Monroe Posted February 26, 2012 Author Posted February 26, 2012 jaclaz ... thanks ... ATTO Disk Benchmark is not listed for Windows 98SE but I downloaded it anyway to try. Every so often I come across a program not listed to work with 98 but it does. Also found another program called USB Flash Drive Tester, also not listed for Windows 98SE....
dencorso Posted February 26, 2012 Posted February 26, 2012 One was listed to work with Windows 98 but I can't seem to get any good readings, no help in the "Help Tab". That program was CrystalDiskMark v2.2.0o (Win 9x).
jaclaz Posted February 26, 2012 Posted February 26, 2012 jaclaz ... thanks ... ATTO Disk Benchmark is not listed for Windows 98SE but I downloaded it anyway to try. Every so often I come across a program not listed to work with 98 but it does. Also found another program called USB Flash Drive Tester, also not listed for Windows 98SE....Do you mean that you:tested Atto AND tested it AND it works on WIn9xdownloaded it BUT NOT tested it under Win9xdownoaded it AND tested it AND it does NOT work n Win9xSame as above for "USB Flash Drive Tester".If you prefer, I am sure that people wouuld appreciate the results of the tests as opposed to a list of what you have downloaded, no matter if listed for WIN9x or not .jaclaz
Monroe Posted February 26, 2012 Author Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) OK ... well Flash Drive Tester requires .NET Framework 2.0 so whether it actually works on Win 98SE, I can't say. I only have .NET Framework 1.1 installed and never went any higher. USB FlashSpeed (ZIP download name is FlashBench) also requires .NET Framework 2.0 ... ATTO Disk Benchmark did seem to give some readings but I'm not sure if it really works on Windows 98 ... it wasn't listed as doing so ... my test folder was transferring (from C to E) with 4 minutes remaining and then jumped to 68 minutes remaining and my USB mouse quit working so there seems to be some conflict there.I really am not looking to do any USB flash drive testing ... I have bought several different makes of USB flash drives and I am "stuck" with them, some weren't cheap ... not buying anymore but most all these programs just do a benchmark or have USB flash testing in mind. I just want to do a file transfer from C to E and have it "pass through" a program every so often (when I want to use it) to get the "actual transfer" rate for that file from C to E or E to C. If anyone knows of such a simple flash speed measurement program, nothing complicated with various settings to set ... just a transfer speed being indicated as a file is moved from one drive to another. In my earlier post (#14) I listed that article title: 5 Apps to Check the Speed of Your USB Flash Drive (Windows) ... that's what I would like, a simple program (working with Windows 98SE) that will give a speed reading of a flash drive. Also in that article, there was one program that sounded like it was exactly what I was looking for ...HD Speed: HD_Speed is a pint sized software that can be used to gauge the speed of data transfer on your hard disks, CD/DVD ROMS and USB flash drives. This program is compatible with Windows 2000, XP and Vista only, though it supports both FAT and NTFS volumes. The 80KB utility does not require installation and runs with a click. Select the drive and hit start. The read/write results show up as a graph and also as real values.... but I couldn't get it to work with Windows 98SE, still sounds like a neat simple program though. ... thanksUpdate: I just found a warning posted about HD Speed: ( 10-24-2009 ) The read test is quick and time limit can be manually set. However, if you proceed to do a write test on your drive, a popup message alerts you as follows. "This will destroy the contents of \drive" "are you sure you wish to continue" ... You must be kidding, no way!NOT recommended.... so beware if anyone might decide to "test" HD Speed on another OS. Only found that one warning.... Edited February 26, 2012 by duffy98
dencorso Posted February 26, 2012 Posted February 26, 2012 One was listed to work with Windows 98 but I can't seem to get any good readings, no help in the "Help Tab". That program was CrystalDiskMark v2.2.0o (Win 9x).Why not use the single program that is known to work?
Monroe Posted February 26, 2012 Author Posted February 26, 2012 Well, I am not interested in doing any USB flash drive testing on any file. I just want to transfer files and maybe get a quick flash speed reading every so often. There was no Help (to me anyway) that came with the program and I have "no clue" as how to work with it or "understand" any information the program is giving me. I looked at the figures and wasn't sure what I was actually seeing. I appreciate that you posted the CrystalDiskMark image but I still don't understand what I'm looking at ... as I said earlier I am not interested in running USB Flash Drive tests. OK, ... let's say this is what I want to do. ... here are three examples of me wanting to transfer a 700 MB file from C drive to drive E .First flash drive will be a 4 GB drive, the second flash drive will be an 8 GB drive and the third flash drive will be a 16 GB drive. .... As I said ... I do not want to DO any USB tests ... this is the "real thing" ... transferring one 700 MB file to each USB drive. What settings should be set ? .... would the settings for all three drives be the same? This is over my head as I look at that image ... I guess I would set the 5 to 1 pass, one file, one time transfer. I just want to transfer a file and see some "speed figures" and not fool with any tests. I don't always pick up on things posted here, I feel most people at this forum are "light years" ahead of me with computer knowledge and all the inside workings ... but I still learn something new once in awhile.So you are saying I can use CrystalDiskMark to bypass all those "test tabs" and get my file transfered and get a quick no-nonsense speed reading and move onto another file? I do appreciate your assistance and from everyone else also, but I don't think this is the program I was hoping to find, but I could be wrong. I will work with it again later tonight or tomorrow....
