Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How long should file tranfers take?

Last response: in Storage
Share
February 26, 2010 1:02:02 PM

I just got a new NAS and am backing up my computer. I just wanted to know how long a 10Gb transfer should take over the network? I know there are many variables but am just curious as to how long you believe it should take. I have GB network but that I know has nothing to do with a NAS.
patriot pcnasvk35s2

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822219003
It is connected directly to Ethernet 1GB switch. Nothing is wireless in the connection. It all goes through an AT&T router/modem from 2wire a 1702HG Gateway.

More about : long file tranfers

a c 127 G Storage
February 26, 2010 1:28:51 PM

The URL you pasted is not complete, please replace with proper URL.

Also, what is your exact question? What speeds are you getting now?

And not to be rude, but we writes bits with lower case 'b' and bytes with a capital 'B'. Thus your network is 1Gbps (1 gigabit or 125MB/s raw bandwidth). And you probably wanted to transfer 10 gigabytes thus GB.

Normal wire transfers for gigabit ethernet are 40-100MB/s. You may need jumbo frames and other optimizations for maximum performance. And of course not using PCI anywhere.
m
0
l
February 26, 2010 1:40:39 PM

My transfer is 10-11 MB/sec.
newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822219003
I had to take out the www for some reason.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 127 G Storage
February 26, 2010 1:51:09 PM

That is pretty low, are you sure your own PC, your switch and the NAS are all gigabit ethernet? If so, it may not be fast enough. A real NAS would be able to get proper speeds; the OEM-built NASes can have very slow hardware or older implementation. The newegg page also suggests it uses Ext2 filesystem (or FAT32) - which means its using pretty outdated technology - which may in cases of disruption (power, etc) cause data-loss.
m
0
l
February 27, 2010 6:54:15 AM

At this point I know it is not the NAS but something that is screwed up. I did get the Gbps to finally start working again but I can't send anything from my Vista comp. to my Xp computer. I can send from XP to vista though. It just won't run. The other day it was around 90 or so MB/sec from C to C. I did get the NAS up to around 20 MB/sec. I can find all my pieces to the network but when I go to send it just can't do it.
m
0
l
February 27, 2010 12:51:33 PM

The NAS you linked to is not a very high spec comsumer NAS by todays standards, as it only has a 500Mhz CPU and 128MB RAM

It has the same spec as my 3 year old Synology DS207+ NAS, which can read at 40+MB/s, and write at 20MB/s

My current Synology DS1010+ with an Dual Core Intel Atom D510 CPU and 1GB RAM has speeds of 100MB/s Read, and 92MB/s Write
m
0
l
February 27, 2010 1:02:07 PM

That's not even my problem right now. I can't seem to get my computer on the other end to take a download now. It goes but goes so slow that it does not even show it is going. The NAS runs at about 22MB/sec now.

What NAS under $300 could you recommend?
m
0
l
February 28, 2010 1:25:43 AM

I have found part of a culprit. My new Avast free stops all downloads to the my other network computer. I shut it off and my download works. I turn it on and it stops it. What settings do I need to change on it because I really like the new Avast.

Would a system restore on my main computer maybe also help to get my settings back to what they were before this all started happening?
m
0
l
March 1, 2010 6:00:27 PM

I have changed my mind. I will pay over $400 if need be to get a NAS that has some fast speed. Does the HP EX490 have fast file transfer speed? I don't know what the heck to do. I look at one article and it says a machine is fast the other says not. Would anyone be able to give me a good recommendation for a prebuilt one?
m
0
l
March 2, 2010 5:04:27 AM

The main purpose is to backup data in a central location for all my computers.
m
0
l
March 2, 2010 1:18:28 PM

I will be using this for mainly backup purposes but along down the road maybe things will change but for now backup and a lot of it. Is Raid 1 an important issue or raid 5 or 10? If so I probably need to look for a 4 bay unit but for now I have decided a 2 bay should suffice which would allow me to raid 1 if all believe it is important.

I have these 3 that I have narrowed it down to.

Seagate Blackarmor 220

Iomega StorCenter ix2-200


Synology ds209+, no not the 209 or 209+II but the 209+ I have a chance for some that remain.

All of these are about the same price. Different tests show each at around the same speed. All are rated good.
What is your take on these? Thanks for your help.
m
0
l
March 2, 2010 6:09:22 PM

Also, what about the QNAP TS-219P and the Thecus N3200? Does anyone know anything about any of these NAS machines?
m
0
l
March 8, 2010 3:46:30 PM

As I continue to test the network speed I am truly baffled. My local area connection shows 1.0Gbps. The computer on the other end shows the same but when I go to download to the other computer I get speeds between 16-20 MB/s. I know there are many variables but holy cow. What can I do?

