- Joined
- Oct 10, 2004
- Messages
- 10,345
- Reaction score
- 597
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Margaritaville
- Your Mac's Specs
- 3.4 Ghz i7 MacBook Pro (2015), iPad Pro (2014), iPhone Xs Max. Apple TV 4K
This is an oft discussed topic, but I figured I would add some personal experience to the mix here. To start with, we all know that USB-2 has a theoretical throughput of 480Mbits and Firewire has a theoretical throughput of 400Mbits. Based on that one would assume that USB-2 would be as faster than FW, right? The reality is MUCH different.
I am in the process of ripping my entire DVD collection to iPod viewable format with MediaFork (big surprise huh?). I have (well HAD) 3 DVD drives hooked up to my Mac, 1 internal and 2 external Firewire. I had wanted to buy a fourth drive and picked a new Lacie FW drive. In short, the Lacie did not play well with the existing devices on my FW bus and I ended up retuning it to Apple. After a bit of searching I found an external Lacie USB-2 slim line drive at MacMall for about $90.
The drive arrived yesterday and I eagerly opened it and set it up. I plugged the drive in, inserted a disc, the disc mounted, I queued up some episodes and hit rip. The rip topped out at about 12-13 Frames Per Second (FPS). That seemed slow, so I stopped the rip, queue the same DVD up in a FW drive and BAM!, 55FPS out of the gate. I tried a different DVD in the USB-2 drive, same thing 12-13FPS max sustained rate. USB-2 could just not handle the throughput I was used to despite the fact that it's architecture is designed to do so. The FW bus only has 4 devices on it, the USB bus has many.
The lesson here is that despite the theoretical advantages and architecture of USB-2, FW 400 is significantly faster in the real world. I found this on the USB-2 Wiki page:
Now, anyone want to buy a nice USB 2 DVDROM/CDRW drive for their laptop?
I am in the process of ripping my entire DVD collection to iPod viewable format with MediaFork (big surprise huh?). I have (well HAD) 3 DVD drives hooked up to my Mac, 1 internal and 2 external Firewire. I had wanted to buy a fourth drive and picked a new Lacie FW drive. In short, the Lacie did not play well with the existing devices on my FW bus and I ended up retuning it to Apple. After a bit of searching I found an external Lacie USB-2 slim line drive at MacMall for about $90.
The drive arrived yesterday and I eagerly opened it and set it up. I plugged the drive in, inserted a disc, the disc mounted, I queued up some episodes and hit rip. The rip topped out at about 12-13 Frames Per Second (FPS). That seemed slow, so I stopped the rip, queue the same DVD up in a FW drive and BAM!, 55FPS out of the gate. I tried a different DVD in the USB-2 drive, same thing 12-13FPS max sustained rate. USB-2 could just not handle the throughput I was used to despite the fact that it's architecture is designed to do so. The FW bus only has 4 devices on it, the USB bus has many.
The lesson here is that despite the theoretical advantages and architecture of USB-2, FW 400 is significantly faster in the real world. I found this on the USB-2 Wiki page:
The signaling rate of USB 2.0 Hi-Speed mode is 480 Mb/s, while the signaling rate of FireWire 400 (IEEE 1394a) is 393.216 Mb/s. USB requires more host processing power than FireWire due to the need for the host to provide the arbitration and scheduling of transactions. USB transfer rates are theoretically higher than FireWire due to the need for FireWire devices to arbitrate for bus access. A single FireWire device may achieve a transfer rate for FireWire 400 as high as 41 MB/s, while for USB 2.0 the rate can theoretically be 55 MB/s (for a single device). In a multi-device environment FireWire rapidly loses ground to USB: FireWire's mixed speed networks and long connection chains dramatically affect its performance.
The peer-to-peer nature of FireWire requires devices to arbitrate, which means a FireWire bus must wait until a given signal has propagated to all devices on the bus. The more devices on the bus, the lower is its peak performance. Conversely, for USB the maximum timing model is fixed and is limited only by the host-device branch (not the entire network). Furthermore, the host-centric nature of USB allows the host to allocate more bandwidth to high priority devices instead of forcing them to compete for bandwidth as in FireWire.
Despite all this and despite USB's theoretically higher speed, in real life benchmarks the actual speed of FireWire hard drives nearly always beats USB 2.0 hard drives by a significant margin.[10] In addition to this, some operating systems take a conservative approach to scheduling transactions and limit the number of transfers per frame, reducing the maximum transfers from, say, the theoretical 13 per frame to 10 or 9.
Now, anyone want to buy a nice USB 2 DVDROM/CDRW drive for their laptop?