KVR Audio

DaveElson · Post by **DaveElson** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:25 pm

Hi All

Just purchased a new comnputer, and I'm wondering about whether usb 3 external hd (which I know nothing about) is faster than an internal hard drive for sample storage?
Would it make much difference either way? My new computer is quad core - at work at present so can't remember the processor speed.
Apologies for my ignorance.
Thanks.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:20 pm

Hi, this thread will likely do better in the computer set-up forum so I'm moving it there but I will leave a shadow topic here to link to where it has been moved too

DaveElson · Post by **DaveElson** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:12 pm

Thanks Hink, I think that's where I meant it to go, where did I put it?

DevonB · Post by **DevonB** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:23 pm

No, you can't get faster than internal, period. Internal deals with the drive interface without additional translation (in your case, SATA, or possibly EIDE, but doubt it these days. Still could be SAS/SCSI, but I digress...) Adding USB is adding a bridge (USB to SATA) which takes more resources and 'time' to do its thing. Now you've got to get on the USB bus which is an additional step that you wouldn't have to do if it was directly attached to the SATA adapter. USB also takes CPU overhead to keep it 'going'. If you HAVE to go external, go eSATA, which is just a SATA port on the outside of your case without additional 'things' getting in the way, otherwise keep it internal.

Devon

DaveElson · Post by **DaveElson** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:29 pm

Devon,

Thanks for the advice. Internals seem pretty cheap nowadays so I'll go that route then. I will have to open the case to make sure I have a spare bay (I should have).
Thanks again.

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:42 pm

Several people in this thread were advising to go for an external drive for samples:

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 25#5206325

so is that not right then?

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:45 pm

In case of external drives, eSATA is probably the best choice. Thunderbolt harddrives aren't many, and it doesn't seem like adoption rate for Thunderbolt devices is rising unstoppably. I suspect Thunderbolt won't survive for much longer, Apple will kill it in due time

So eSATA it is.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:02 pm

DaveElson wrote:Thanks Hink, I think that's where I meant it to go, where did I put it?

diy, but that's okay

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:16 am

EvilDragon wrote:In case of external drives, eSATA is probably the best choice. Thunderbolt harddrives aren't many, and it doesn't seem like adoption rate for Thunderbolt devices is rising unstoppably. I suspect Thunderbolt won't survive for much longer,

It won't if they keep gouging purchasers with such ridiculous prices. I bought a 2 TB Seagate GoFlex drive last year for my Mac, the one with the adaptable base for different interfaces including Thunderbolt, but the addon adapter is still more than the cost of the drive itself, and then you still have to pay for the Thunderbolt cable, which is ridiculous!

DevonB · Post by **DevonB** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:31 pm

EvilDragon wrote:In case of external drives, eSATA is probably the best choice. Thunderbolt harddrives aren't many, and it doesn't seem like adoption rate for Thunderbolt devices is rising unstoppably. I suspect Thunderbolt won't survive for much longer, Apple will kill it in due time So eSATA it is.

Nah, eSATA *IS* the best.

It's the only one that doens't require an additional layer of translation to get to the drive (USB > SATA, FireWire > SATA, Thunderbolt > SATA) All the others just get in the way of best performance.

Intel developed Thunderbolt with collaboration from Apple, so they have some vested interest in it, but we'll see. They've done some missteps with connectivity before (PCI-X, which is mainly a server slot connection.)

Devon

DevonB · Post by **DevonB** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:36 pm

aMUSEd wrote:Several people in this thread were advising to go for an external drive for samples:

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 25#5206325

so is that not right then?

If I'm reading what I think you're making reference to, they are advising a *DIFFERENT* drive other than the system drive, which would be correct. In that case, internal or external is not relevant. Internal would still be better.

Devon

tenshin111 · Post by **tenshin111** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:04 pm

DevonB wrote:No, you can't get faster than internal, period. Internal deals with the drive interface without additional translation (in your case, SATA, or possibly EIDE, but doubt it these days. Still could be SAS/SCSI, but I digress...) Adding USB is adding a bridge (USB to SATA) which takes more resources and 'time' to do its thing. Now you've got to get on the USB bus which is an additional step that you wouldn't have to do if it was directly attached to the SATA adapter. USB also takes CPU overhead to keep it 'going'. If you HAVE to go external, go eSATA, which is just a SATA port on the outside of your case without additional 'things' getting in the way, otherwise keep it internal.

Devon

+100

Many people look only at the maximum data transfer rate for the USB 3.0 specification but they forget that internally hdd is using a completely different interface and is also constrained by other limits inherent to magnetic hard drives.

Also, all these translation layers and additional latency added by the USB itself make the external hdd less "responsive" so to speak. So it is never a good choice performance wise as long as you have an option for an internal hdd or eSATA port available.

Besides, data transfer rates (which people often look at in the first place)are not the most important factor. In everyday use where lots of random reads and writes happens it is the drive's access speed / seek time that gives the overall impression of whether it is 'fast' or 'slow'.

jcschild · Post by **jcschild** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:19 pm

from slowest to fastest (assuming good contrllers)

usb
firewire
eSata
USB3 *
internal*

the latter 2 can swap easily, on laptops USB3 is definately faster with a good controller

Scott
ADK

spirit · Post by **spirit** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:22 pm

In that case would an SSD on USB3 be the best alternative to eSATA?

jcschild · Post by **jcschild** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:37 pm

caching model on USB 3 is better than internal but it has slighly higher latency
internal will have lower latency. (again laptop is still better with USB3)

SSD will help with the lantecy aspect but will still bet better internally.

sample playback would be best internally with SSD (other than laptop) and its sorta a wash as the ssd makes it stupid fast regardless
and less to lug around laptop wise..

about as clear as i can be..

Scott

USB 3 external HD compared to internal HD for samples?