My problem is still that there seems to be a problem between my one computer running vista 64bit and windows xp pro on the other one. I have enabled jumbo frames and nothing changes. The computer is an AMD quad core computer 4400+. That should be able to handle what I was feeding it. I changed hdd and that did not make a difference except to give me my needed space for the computer I was needing. The gig lan is a built in lan to the mobod of the computer. I don't have a NAS yet as I tried one but it was not very good.

Would buying a pci lan card be the way to go for this computer as I will use it for alternative backups etc.

Could a new nic card in each computer maybe make a difference? The cards would be exactly the same. The one mobod is around 6 years old the other maybe 4. The lan that I have are on the mobod. Just a thought.
m
0
l
March 8, 2010 6:51:14 PM

This is what someone told me in another forum. What is true about this?

For 1Gbit LAN to work, you'll need GBLan adapters and cables (yes, these are different than
"Normal" CAT-5 cables) in all devices on your network, including switches & routers.

I did not think routers would affect it after it is hooked up to the switch.

My network goes like this. Internet in to a 2wire modem/router-----gig switch-----computer-- also from the gig switch------ to another switch in another room------ to another computer, bluray, denon 3808CI, NAS(soon).
m
0
l
a c 127 G Storage
March 9, 2010 12:22:36 PM

Like the difference between a sports car and a bike?

Your NIC should be onboard though, embedded in your chipset. If you don't you have old hardware anyway.

If you care at all about speed, you would make sure you never use PCI ever again in any of your systems. That's a good rule of thumb and may prevent lots of problems.
m
0
l
March 9, 2010 12:31:23 PM

So, what you are saying is that PCI-E will work better for a nic than the PCI. It will make a difference in download speed?
m
0
l
a c 127 G Storage
March 9, 2010 12:34:26 PM

Onboard is the best solution - chipset connected
PCI-express is the second best solution - slower than onboard but still fast
PCI is the worst solution, and should never be used.

PCI is extremely old in case you didn't know. Its technology from 1993. So almost 20 years old.
m
0
l
March 9, 2010 1:35:45 PM

I have onboard right now. It is an older board but I think that is where my problem stems.
m
0
l
March 9, 2010 2:59:54 PM

What does this say about the lan on my computer?

Onboard LAN 2 - Realtek RTL8110SC - PCI Gigabit Ethernet controller
Is that saying it is a PCI onboard controller? Would that only give it pci speeds?
m
0
l
a c 127 G Storage
March 9, 2010 3:11:37 PM

Yes, that means your "onboard" ethernet is not chipset-powered at all, because the chipset does not support onboard ethernet. So your motherboard put an extra chip on the PCB that incorporates an ethernet NIC and PHY - and connects that to your PC via the PCI bus. It would be the same as using a 5-dollar realtek PCI-card.

Using PCI either for storage or networking is bad for performance. If both are on PCI its a nightmare with very low performance.
m
0
l
March 9, 2010 3:38:30 PM

So adding a pci-e nic card should help alot right?
m
0
l
a c 127 G Storage
March 9, 2010 3:42:11 PM

Yes, and you don't even need an expensive one. A realtek would do just fine. Though generally, the Intel PRO/1000 PT (PT version means its PCI-express) is a solid buy that has good drivers.

I don't guarantee that would be the end of your performance issues though, as alot of factors might lower performance - and i don't have a full picture of your setup. But at least you would rule out network performance, as PCI-e NIC is generally very good.
m
0
l
March 10, 2010 4:56:01 PM

I could see CPU as an issue for gig transfers. My 2.66ghz i7 uses ~4%-5% cpu when transferring 110MB/sec over Windows file sharing. Once you add in overhead, I'm sure about about the limit of a 1000mb/sec link.

Since I have 8 kernel threads(cpus), 5% of my cpu is about 40% of a single core. 40% of a 2.66ghz cpu is MUCH more than a 500mhz cpu could handle. And I have an Intel NIC with full TCP/UDP+IPv4/6 offload.

I'm using Win7 with Win7 NIC drivers with full hardware accelerated chimney support, so my CPU usage is probably lower than that of a low grade NAS with a NIC that has little/no offload.

I could probably get better speeds and lower cpu if I could find out how to enable jumbo frames.
m
0
l
March 12, 2010 11:45:48 PM

This is what I bought. The Intel EXPI9301CT 10/ 100/ 1000Mbps PCI-Express Gigabit CT Desktop Adapter. I have this nic card and it sure made a difference. The one nice thing it did was find that I had a bad cable. I never found that with anything else I had. With the new nic I got an extra 200Mbps and when it found the bad cable it gave me another 100Mbps. I just want to know if anyone has this card and how to tweak it. Man are there a lot of settings. I got two of them. One for each computer on the net. How does the master/slave work. There is also teaming. How do I use it and should I? If anyone has perfected any of these settings please help me out. Thanks.
m
0
l
March 17, 2010 12:01:28 PM

I got my speeds up to 89-91 MB/s. For my two main runs which are a little under 60' do you think cat 6 would help a little?
m
0
l
!