Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Does Disk Speed Affect Download Speed
531 views
Skip to first unread message
Faustina Bartsch
Jan 8, 2024, 10:25:00 PM1/8/24
to
I have a Samsung Series 7 laptop with a Hitachi HTS727575A9E364 internal HDD, and was wondering if purchasing a Buffalo DriveStation DDR 2TB HDD would be worth it. Would the speed of my internal HDD limit the speed this external HDD could achieve? I would be attaching it to the laptop via USB 3.0.
The external drive will run at the speed determined by its connection (USB 3.0, in your case). The internal drive won't affect its transfer speed at all. Rather than the drive you're considering, I'd probably get something like the Seagate FreeAgent GoFlex Home 2 TB. That's a connectivity and personal taste thing, though so you may not agree.
does disk speed affect download speed
Download https://spirsup-qtemppi.blogspot.com/?nr=2x5RYN
If copying from external to internal you are limited to the internals hard drive write speed. However, most hard drives are about the same. You can attach the hard drive to a USB 3.0 port but it will not reach anywhere near the max USB 3.0 can do.
For files >1gb in size file speeds revert back to normal hard drive speeds. The other danger listed is if power loss occurs during a write you will corrupt those files and have to rewrite them or get a UPS to backup the power.
An unused disk will not affect the global performance, but you should be thinkingof other factors: The disk is relatively old (as disks go), so may have a limitedlifetime. The fact that it will be powered-on now for some years to come,will use up the spin-time that is still left for it.
Overall, no, it will not affect your PC's general performance. Only applications that make use of data stored on that HDD will experience a performance penalty due to the slower data speeds of that harddrive.
I have excluded my hard disk drive for search indexing. Thus, the less the computer works with the old disk, the better it is. Any access by the computer to the old disk will slow down the computer, because there are many hidden processes that you cannot control, and if your disk is old, then the transfer speed will be very low.
Specifically, your system could be configured to spin down the HDD when not in use (as it should be unless it is a server disk which are designed to preferably spin 24/7). Sometimes, some application will request information about all partitions in the system, and then this operation will wait until the HDD has been spun up again. In my pretty top-notch PC at home this can take some 5-10 seconds for two old HDDs. Happens every once in a while; I know who the culprits are, it doesn't bother me, but if this were a critical PC, say one which needs to perform near-realtime tasks, then I would take them out.
Also as the sectors start to wear out the hard drive will need to do more ECC (error correction). As the problem gets worse, read/write speeds will diminish until its painful to use the drive or it fails.
We have been using ESET for over 10 years, and adopted Deslock when it was first introduced to the ESET ecosystem. Over the years we have noticed Encryption adversely affecting system performance - primarily in the read and write speeds. With some hard drives, this has been up to a 70% drop in speed. We see this on SSD's and NVMEs'. By upgrading a faster drive get and improvement, but once you decrypt it, you realise just how fast it could have been.
One of the key factors to be aware of when performing read and write tests on encrypted drives is that encrypted data cannot be compressed. With a lot of drives today they use technology which compresses the data, makes it smaller on the disk, so when it is read/written, the end result is basically increase R/W speeds of the disk because it's reading less data. However since encrypted data cannot be compressed, this technology cannot be used at all, therefore the true speeds of the disk are more evident.
In our own testing we have not seen a massive affect to the users experience when using the hardware we have at our disposal. However as I've stated before every drive can behave differently, performance measured by a benchmarking application may show a difference in speed but Windows load times and general use of the system may be in fact totally acceptable.
The read and write speed is what we are using to provide a specific, measurable bench mark. In actual fact the user experiences the slow down across the machine, including but not limited to, start-up, opening file explorer, navigating between folders, opening applications, opening files, coping files. If we ship a new laptop already encryption the user doesn't know any different. However if we ship them something new and encrypt once they have started using it, this is when they notice the difference and complain. If we onboard new customers and push out encryption, we get many complaints that our systems and ESET has adversely affected their computers.
We have noticed these affects over all manor of devices and drives. We see it on Dell Laptops with hi-speed NVME using RAID, and using ACHI. We see it on Lenovo laptops with old hard drives and new SSD's. The age and drive performance will dictate the extent of the slow down - however the slow down is always present to some extent.
So if you're downloading let's say a 10-20 MB file from somewhere, you could potentially download it at up to 10gbps and get it within milliseconds... the operating system or the network card will have big enough buffers that the whole file will fit in your computer's ram and as data comes it's also written to disk at the much slower speed (but this is separate and doesn't slow down the network transfer). However, if you were to download let's say a 8 GB DVD image of some movie or let's say Linux / Windows DVD iso/image , you will get maybe up to a few hundred MB at up to 10gbps and afterwards the speed will go down to around as fast as your SSD or hard drive is (the network card and operating system's buffers fill up and the storage is too slow to empty the buffers).
On my desktop (where I also compile sometimes) I only have 8 Gib of RAM, and six cores. Doing the same parallel build there could be greatly sped up, because six compilers running in parallel eat up enough memory for the SSD speed difference being very noticeable.
C++ compilation/linking is limited by processing speed, not HDD I/O. That's why you're not seeing any increase in compilation speed. (Moving the compiler/linker binaries to the SSD will do nothing. When you compile a big project, the compiler/linker and the necessary library are read into memory once and stay there.)
I have seen some minor speedups from moving the working directory to an SSD or ramdisk when compiling C projects (which is a lot less time consuming than C++ projects that make heavy use of templates etc), but not enough to make it worth it.
I presently have a 1000 MB/s SSD. I see that I can get a 2800 MB/s SSD. Would that gain me any speed with Final Cut? And assuming I use NeatVideo noise reduction and their dust and scratch filter. I know that NV really gets your GPU going. (Well, my optimization tests with v5 came up with GPU only for the best speed.)
The size of your hard drive doesn't affect how fast your processor runs or how quickly your computer is able to access the Internet. However, the hard drive's size plays a role in overall computer performance, but is a secondary role. Modern hard drives have such a high capacity that the size doesn't affect performance.
The hard drive doesn't affect how fast a processor runs. However, the hard drive is one of the slowest parts of the computer and actually leaves the processor waiting for more information. The hard drive is the data bottleneck: It is the member of the team that slows everyone down. The size of the hard drive doesn't matter, but a faster hard drive takes less time to send data to the processor. Additionally, the hard drive can be used to hold a page file, also known as virtual memory, that acts as an extension of the computer's main memory, the RAM. A larger hard drive can support a larger page file. According to Microsoft, the maximum page file size is 16TB, however most computers use just single-digit GBs of space. For example, an 8GB page file will work the same on a 20GB hard drive and a 500GB hard drive.
The size of a computer's hard drive has no effect on how quickly it can access the Internet. However, computers use something called "Temporary Internet Files" to store a local copy of images, text, scripts and other content on a Web page on the computer's hard drive. While broadband speeds can get very fast, the computer may be able to load the information from the hard drive faster than downloading it again from the site. The size of the hard drive won't affect the speed that the "Temporary Internet Files" load, but it does affect how much space it can use to store copies of these files.
1. I have on hand a couple of 7 year old 500GB 2.5" hard drives ripped out of old broken laptops. Am I correct in assuming that if I add these two old drives into my array, their much slower speed would massively reduce the overall performance of the entire build? If so, is there anything I could use them for in my unRAID build, or am I better off just forgetting about them?
1) If used in the parity array, they won't affect the normal read/write performance of the other drives. Unlike traditional RAID, each disk is an independent filesystem, so when reading a file, only the single disk that contains the file is accessed, and when writing a file, only parity and the single disk written is accessed. The drives would have some affect on parity checks and rebuilds, but after the check/rebuild had gotten past their size they wouldn't be involved anymore.And you could use them as cache disks. But, I probably wouldn't bother with them myself since they are too old, small, and slow to waste a port on.
