OMG this is a slow HD!

~~craig588~~ · Sep 20, 2003, 11:13 PM

I was just hired to transfaer over all of the data from someones 2 5400RPM 120G HDs onto their new dual 250G WD special edition raid 0 array. Well, anyways I started copying the data from the 1st one, and windows is estimating it will take about 100,000 minutes. In other words 70 days, and thats just for one drive. This guy has both of his HDs filled up completely with photographs. (Hes a professional photographer)

Is there anything I can do to speed up the transfer? I can't compress the files down because neither one of the HDs has more than 1GB of space left on them. Does windows miscalculate the estimiated transfer time on very large transfers such as this? It has been going for about a half hour now.

BWX · Sep 20, 2003, 11:22 PM

LOL, 70 days, that's hilarious. It can't be right.

Matth · Sep 20, 2003, 11:30 PM

http://www.ppsoft.dk/hol_Copy_eng.htm - not the one I was looking for, I remember a few "fast" file copiers.

Still hunting...

If the drives are on different controllers, they should not be impeding each other.

http://www.codeproject.com/tools/multicopier.asp - still not the one I remember

~~craig588~~ · Sep 20, 2003, 11:34 PM

They are on seperate controllers. Ones on the mobo ATA connector on its own channel, and the other 2 are on the mobos SATA connectors.

I'll check out that site.

Judas · Sep 21, 2003, 03:44 AM

.....windows does estimate incorrectly..

if all depends on the file size and whatnot... defraging the drive before coping helps a pile...

I moved 40+ gb of information from 2 drives.... through a network onto 1 drives.... Windows esitmated 10,000 minutes or so..but it was done in 22 minutes....

Everytime it finished one file...and started copying the next... the minutes would fluctuate a fair bit.... small files seemed to bump the minutes up.... large files would lower it drastically... (most of the files were 10mb in size)

~~craig588~~ · Sep 21, 2003, 03:51 AM

Acctually it finished in about 2 hours. I guess the estimation doesn't really matter as long as it acctually copies.

Sep 20, 2003, 11:13 PM	#1
~~craig588~~ Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: In clothing Posts: 3,510 Rep Power: 0	OMG this is a slow HD! I was just hired to transfaer over all of the data from someones 2 5400RPM 120G HDs onto their new dual 250G WD special edition raid 0 array. Well, anyways I started copying the data from the 1st one, and windows is estimating it will take about 100,000 minutes. In other words 70 days, and thats just for one drive. This guy has both of his HDs filled up completely with photographs. (Hes a professional photographer) Is there anything I can do to speed up the transfer? I can't compress the files down because neither one of the HDs has more than 1GB of space left on them. Does windows miscalculate the estimiated transfer time on very large transfers such as this? It has been going for about a half hour now.

Sep 20, 2003, 11:22 PM	#2
BWX unplugged Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: USNY Posts: 19,669 Rep Power: 110 System Specs	LOL, 70 days, that's hilarious. It can't be right. __________________

Sep 20, 2003, 11:30 PM	#3
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,426 Rep Power: 93 System Specs	http://www.ppsoft.dk/hol_Copy_eng.htm - not the one I was looking for, I remember a few "fast" file copiers. Still hunting... If the drives are on different controllers, they should not be impeding each other. http://www.codeproject.com/tools/multicopier.asp - still not the one I remember Last edited by Matth; Sep 20, 2003 at 11:39 PM.

Sep 20, 2003, 11:34 PM	Thread Starter #4
~~craig588~~ Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: In clothing Posts: 3,510 Rep Power: 0	They are on seperate controllers. Ones on the mobo ATA connector on its own channel, and the other 2 are on the mobos SATA connectors. I'll check out that site.

Sep 21, 2003, 03:51 AM	Thread Starter #6
~~craig588~~ Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: In clothing Posts: 3,510 Rep Power: 0	Acctually it finished in about 2 hours. I guess the estimation doesn't really matter as long as it acctually copies.