![]() Maybe an UI switch, defaulting to off, would be sufficient to fulfill both types of users.Īnyway, I'm supporting your request for faster transfers - TeraCopy should, at the very least, be nearly on par with Windows's internal copy routine. transferring a couple of big files and way more small files to the same target disk. While there's even a drop with NVMe based flash storage, IMHO that can be ignored sometimes, e. There should be a lot of room to optimize performance by better use of multi-threading. CPU core counts are going up and up, 10GbE networks are becoming accessible and NVMe SSD performance are starting to hit the PCIe Gen3x4 bandwidth limit. Even Windows 10 transfers are more than double that of Teracopy's. by using large numbers of HDD in Raid arrays or NVMe SSDs) and 10GbE+ networks.įor example, doing a hash verification on a 50GB file goes at only 350MB/sec on a Windows 10 VM with CPU utilization at only 10% when Crystal Disk Mark on the same system can hit over 2000MB/sec on sequential read and write when using 4 threads. However I am finding even when transferring and verifying single large files Teracopy seems very slow on systems capable of Giga Bytes per second of sequential read/write (eg. Keep in mind transferring multiple files simultaneously will turn a sequential read/write job into lots of random read/write jobs and your hard drives will become your bottle neck. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |