesn't blink much then you have close to a max xfer for those two HDD.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post

[ed. plus the drive tends to stay fairly empty, so I'm almost always using the fastest outer tracks of the drive.]

I tend to forget about that; FWIW I've no knowledge of whether the inside or outside of an empty drive gets used 1st. But it doesn't make much difference with regard to my timings which are usually cloning (HDD to HDD) where the target HDD is always treated as an empty drive.
post #22 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherSongs View Post

FWIW I've no knowledge of whether the inside or outside of an empty drive gets used 1st.

From outer tracks to inner .... of whatever partition space (i.e. if you've configured the drive as one big partition, or have segmented it into a number of partitions).

FWIW, its the opposite w/ optical drives (they read/write from the inner tracks to the outer edge of the disc for the first layer ... you can see that in one of the graphs in this review of a ext. BR drive at (to my surprise) the former cdfreaks site: http://www.myce.com/review/liteon-eh...performance-2/

Note the speed graphs obtained from reading/writing on a dual layer; they look something like: /\\

In other words, the read/writes of the underlying 2nd layer start at the outer tracks and proceed inwards.
post #23 of 26
Oh, forgot to mention, I also reformatted that external drive as ext4.

I've seen the NTFS drivers cause really big performance issues as the transfer rates go up. It's not noticeable at USB2.0 speeds, but in my experience, somewhere around 70MB/s they start to have problems.

Actually, I guess I really don't know if it's the NTFS drivers or something they are calling. But since the NTFS drivers are userspace drivers and the kernelspace drivers like ext4 don't seem to have the same problem, the NTFS drivers are the most likely suspect.
post #24 of 26
I can second that, the NTFS fuse driver starts to max out a cpu core around 70MB/s on my systems. I hear there is a proprietary, in-kernel NTFS driver out there which the developer claims to be the fastest filesystem available for linux.
post #25 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherSongs View Post

External USB 3.0 HDD that works OK with Linux?

Is an external USB 3.0 Toshiba 2.5" likely to be seen OK by a current Linux?

Yes, it is likely to be "seen". Getting it to work is next step.

I have an ext. USB 3.0 HDD - a Western Digital Elements 500GB - which is connected via this ExpressCard/34:

05:00.0 USB controller: Fresco Logic FL1000G USB 3.0 Host Controller (rev 01)

It is recognised by an Ubuntu patched kernel 3.2.0-25-generic #40-Ubuntu SMP in a Linux Mint 13 system.

However, it connects the disk at the same speed (480Mb/s) as external USB 2 drives, which I can tell by using the Gnome Disk Utility, which, if you don't have it, can be installed like this:

sudo apt-get install gnome-disk-utility

It requires this kernel parameter (as you can find in various Ubuntu and Mint forum threads):

pci=nomsi

.. and then it connects at 705 Mb/s, according to Disk Utility - telling me that it is in fact a proper USB 3 connection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac The Knife View Post


Seems like a bit of overkill for a 2.5" drive since most of those can barely saturate USB 2.0.

It is a 2.5'' drive and so far it does read/transfers around 65MB/S, but without the NOMSI parameter it does max. around 40Mb/s.

According to Disk Utility, the max. read speed in the benchmark test was 93.6Mb/s

The disk is factory NTFS formatted. I have still not tried ext4, because I use it to share files with a Windows based friend. Will be interesting see how much faster - if at all .- it will be.
post #26 of 26
Hello, guys.

I have been running linux of a 32gig pendrive for a while. I use Fedora. There is a nice little app which I run and it creates a pendrive with linux in which I can save files and all. I use dropbox and google drive so I do not mind the pen drive dyieing on my.

I an not linux savvy so when I have to install something or other I basically google "install photo editor" and copy and paste the commands on a terminal.

So, having said that, I just bought a new pendrive today. Since we are in the USB 3.0 era I went ahead and ordered one of those. I just ordered a PCI USB3 card to add to my computer.

I'll try just hooking everithing up and seeing if it just works. In case it does not I plan to just plug it to a US2 port and I imagine that it will then work as if it were a 2.0 drive.

In case it does not work, any ideas how I may get the 3.0 pci board to boot with a 3.0 usb pendrive?

cherrs,

Alessio
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HTPC - Linux Chat
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › HTPC - Linux Chat › External USB 3.0 HDD that works OK with Linux?