Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

20

USB 3.0 has an upper limit around 5.0Gbps. SATA III has an upper limit of 6.0Gbps. Regardless of overhead these rates are far higher than what a mechanical HDD can sustain for large transfers. Most mechanical HDDs won't be able to sustain more than about 1.5Gbps (HDD Speed results). So I doubt you would notice much difference in performance. Real world ...


8

USB will always be slower than SATA because of protocol overhead, at least. You also must consider that USB is "one transfer at a time", which means any other device connected to USB will degrade performance of the USB-HDD. While theoretically using 1 USB root for 1 USB hdd might yield good results, in practice every computer has a plethora of other devices ...


6

It’s a command the host sends to the drive. In your regular PC, power is supplied directly from the PSU. It’s supplied as long as the PC is on, whether or not the drive is in standby. This is necessary because if the drive were to shut down completely, you would not be able to access it again.


3

Basically since exFAT dirty bit is in dec offset 106 of the VBR, and it's a bit, not a byte. Luckily the flags which include byte 106(6a) are not included in the calculation of the VBR checksum. You just use a hex editor to zero that dirty bit. For more detailed info on the layout of the VBR and the lags, the internals are at ...


2

As USB 3.0 should be able to transfer around 400 MB/s [1], it should be faster to connect both drives to the USB3. You won't exceed 2x200 MB/s with the harddrives, I am quite sure. For even coming close to this, you would have to copy one very big file to the other harddrive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB#USB_3.0


2

This is due to how a physical harddrive works. When data is written to the harddrive, the partition table stores for each file where the data is stored. It does this as follows: It looks up the first available free spot, and starts writing there. When the file is bigger than that space, it will stop writing there, and make a note in the partition table ...


2

As per the discussion in the comments above, the suggested solution is to add a drive letter to the drives, and if that doesn't work, to delete all existing partitions, re-partition and reformat the drives as NTFS via Disk Management. Since one of the drives might have a HFS/HFS+ Mac partition, the latter would be required anyway.


1

Create a Bootable USB Drive 1 Your flash drive will need to be at least 4 GB in size in order to successfully copy the ISO file onto it. All of the data on your flash drive will be lost when you turn it into an installation drive, so be sure to back up any important files before continuing. 2 Download the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool. This is available ...


1

Hard drive manufacturers market drives in terms of decimal (base 10) capacity. In decimal notation, one megabyte (MB) is equal to 1,000,000 bytes, one gigabyte (GB) is equal to 1,000,000,000 bytes, and one terabyte (TB) is equal to 1,000,000,000,000 bytes. Programs such as FDISK, system BIOS, Windows, and MacOS use the binary (base 2) numbering system. In ...


1

There are really two types of recovery involved: Partition table -- This data structure defines where your partitions reside on the disk (their start and end points, or start point and length, plus other associated metadata such as type codes). Your action overwrote the partition table at the start of the disk. If your disk uses the older Master Boot ...


1

Was just about to toss my old iomega 500GB when I thought I'd try one last thing. I used Disk Utility to reformat the partition that wouldn't mound. I selected the "1 Partition" layout, then formatted it to MBR (Master Boot Record) and hit "Apply". To my surprise, it mounted! Then I formatted it again, this time under options I chose "GUID" and under format ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible