Firewire and USB Performance

After looking at many options for Firewire and USB testing, we finally determined that an external USB 2.0, Firewire 400, and Firewire 800 hard disk might be a sensible way to look at USB and Firewire throughput.

Our first efforts at testing with an IDE or SATA drive as the "server" yielded very inconsistent results, since Windows XP sets up cache schemes to improve performance. Finally, we decided to try a RAM disk as our "server", since memory removed almost all overhead from the serving end. We also managed to turn off disk caching on the USB and Firewire side by setting up the drives for "quick disconnect" and our results were consistent over many test runs.

We used 2GB of fast 3-2-2-4 system memory set up as a 450MB RAM disk and 1550MB of system memory. Our standard file is the SPECviewPerf install file, which is 432,533,504 bytes (412.4961MB). After copying this file to our RAM disk, we measured the time for writing from the RAM disk to our external USB 2.0 or Firewire 400 or Firewire 800 drive using a Windows timing program written for AnandTech by our own Jason Clark. The copy times in seconds were then converted into Megabits per second (Mb) to provide a convenient means of comparing throughput. Higher Rates, therefore, mean better performance.

Firewire and USB Performance

Possibly the most striking finding in our Firewire and USB throughput tests is the performance of an external hard drive connected to Firewire 800. If you wonder why Firewire 800 matters, just look at the data. Our benchmarks show Firewire 800 is up to 46% faster than a drive connected to the more common Firewire 400, and about 29% faster than USB 2.0.

Our test is just one of many throughput tests, but in this benchmark, it is clear that the VIA Firewire 400 chip is faster than TI's 1394a chip. The NVIDIA nForce4 USB 2.0 controller is slightly faster than Intel's solution.

Disk Controller Performance Ethernet Performance
Comments Locked

19 Comments

View All Comments

  • smn198 - Friday, September 23, 2005 - link

    Welcome Gary. Look forward to seeing more from you.
  • Gary Key - Friday, September 23, 2005 - link

    smn198,

    Thank you. I really enjoyed doing this article, working with Wes, and having the opportunity to share my experiences with the great members and visitors here at AnandTech. I certainly hope you will be seeing more from me. ;-)

    Sincerely,
    Gary Key
  • Evan Lieb - Friday, September 23, 2005 - link

    Welcome Gary, and have fun!
  • Ecmaster76 - Friday, September 23, 2005 - link

    Looks like it went up early.

    Good read though. At first I was like "Holy $#!+" when I saw the gaming benchmarks, but then they mentioned about the Gigabyte BIOS being effed up.
  • cryptonomicon - Thursday, September 22, 2005 - link

    DRAM Voltage Auto, 1.80V to 2.3V in 0.1V increments


    uh.. but isnt ram like 2.5-2.8v?
  • Pete84 - Friday, September 23, 2005 - link

    DDR2 runs at much lower vdimm than DDR.
  • cryptonomicon - Friday, September 23, 2005 - link

    ah yes of course..

    so much for active cooling then
  • BlvdKing - Thursday, September 22, 2005 - link

    I can't believe the Nforce 4 for AMD supports dual core but the Intel edition only has limited support and no support for the 820.
  • coomar - Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - link

    no a diamond can't beat a royal flush

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now