On Friday, 30 May 2025 14:47:49 British Summer Time Frank Steinmetzger wrote: > Am Fri, May 30, 2025 at 11:56:24AM +0100 schrieb Michael: > > > According to that, it is connected at udma6 which is the fastest. So > > > that is good, I guess. Since both drives is slow to connect, it seems > > > this is a trend and may just be normal for these drives. Given I use > > > these for data that is only put in use a few minutes after booting, > > > which gives it plenty of time to connect properly, then it isn't a > > > problem for me. I just wouldn't want to try to put a OS on the thing > > > and boot from it. > > > > > > Any one else have different thoughts? See a problem that is a trend, in > > > a bad way? Given two different drives has the same slow connect time, > > > maybe it is normal. > > > > You can transfer some data from a tmpfs and measure the speed. If it gets > > anywhere near 4.8 Gbit/s (600 MB/s) its a SATA 3. > > But only on a fast SSD. An HDD does not reach this speed at all. I have a > USB3 to M.2 SATA enclosure with an SSD inside and I get around 400 MB/s for > sequential transfers of big video files. I guess the SSD doesn’t get any > faster.
Yes, you are quite right of course. The speed I quoted was the theoretical maximum for a SATA 3 interface. The drive itself would be much slower. Using dd to copy a 1.6G video on a HDD here I get ~216MB/s.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