2) Parity operations will only proceed at the speed of the slowest disk involved. As mentioned in 1), for normal reading, parity isn't involved, and for normal writing, parity and a single data disk is involved.
35fe9a5643
The external drive will run at the speed determined by its connection (USB 3.0, in your case). The internal drive won't affect its transfer speed at all. Rather than the drive you're considering, I'd probably get something like the Seagate FreeAgent GoFlex Home 2 TB. That's a connectivity and personal taste thing, though so you may not agree.
does disk speed affect download speed
Download https://spirsup-qtemppi.blogspot.com/?nr=2x5RYN
If copying from external to internal you are limited to the internals hard drive write speed. However, most hard drives are about the same. You can attach the hard drive to a USB 3.0 port but it will not reach anywhere near the max USB 3.0 can do.
For files >1gb in size file speeds revert back to normal hard drive speeds. The other danger listed is if power loss occurs during a write you will corrupt those files and have to rewrite them or get a UPS to backup the power.
An unused disk will not affect the global performance, but you should be thinkingof other factors: The disk is relatively old (as disks go), so may have a limitedlifetime. The fact that it will be powered-on now for some years to come,will use up the spin-time that is still left for it.
Overall, no, it will not affect your PC's general performance. Only applications that make use of data stored on that HDD will experience a performance penalty due to the slower data speeds of that harddrive.
I have excluded my hard disk drive for search indexing. Thus, the less the computer works with the old disk, the better it is. Any access by the computer to the old disk will slow down the computer, because there are many hidden processes that you cannot control, and if your disk is old, then the transfer speed will be very low.
Specifically, your system could be configured to spin down the HDD when not in use (as it should be unless it is a server disk which are designed to preferably spin 24/7). Sometimes, some application will request information about all partitions in the system, and then this operation will wait until the HDD has been spun up again. In my pretty top-notch PC at home this can take some 5-10 seconds for two old HDDs. Happens every once in a while; I know who the culprits are, it doesn't bother me, but if this were a critical PC, say one which needs to perform near-realtime tasks, then I would take them out.
Also as the sectors start to wear out the hard drive will need to do more ECC (error correction). As the problem gets worse, read/write speeds will diminish until its painful to use the drive or it fails.
We have been using ESET for over 10 years, and adopted Deslock when it was first introduced to the ESET ecosystem. Over the years we have noticed Encryption adversely affecting system performance - primarily in the read and write speeds. With some hard drives, this has been up to a 70% drop in speed. We see this on SSD's and NVMEs'. By upgrading a faster drive get and improvement, but once you decrypt it, you realise just how fast it could have been.
One of the key factors to be aware of when performing read and write tests on encrypted drives is that encrypted data cannot be compressed. With a lot of drives today they use technology which compresses the data, makes it smaller on the disk, so when it is read/written, the end result is basically increase R/W speeds of the disk because it's reading less data. However since encrypted data cannot be compressed, this technology cannot be used at all, therefore the true speeds of the disk are more evident.
In our own testing we have not seen a massive affect to the users experience when using the hardware we have at our disposal. However as I've stated before every drive can behave differently, performance measured by a benchmarking application may show a difference in speed but Windows load times and general use of the system may be in fact totally acceptable.
The read and write speed is what we are using to provide a specific, measurable bench mark. In actual fact the user experiences the slow down across the machine, including but not limited to, start-up, opening file explorer, navigating between folders, opening applications, opening files, coping files. If we ship a new laptop already encryption the user doesn't know any different. However if we ship them something new and encrypt once they have started using it, this is when they notice the difference and complain. If we onboard new customers and push out encryption, we get many complaints that our systems and ESET has adversely affected their computers.
We have noticed these affects over all manor of devices and drives. We see it on Dell Laptops with hi-speed NVME using RAID, and using ACHI. We see it on Lenovo laptops with old hard drives and new SSD's. The age and drive performance will dictate the extent of the slow down - however the slow down is always present to some extent.
