Resolved Is it faster to connect USB 3 hard disk to newer Mac and connect remotely, vs direct?

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by poiihy, Jan 1, 2015.

  1. poiihy, Jan 1, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2015

    poiihy macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #1
    I have a lot of transferring to do to my USB 3 HD between a 2009 MBP and iMac. They only have USB 2 ports and the speed is slow (30MB/s). On a newer mac with USB 3 ports, the speeds are much faster (100MB/s). Would it be faster to connect the usb disk to the new rMBP with USB3 ports and connect to the hard disk remotely from the old 2009 Macs (using File Sharing)?
     
  2. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #2
    Depending on the network, it can be faster to connect to it over a network.
     
  3. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #3
    You would need to be using Gigabit Ethernet as the backbone to see any speed benefit.
     
  4. poiihy thread starter macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #4
    I use WiFi
    802.11n has max speed of 600Mbit/s which is 75MB/s, according to Wikipedia if I understand it correctly.
    Whatever it is I am going to test it now and see.
     
  5. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #5
    That's the maximum theatrical speeds, real world speeds are much less around that of USB 2.
     
  6. poiihy thread starter macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #6
    Ok...so...I tested it...
    5 MB/s.
    Oh the horror.
     
  7. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #7
    Most routers are 3x3 which is limited to 450 Mbps.
     
  8. poiihy thread starter macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #8
    idk what that means

    For some reason it only runs at 5MB/s
    Surely it can do better than that, can't it?
     
  9. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #9
    I wonder if it is copying to the internal hard drive then having the Mac put it on the USB drive? What are the transmit rates on both of the computers? You can view this by option clicking the Wi-Fi icon in the menu bar.
     
  10. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #10
    Don't forget if both machines are using the same access point speeds will be cut as the radio can only talk to one machine at a time.
     
  11. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #11
    You could just take an Ethernet cable and directly connect the two computers.
     
  12. ColdCase, Jan 1, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2015

    ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #12
    In my experience, just save the stuff to the drive via USB and transfer to the iMac. Fewer problems in the long run. The network latency will hurt you and you need a strong network backbone. The old 2009 mac probably has a slow wireless radio anyway. Ethernet connections would be better. But just kick off the save and come back tomorrow. Set the Mac to never sleep.
     
  13. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #13
    Or use Caffeine which is free in the App Store.
     
  14. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #14
    You don't even need Caffine, just use the builtin Terminal command: caffeinate -dims
     
  15. MrX8503 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    #15
    You'll never get any kind of appreciable speeds over 802.11n. You need gigabit ethernet or 802.11ac. Ethernet would be the best though.
     
  16. poiihy thread starter macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #16
    Caffeine doesn't seem to work anymore

    ----------

    rMBP does not have Ethernet port.

    ----------

    You misunderstood... I needed to transfer data from 2009 MBP and 2009 iMac to 2TB hard drive. The question was if using network to USB 3 would be faster. Apparently it is insanely slow

    ----------

    The Tx Rate? on 2009 MBP it is 200-250Mbps. Don't know about the rMBP.
     
  17. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #17


    Perhaps, but the answer is the same. Just copy and let it run. It may be more reliable to do it in chunks (groups of folders) than just dragging and dropping the entire disk. If this was a routine part of your work flow, it may make sense to spend some time optimizing. For a one or two time deal, just brute force it. I've done that numerous times on a number of different machines and in the end it just works better. Slow but without potential complications to resolve that makes one do it again and again :) A total of 2TB of data is not that much today.
     
  18. poiihy thread starter macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #18
    ik
    it's already been done
     
  19. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #19
    USB 2.0 is capable of 480 Mbps theoretically. Your network connection was a bottle neck to begin with.
     
  20. poiihy thread starter macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #20
    Mbps is megaBITS per second? I thought Mbps was the same as Mb/s. Ugh these bits and bytes are so confusing.
    Still it shouldn't be 5MB/s should it? It should be same speed as USB 2...
     
  21. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #21
    USB 2.0 is 480 Mbps (Megabits Per Second) theoretically. Your wireless router likely can only go to 450 Mbps (Megabits Per Second) as most consumer routers are 3x3. You say that the transmit rate on the 2009 MacBook Pro was 200-250 Mbps (Megabits Per Second). We will assume it was consistent at 200 Mbps. 200 Megabits per Second is 25 Megabytes per Second. Coupled between overhead, the transmit rate of the other Mac, and if the files were being copied to the internal drive first could cause speeds to consistently be that low.
     

Share This Page