dencorso Posted February 27, 2012 Posted February 27, 2012 Set the test size to 700 MB, let the # of passes remain 5 and click on Seq, instead of All. CrystalDiskMark will tell you the speed (in MB/s) for read and write operations, selecting the best result out of 5 tries. It's simple like that.Now, what does it actually mean? Let's see (my tests were performed with a 100 MB file, not a 700MB one) how long it takes to copy a 100 MB file, here are some real life data:Sony Micro Vault 1GB (made in 2005):Sequential Read : 10.245 MB/s --> or (100 / 10.245) = 9.76 sSequential Write : 6.198 MB/s --> or (100 / 6.198) = 16.13 s Kingston DataTraveler DT100 8GBSequential Read : 23.211 MB/s --> or (100 / 23.211) = 4.31 sSequential Write : 15.256 MB/s --> or (100 / 15.256) = 6.55 sOCZ ATV Turbo 8GBSequential Read : 32.630 MB/s --> or (100 / 32.630) = 3.06 sSequential Write : 26.449 MB/s --> or (100 / 26.449) = 3.78 s Corsair GTR 64GBSequential Read : 28.587 MB/s --> or (100 / 28.587) = 3.49 sSequential Write : 16.655 MB/s --> or (100 / 16.655) = 6.00 sPatriot Supersonic Magnum 64GB (in USB 2.0 mode)Sequential Read : 30.611 MB/s --> or (100 / 30.611) = 3.27 sSequential Write : 27.303 MB/s --> or (100 / 27.303) = 3.66 sSo, my good old Sony Micro Vault 1GB (which was razor-edge technology in 2005) takes 9.76 seconds to finish when I read 100 MB from it, while the OCZ ATV Turbo 8 GB finishes the same operation in 3.06 seconds (or in about one third of the time). And the same Sony Micro Vault 1GB takes 16.13 seconds to finish when I write 100 MB to it, while the Patriot Supersonic Magnum 64GB finishes the same operation in 3.66 seconds (or in about one fourth of the time). Moreover the Sony Micro Vault 1GB takes 9.76 seconds to finish when I read 100 MB from it, but takes 16.13 seconds to finish when I write 100 MB to it, so the write operation is about twice as long as the read operation. All this was measured with the same motherboard (Asus A7V600-x), and the same processor (Athlon XP 3000+ overclocked to run as a 3400+) and the same OS (Win XP SP3). See this results from a much l faster (SATA I) hardware ramdrive:GB i-RAM 1.5GiB under Win 98SESequential Read : 122.069 MB/s --> or (100 / 122.069) = 0.82 sSequential Write : 120.388 MB/s --> or (100 / 120.388) = 0.83 sGB i-RAM 1.5GiB under Win XP SP3Sequential Read : 132.878 MB/s --> or (100 / 132.878) = 0.75 sSequential Write : 120.388 MB/s --> or (100 / 120.388) = 0.79 sXPSP3 is 9% faster for reads and 5% faster for writes than 98SE, both fully tweaked, for the same hardware and processor. Hence, write times are always greater than read times. Different OSes give slightly different results, with new OSes being faster. Different hardware gives different results, with newer hardware being faster, in general. What you did in your real-life example is, by far, the most unfair comparison, since you wrote (slower than reading) to your unnamed pendrive in the older hardware (slower) with the older OS (slower), getting the longest write time possible. Then you read it (faster) in the newer hardware (faster) under the newer OS (faster), and got the shortest read time possible for the same pendrive. As I said many posts ago, you've got an absolutely normal result.Moreover, the empirical (not theoretical) limit for sustained USB 2.0 transfers is about 35 MB/s (and I know no pendrive that really reaches it, especially for write operations), so, even if you acquired the bestest pendrive ever under the fastest hardware, CPU and OS possible, you wouldn't be able to do any 700 MB transfers significantly below 20 seconds, no matter what you do.
Monroe Posted February 27, 2012 Author Posted February 27, 2012 Thanks for the detailed explanation on everything.
pointertovoid Posted March 7, 2012 Posted March 7, 2012 I use Atto 2.02 and 2.34 on Win95a and Win95b regularly, no single worry.Apparently this hasn't been mentioned nor discussed, sorry if I missed it...Have you installed the Usb 2.0 driver for the Southbridge?Win98se brings no Usb 2.0 driver, and I'm not quite sure the InfInst for your chipset are meant for Win98se.10mn for 700MB correspond well to Usb 1.1 speed.In the so-called device manager, you must have a line with "extended USB" or Ehci or USB 2.0 or similar.
