Go Back   PCMech Forums > Help & Discussion > Computer Hardware

Need Some Help? Type Your Keywords Here:

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 08-08-2005, 04:41 PM   #1
Member (8 bit)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 155
USB Speed

Can anybody please advise me as to the data transfer speeds which can be expected in practice with a USB 2.0 port.

I have a digital camera which I have tried on an older machine with USB 1.1, and for interest I compared the data transfer rate obtained with that obtained when connected to a newer XP machine with USB 2.0.

With the USB 1.1 connection I got a transfer rate of 0.61MByte/sec, and with USB 2.0 it was 0.77MByte/sec.

I would have expected a much larger difference as USB 2.0 is supposed to be 40 times faster than USB 1.1.

Does anybody know why there is so little difference in these speeds, or is my new PC with USB 2.0 possibly not set up properly, and transferring data via USB 2.0 too slowly.

thanks in advance for any advice

Ross
Rossua is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2005, 04:55 PM   #2
Served with Pride
Staff
Premium Member
 
Panama Red's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: near the left coast of Michigan
Posts: 14,538
Send a message via AIM to Panama Red
Check your USB devices in Device Manager and make sure you see one marked "Enhanced". That will indicate that 2.0 is enabled. If you're dowloading directly from the camera and not from the digital media in a reader of some kind, it may be the camera that is limiting the speed.
__________________
Computers have enabled people to make more mistakes faster than almost any invention in history,
with the possible exception of tequila and hand guns.
Panama Red is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2005, 12:32 PM   #3
Member (8 bit)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 155
There is an entry in Device Manager that says "Intel PCI to USB Enhanced Host Controller" and also one which says "USB 2.0 Root Hub", so it looks like USB 2.0 is enabled.

I tried taking the SD memory card (Viking Interworks 512MB) out of the camera and transfering the data to a laptop using a MMC/SD/MS card reader, and the data transfer rate there was 0.9MB/sec, which would suggest the memory card is the main speed bottleneck when on USB 2.0 (assuming this is a typical transfer speed for these type of cards), with the camera itself adding a little more bottleneck in addition that.

Regards,
Ross
Rossua is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2005, 01:19 PM   #4
glc
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
 
glc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 36,460
Is that card reader USB 2.0?
glc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2005, 09:40 PM   #5
Gremlin Overlord
 
Jaggannath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
I have the same thing on this computer Rossua, but a dialogue box pops up each time telling me a high-speed device is plugged into a non-supporting hub, and to click on it to fix it. Of course, this being an older computer (it only has 2 USB ports it's that old ), there isn't really an easy fix that doesn't involve money and effort
Jaggannath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2005, 12:11 PM   #6
Member (8 bit)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 155
The card reader is built in to the laptop and has 2 slots, one for SM card and one for SD/MS/MMC cards, but I don't know if it uses USB in any way internally. Here is a photo of it :-

[IMG]cardreader.jpg[/IMG]
Attached Images
File Type: jpg cardreader.JPG (13.9 KB, 71 views)
Rossua is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2005, 12:20 PM   #7
Member (8 bit)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 155
That device must need the high speed USB 2.0. The camera I attached though works just as well under USB 1.1, with only about 20% slower transfers, even though it says in the manual it uses USB 2.0.

You can get PCI cards containing 2 or 4 USB 2.0 ports, some around £5-10GBP on EBay, and they usually need PCI version 2.1 or higher, (which all but the very oldest PC's have).

PS can anyone tell me how to insert an image in a post, as in my last post it only comes up with the text of the [IMG] tags enclosing the file name.

Regards
Ross
Rossua is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2005, 01:35 PM   #8
glc
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
 
glc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 36,460
Please use attachments instead of inline images. We are trying to keep these forums dialup and low screen resolution friendly. Small images are acceptable, but you must load them to a website that allows external linking, and you have to put the full URL in the image tags.

- Moderator -

Last edited by glc; 08-10-2005 at 01:37 PM.
glc is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Still Need Help? Type Your Keywords Here:


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0