(SOLVED) T for Win -600MBs then 100MBs
-
- Posts: 3738
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:37 pm
Re: T for Win -600MBs then 100MBs
VSS is default as it's there to use when available. The backup test was roughly 20sec difference which is within normal system differences. Copying the raw 108G file itself at windows command prompt was only about 30 seconds difference from actual backup which suggests it's hit the max write speed. More important than watching the graph jump up and down is the total time which involves not only read/write but compression, integrity, and other overhead. In some cases higher compression may be faster if waiting on writes.
Re: T for Win -600MBs then 100MBs
I used Rufus to create a image 4 linux 3.61 stick and booted to it and ran a backup. 1:24 - that's 1 min 24 sec. It absolutely flew. Never seen it go so fast. That's 100GB of data to a 79GB backup image. I'm going to boot to it again to see if I understand how to capitalize on this...
EDIT, so I used I4L to restore that image back onto the sammy 980pro and that took 1 min 31 sec. Fantastic. And tested both Mint and windows - both boot and seem fine, as I would expect. I don't understand it but I'll take it!
The only capability I don't have is the ability to restore a file, but I can easily do that in windows, but for my backups and restores, drive or partition, I can just use I4L. Very nice!!! THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! looks like average speed of 1.190GBs.
EDIT, so I used I4L to restore that image back onto the sammy 980pro and that took 1 min 31 sec. Fantastic. And tested both Mint and windows - both boot and seem fine, as I would expect. I don't understand it but I'll take it!
The only capability I don't have is the ability to restore a file, but I can easily do that in windows, but for my backups and restores, drive or partition, I can just use I4L. Very nice!!! THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! looks like average speed of 1.190GBs.
Re: (SOLVED) T for Win -600MBs then 100MBs
I just restored a 22.7 GB Win11 image in 21 seconds. Using IFL. Two Samsung 970 M.2 NVMe drives.
IFL is always fast for me.
I create images with IFW. Creating the above image was strange. The transfer rate was only around 150 MBps for the first half and it jumped up to 1100 MBps for the second half.
IFL is always fast for me.
I create images with IFW. Creating the above image was strange. The transfer rate was only around 150 MBps for the first half and it jumped up to 1100 MBps for the second half.
Re: (SOLVED) T for Win -600MBs then 100MBs
yeah , something I don't understand going on with IFW, but now that I know about IFL, I will use that for 99.9% of my stuff, backup and restore. Flies.
-
- Posts: 3738
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:37 pm
Re: (SOLVED) T for Win -600MBs then 100MBs
FWIW, I found "winsat" tool built-in to windows - from administrator command prompt:
winsat disk -drive x
I found my target drive was 441.12MB/s which is why it slowed down. I thought it was an NVMe but may not have been.
winsat disk -drive x
I found my target drive was 441.12MB/s which is why it slowed down. I thought it was an NVMe but may not have been.
Re: (SOLVED) T for Win -600MBs then 100MBs
Revisiting this thread very briefly.
One NVMe I was having the speed drop on was a WD.
I was doing something else and discovered that all along, this was MBR.
I changed it to GPT.
No more speed drop.
IFL 109GB 2:05
Under windows10, TeraByte app same SSD 3:39 which is quite reasonable for windows overhead. But no speed drop - fairly constant ~ 540MBps.
So my problem was apparently that it was MBR. Or maybe the change from 3.61 to 4.02
Go figure!
You rock!
Be well.
One NVMe I was having the speed drop on was a WD.
I was doing something else and discovered that all along, this was MBR.
I changed it to GPT.
No more speed drop.
IFL 109GB 2:05
Under windows10, TeraByte app same SSD 3:39 which is quite reasonable for windows overhead. But no speed drop - fairly constant ~ 540MBps.
So my problem was apparently that it was MBR. Or maybe the change from 3.61 to 4.02
Go figure!
You rock!
Be well.