Monroe Posted March 9, 2012 Author Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) pointertovoid ... thanks for the Atto version numbers. I couldn't locate a working link for v2.02 but I did get v2.34. Probably a better version anyway for Windows 98 ... it does work. As far as the USB 2.0 driver for the Southbridge ... I really wouldn't know. I installed the Unofficial Windows 98SE Native USB Drivers (NUSB) 3.5 - adds native USB + USB 2.0 support for most internal + external USB devices (free). So that is what I'm working with. In "rough timing" with a stop watch ... a 700 MB file will transfer around 5 1/2 minutes ... so a 700 MB file is transferring at around 2.1 to 2.3 MBs a second. I guess that's slightly better than USB 1.1 speed. Just disappointed that USB 2.0 speed isn't better. As dencorso said about the OS having something to do with it, that XP would be faster over Windows 98SE. Edited March 9, 2012 by duffy98
dencorso Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 10mn for 700MB correspond well to Usb 1.1 speed.In the so-called device manager, you must have a line with "extended USB" or Ehci or USB 2.0 or similar.Do you know what motherboard is it you machine has? Of course pointertovoid is right: it may not actually have USB 2.0 hardware. NUSB 3.5 surely gives you the software drivers to use USB 2.0 hardware, provided it be available. Right-click on My Computer, go to Properties, then Device Manager, then expand the Universal Serial Bus controllers hive, take a screenshot and post it please.
Monroe Posted March 9, 2012 Author Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Well I couldn't get the information from Device Manager to print. I have PrintKey 2000 and a Syntax error kept popping up. I copied everything exactly as shown below and everything is installed and working. These computers are IBM Thinkpads (T41 and T42 notebooks) with USB 2.0:Note ... These notebooks came with XP Pro installed but I removed all that and installed Windows 98SE.Product Specification: Lenovo ThinkPad T41 2373 Laptop ComputerProduct Type NotebookOperating System Windows XP ProfessionalNetworking IEEE 802.11b, Gigabit EthernetInterface Type 2 x USB 2.0, S-Video YesIncluded Drives CD-RW/DVD-ROMVideo Chipset ATI Mobility RADEON 7500Processor Type Intel Pentium MScreen Size 14.1Processor Speed 1600Installed Memory 512Hard Drive Size 40000Additional SpecificationsModem YesProduct Series T41Screen Mode XGANumber of Total Memory Slots 2Expansion Bay Type Ultrabay SlimHard Drive RPM 5400Total Number of USB Ports 2Number of USB 2.0 Ports 2(T42 is the same)------------------------------------------------(T41 Reading)Device Manager:Universal Serial Bus Managers:Intel® 82801DB/DBM (ICH4 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 24CDIntel® 82801DB/DBM USB Universal Host Controller - 24C2Intel® 82801DB/DBM USB Universal Host Controller - 24C4Intel® 82801DB/DBM USB Universal Host Controller - 24C7Prolific USB-to-Serial Comm PortUSB 2.0 Root HubUSB Root HubUSB Root HubUSB Root Hub-------------------------------------------------From Astra32: Motherboard System System Vendor: IBM Product Name: 23738RU Version: ThinkPad T42 Serial Number: 99PZVTC UUID: AB624881468911CBB99DAB5AD752C6C3 Wake-up Type: Power Switch Motherboard Motherboard Vendor: IBM Corporation Vendor URL: www.ibm.com Board Model: IBM 23738RU Version: Not Available Serial Number: J1W8S48523L BIOS Version: Phoenix FirstBIOS Notebook Pro Version 2.0 for IBM ThinkPad for IBM BIOS Date: 06/02/06 Chipset Name: Intel 855PM (Odem) Chipset Vendor: Intel Corporation Chipset: 82855PM Processor to I/O Controller Southbridge Vendor: Intel Corporation Southbridge: 82801DBM (ICH4-M) LPC Interface Bridge Onboard Device 1 Description: IBM Embedded Security hardware Device Type: Other Status: Disabled System Enclosure Manufacturer: IBM Type: Notebook Version: Not Available Serial Number: Not Available Asset Tag: No Asset Information Boot-up State: Unknown Power Supply State: Unknown Thermal State: Unknown Security Status: Unknown OEM-defined: 00000000h------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Edited March 10, 2012 by duffy98
dencorso Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 Well, that settles it. ICH-4(-M) Southbridges do have USB 2.0 hardware support all right. And drivers are installed for it, too, since the device manager displays:Intel® 82801DB/DBM (ICH4 Family) USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 24CD
Monroe Posted March 11, 2012 Author Posted March 11, 2012 Thanks for the USB 2.0 verification ... I guess the transfer speed I have is as good as it's ever going to be. It's still better than USB 1.1 speed ... not much, but for Windows 98SE I'll take it.
Monroe Posted March 21, 2012 Author Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Post deleted ... The fast USB transfer that were mentioned in the deleted post are no more. They only lasted for about 30 minutes ... now the old slower USB transfer speeds are back. Just a fluke, no rhyme or reason, nothing was installed, nothing was changed on the computer. Edited March 22, 2012 by duffy98
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now