So if you're downloading let's say a 10-20 MB file from somewhere, you could potentially download it at up to 10gbps and get it within milliseconds... the operating system or the network card will have big enough buffers that the whole file will fit in your computer's ram and as data comes it's also written to disk at the much slower speed (but this is separate and doesn't slow down the network transfer). However, if you were to download let's say a 8 GB DVD image of some movie or let's say Linux / Windows DVD iso/image , you will get maybe up to a few hundred MB at up to 10gbps and afterwards the speed will go down to around as fast as your SSD or hard drive is (the network card and operating system's buffers fill up and the storage is too slow to empty the buffers).
On my desktop (where I also compile sometimes) I only have 8 Gib of RAM, and six cores. Doing the same parallel build there could be greatly sped up, because six compilers running in parallel eat up enough memory for the SSD speed difference being very noticeable.
C++ compilation/linking is limited by processing speed, not HDD I/O. That's why you're not seeing any increase in compilation speed. (Moving the compiler/linker binaries to the SSD will do nothing. When you compile a big project, the compiler/linker and the necessary library are read into memory once and stay there.)
I have seen some minor speedups from moving the working directory to an SSD or ramdisk when compiling C projects (which is a lot less time consuming than C++ projects that make heavy use of templates etc), but not enough to make it worth it.
I presently have a 1000 MB/s SSD. I see that I can get a 2800 MB/s SSD. Would that gain me any speed with Final Cut? And assuming I use NeatVideo noise reduction and their dust and scratch filter. I know that NV really gets your GPU going. (Well, my optimization tests with v5 came up with GPU only for the best speed.)
The size of your hard drive doesn't affect how fast your processor runs or how quickly your computer is able to access the Internet. However, the hard drive's size plays a role in overall computer performance, but is a secondary role. Modern hard drives have such a high capacity that the size doesn't affect performance.
The hard drive doesn't affect how fast a processor runs. However, the hard drive is one of the slowest parts of the computer and actually leaves the processor waiting for more information. The hard drive is the data bottleneck: It is the member of the team that slows everyone down. The size of the hard drive doesn't matter, but a faster hard drive takes less time to send data to the processor. Additionally, the hard drive can be used to hold a page file, also known as virtual memory, that acts as an extension of the computer's main memory, the RAM. A larger hard drive can support a larger page file. According to Microsoft, the maximum page file size is 16TB, however most computers use just single-digit GBs of space. For example, an 8GB page file will work the same on a 20GB hard drive and a 500GB hard drive.
The size of a computer's hard drive has no effect on how quickly it can access the Internet. However, computers use something called "Temporary Internet Files" to store a local copy of images, text, scripts and other content on a Web page on the computer's hard drive. While broadband speeds can get very fast, the computer may be able to load the information from the hard drive faster than downloading it again from the site. The size of the hard drive won't affect the speed that the "Temporary Internet Files" load, but it does affect how much space it can use to store copies of these files.
1. I have on hand a couple of 7 year old 500GB 2.5" hard drives ripped out of old broken laptops. Am I correct in assuming that if I add these two old drives into my array, their much slower speed would massively reduce the overall performance of the entire build? If so, is there anything I could use them for in my unRAID build, or am I better off just forgetting about them?
1) If used in the parity array, they won't affect the normal read/write performance of the other drives. Unlike traditional RAID, each disk is an independent filesystem, so when reading a file, only the single disk that contains the file is accessed, and when writing a file, only parity and the single disk written is accessed. The drives would have some affect on parity checks and rebuilds, but after the check/rebuild had gotten past their size they wouldn't be involved anymore.And you could use them as cache disks. But, I probably wouldn't bother with them myself since they are too old, small, and slow to waste a port on.
2) Parity operations will only proceed at the speed of the slowest disk involved. As mentioned in 1), for normal reading, parity isn't involved, and for normal writing, parity and a single data disk is involved.
35fe9a5643
0 new messages