Displaying first 50 comments.
| 1. Posted By: Jeff - - April 19, 2007, 3:58 pm |
Program/Method: Windows Mapped Drive (X:)
Size of file: 347 MB
Network Type: 802.11b (11 mbps)
Transfer Time: 18 min
Transfer Speed: 2.57 mbps
|
| 2. Posted By: Jeff - - April 22, 2007, 12:50 pm |
Program/Method: Windows File Sharing
Network Type: 802.11g (54 mbps)
Size of file: 685 MB
Transfer Time: 7 min
Transfer Speed: 13.05 mbps
|
| 3. Posted By: Jeff - - April 22, 2007, 12:51 pm |
Program/Method: Mapped Drive (X:)
Network Type: 802.11g (54 mbps)
Size of file: 347 MB
Transfer Time: 3 min
Transfer Speed: 15.42 mbps
|
| 4. Posted By: JG - - May 21, 2007, 10:16 am |
Program/Method: XP Mapped drive
Network Type: 100Mbps NIC on a 1Gbps switch
Size of file: 2490 MB
Transfer Time: 4.5 min
Transfer Speed: 73.78 mbps
|
| 5. Posted By: Chuck - - May 21, 2007, 1:43 pm |
Program/Method: Net Use cross-domain
Network Type: T1
Size of file: 4138 MB
Transfer Time: 22 min
Transfer Speed: 25.08 mbps
|
| 6. Posted By: Mike - - May 22, 2007, 5:58 am |
Program/Method: Mac to windows via Samba share
Network Type: 802.11g wifi
Size of file: 347 MB
Transfer Time: 7 min
Transfer Speed: 6.61 mbps
|
| 7. Posted By: Jeff - - July 27, 2007, 11:35 pm |
Program/Method: Windows File Sharing
Network Type: 802.11g 54mbps
Size of file: 233 MB
Transfer Time: 2 min
Transfer Speed: 15.53 mbps
|
| 8. Posted By: compguyeye - - July 28, 2007, 12:01 am |
Program/Method: Mapped Drive
Network Type: 1000base or I gig/ 6E
Size of file: 666 MB
Transfer Time: 3 min
Transfer Speed: 29.6 mbps
Transfer from a VM server to workstation (Vista).
|
| 9. Posted By: Jeff - - July 28, 2007, 12:24 am |
Program/Method: windows shared drive letter X:
Network Type: 100mbps ethernet
Size of file: 6300 MB
Transfer Time: 15 min
Transfer Speed: 56 mbps
|
| 10. Posted By: internet-jeff - - September 12, 2007, 3:10 pm |
Program/Method: filezilla ftp client to Mac OS X FTPD
Network Type: IEEE 1394
Size of file: 1073 MB
Transfer Time: 7 min
Transfer Speed: 20.44 mbps
|
| 11. Posted By: Brad - - September 19, 2007, 10:03 am |
Program/Method: FTP, VSFTPd Server, FileZilla client
Network Type: 100mbps ethernet
Size of file: 571 MB
Transfer Time: 57 seconds
Transfer Speed: 76 Mbit
|
| 12. Posted By: Brad - - September 19, 2007, 10:03 am |
Program/Method: Mapped drive, Win2003 Server, Win 2000 client
Network Type: 100mbps ethernet
Size of file: 390 MB
Transfer Time: 44 seconds
Transfer Speed: 67 Mbit
|
| 13. Posted By: Brad - - September 19, 2007, 10:07 am |
Program/Method: iSCSI, iscsid Linux Server, Windows XP w/MS iscsi initiator client
Network Type: 1000mbps ethernet
Size of file: 1073739776B (~1GB)
Transfer Time: 20.8 seconds
Transfer Speed: 393 Mbit (!)
WiFi is for web browsing, not file serving. Which I think you've already discovered. Waiting 20+ minutes for a file to copy is painful!
Good luck,
Brad
|
| 14. Posted By: Lee - - December 4, 2007, 7:44 am |
Program/Method: Robocopy
Network Type: 100mbps ethernet
Size of file: 170000 MB
Transfer Time: 7200 min
Transfer Speed: 3.15 mbps
This is a rubbish transfer speed for Robocopy. Five days to copy 170GB isn't good at all. But then I discovered that the 64-bit version of Server 2003 has some issues (which is the server I'm copying to) so perhaps that has some bearing on things.
My previous copy was from 32-bit server 2003 to XP and that took less than two days.
|
| 15. Posted By: Martin Padilla B - padillabravo@hotmail.com - January 17, 2008, 6:14 pm |
Program/Method: windows mapped drive
Network Type: 100 mbps ethernet
Size of file: 10000 MB
Transfer Time: 18 min
Transfer Speed: 74.07 mbps
Also, I used unstopable copier to make a backup of an old hardisk to a new. The whole directory was aprox 10 Gb.
|
| 16. Posted By: helios - - February 18, 2008, 9:35 am |
I think you needed to do more testing.
I've done some personal testing on a 100mbps network and found similar results that when you use a mapped network drive that you can not even come close to getting the full available bandwidth.
However, I routinely use Filezilla to do transfers and can completely saturate the link - i.e. 100mbps, even with one transfer, not to mention filezilla's ability to do multithreaded transfers.
Another note, Filezilla's compression can work wonders on compressible files - for instance, a 300MB test file will compress well and transfer unbelieveably fast - however, a zip file with 300MB of MP3 or JPG files will transfer at wire speed.
|
| 17. Posted By: Mathew7 - - March 20, 2008, 12:57 am |
I made a small test using 100Mbps network between 2 computers that were connected through 5 switches (a cascading neighborhood network). The results:
FTP: 9MB/s
Windows file sharing: 7MB/s
When using only 1 switch, it is a tie.
For FTP I used Vermillion FTP Daemon, which was a lightweight FTP server.
So in case you use a low-latency (not speed) network, you are better with FTP.
The reason: FTP sends burts with the file contents, so it could have sent 10 packets before receiving any acknowledge of transmission. Windows file sharing uses a request-grant scheme: the client request a small part of the file and the server sends it. But the next request is made only after receiving the previous part. MS may have some handling improvements in this, but this is the way applications are designed.
|