Hello, my 2-in-1 netbook/tablet thingy only has one USB3 connector, for reasons I cannot fathom. Copying things from one external USB3 drive to another USB3 drive takes ages, as one of them is connected to USB2. I'm thinking of buying a USB3 hub and connecting both external drives to that, should be faster, right? Also, these things sometimes come with an external networkport (RJ45), does anyone hav any experiences with these external ports? I was thinking of this one
I use an Icy Box one http://www.amazon.co.uk/Icybox-IB-A...1446459864&sr=8-15&keywords=usb+3+hub+icy+box and an Anker one http://www.amazon.co.uk/Anker-4-Por...=1446459930&sr=8-4&keywords=anker+usb+3.0+hub Both are very good, but in your situation I do not think you will go wrong whatever you choose.
I am not sure it would be faster because you are still going through the same computer. If the hub could handle all the processing and simply transfer data directly from one external drive to the other, it would be much faster. But you are still going from one drive, through the hub, through the computer's USP port to the computer's processor and RAM, then back to the computer's USB port, through the hub then out to the second drive.
Yes but given USB3 is hugely faster than USB2, using the same USB3 port as opposed to a USB3 and a USB2, should still see a significant reduction in time. Unless of course the hub is crap, the USB devices themselves are crap or the laptop's controller is crap.
If all the devices are USB3.0, then you will see difference. But there are many points in between that can bottleneck the process - including system RAM. And if the system listed above is the system this hub will go through, then that 2GB of DDR400 will not help.
OP says it's a laptop. Presumably much newer than the sig rig. How can system RAM be a bottleneck for USB!?
He said "netbook/tablet" so it will not have an abundance of horsepower - and may not even have 2Gb of RAM.
You are joking right? No abundance of horsepower? Maybe less than 2GB RAM? What does any of that have to do with USB? If it has USB3 it's new enough to be powerful enough to use it
"To use it" is not the same as being happy with the performance. 32-bit Windows 10 will run with a 1 GHz processor, 1 GB of RAM and 16GB of disk space but that IN NOW WAY suggests a user with such a system will be happy with the performance. Now who's joking? The USB interface is NOT an independent device!! It depends entirely on the system (OS, motherboard bus, CPU and RAM) to process every single byte of data being transferred through the USB port. And in the case of transferring files from one drive to another (including with a hub), the RAM is playing a critical role in that process. But much of that RAM is already being consumed by Windows itself, system drivers, networking, and resource hogging security programs. This means even with the best of transfer speeds, only small chunks of data from drive 1 can be copied to drive 2 at a time. And that going back and forth for many tiny chunks of data will greatly bog down transfer speeds.
It's a Celeron N2940 based netbook with 2GB ram. That said, the processor does have native USB3 support
That will certainly help. But again, even with a hub, the data must be processed through the netbook's one USB 3.0 port using the same limited amount of RAM. So even with the faster speeds of USB 3.0, I would not expect much of a performance gain - keeping in mind these are hard drives too, and not SSDs. I have used USB to Ethernet adapters before with no problems. If your netbook does not have Ethernet support already, this would be a good way to add it.
I'm sorry but I've never heard such a load of rubbish. I feel the need to abandon this thread now before it gets worse. Noiz out
Well, it was sure was nice of you to explain, rather than run off in a tissy fit. At this point, we don't even know what you are whining about! If you don't believe the amount of system RAM matters when transferring data through a single USB port, how about educating us with some logical rationale as to how you think it works? Or are you now suggesting the Ethernet port will not work?
Is it your sole mission to annoy everybody on this forum? It's really quite simple. Yes, system resources play a part, however saying that he will likely see no difference is utter crap. Any relatively modern CPU with a bit of RAM won't be affecting USB3 speed that much. It's like saying software RAID is a bad idea because the CPU has to do all the calculations and it will affect system performance. It was true years ago, not now. Anything equipped with USB3 will have the necessary oomph to make a decent job of using it.
So I recap, copying usb3-to-usb3 over a usb3 hub SHOULD be faster than copying usb3-to-usb2. External ethernet-via-usb3 works. Thx!
