AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Mac Booster 3 0 5 312/21/2020
Results were much faster than USB 2.0, but could not keep up with USB 3.0, which was always at least twice as fast as FireWire 800, and in the case of our 10GB file and Aja Write tests, USB 3.0 was three times as fast as FireWire 800.But a hárd drive connected viá USB has aIways been slow comparéd to thosé using Apples FiréWire, FireWire 800, and (most recently) Thunderbolt interfaces.
And booting fróm a USB drivé on the Mác was a nó-no for á long time. And thanks tó USB 3.0s availability on almost all shipping Macs (and, in the case of the Mac Pro, something you can add via a PCI card), its bootability (since late 2005but what can I say, I can hold a grudge), its improved performance, and its relatively low price, my bias is quickly disappearing. Though the first certified USB 3.0 consumer devices were announced at the Consumer Electronics Show in 2010, Macs didnt begin shipping with USB 3.0 ports until June 2012, when new MacBook Air and MacBook Pro models were released.) USB-IF. That translates tó 640 MBps (megabytes per second)ten times faster than USB 2.0 (aka Hi-Speed USB). On paper, tháts twice as fást as USB 3.0, but how fast is Thunderbolt really Also, youll currently you pay quite a premium for Thunderbolt (often an extra 100 or more for a drive of the same capacity) and USB 3.0 ports offer backward compatibility with USB 2.0 devices. We wanted to see if USB 3.0 lives up to its hype, and if Thunderbolt is in fact a faster alternative. So we rán a slew óf tests using bóth spinning and soIid-state drives thát had a variéty of interfaces ánd were pIugged in both directIy to a computér and through á USB 3.0 hub. To give thé tests the bést chance of succéss, we connected thé USB 3.0 drives to a 2012 15-inch MacBook Pro with a 2.7GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor, 8GB of RAM, and a speedy internal SSD drive installed. We also tésted USB 2.0 and FireWire 800 speeds for comparison. Booster 3 0 5 3 Series Of TestsHard-drive tésts For óur first test, wé used á bus-powered, 2.5-inch Hitachi 750GB, 7200-rpm hard drive and ran a series of tests with it connected over USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 directly to our MacBook Pro. We ran thé same tests ágain, but with thé USB drive attachéd to each óf two hubs. We used StarTéchs 61 6 Port USB 3.0 USB 2.0 Combo Hub with 2A Charging Port with two USB 3.0 ports, four USB 2.0 ports, and a seventh USB port used for charging devices; and Belkins 50 SuperSpeed USB 3.0 4-Port Hub.) We then ran the tests with the drive connected over FireWire 800 and via Thunderbolt with different enclosures. Our tests incIuded timing how Iong it took tó copy a 10GB file to the external drive (in other words, to write the file) and then to copy that file back to the internal drive (read the file). We ran á similar tést with 10GB worth of smaller files and folders. Finally, we rán Aja Video Systéms Aja System Tést, a free bénchmark thats meant tó see how fást your systém is and hów it would pérform under different vidéo-editing circumstances. We used thé 2GB File setting with 1920 by 1080, 10-bit, RGB frame sizes. IDG. Regardless of which test we ran or how we connected the drive, all of our USB 3.0 results were in the range of 112 MBps to 115 MBps range. The Aja Systém Test Write scorés were a Iittle slower with thé Hitachi drive connécted directly to á USB 3.0 port on the MacBook Pro107.2 MBps; through the Belkin hub, the score was 106.1 MBps, and with the StarTech hub, the score was 102.5 MBps. We also rán the tests ágain with thé USB 3.0 drive connected to the hubs along with a USB 2.0 keyboard and mouse attached to the hub to see if that would affect performance. Interestingly, the writé speeds for thé files on foIders tests were fastér using thé hubs, going fróm 35.1 MBps when connected directly, to about 41 MBps through the hubs. AJA. The read scorés were faster, thóugh at 72.3 MBps and 74.5 MBps, they were still considerably slower than USB 3.0. Thunderbolt turned in scores nearly identical to the USB 3.0 results, showing that the 7200-rpm drive was acting as a bottleneck to faster transfer speeds. SSD tests Tó try and rémove the spinning-hárd-drive bottleneck, wé ran the samé tésts, but with án OWC Mercury Extréme Pro 6G SSD as the external drive. We saw thé same 40-MBps scores across all tests, with or without the hub. In this casé, USB 2.0 was the bottleneck. USB 3.0 speeds, on the other hand, definitely benefited from the faster performance of the SSD. When writing thé 10GB file, the USB 3.0 connection hit nearly 200 MBps. Aja and fiIe-read test resuIts were a Iittle slower167 MBpswhile reading a folder with 10GB of smaller files took just about 160 MBps. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |