USB 3.0 or eSATA

[Netdewt]

Specs say USB3 is faster, but in use I have read that many people still like eSATA. What do you say?

Has anyone had success with USB3 -> eSATA adapters?

[alaricljs]

Sure USB3 is faster... but SATA is the native connection for a hard drive.  eSATA will be at least marginally faster on account of there being no translation along the way.

[itznfb]

USB and USB 3.0 controllers generally suck and don't even come close to their rated speeds. SATA controllers even when they suck can often come close to or hit their rated speed. More latency with USB/USB3.0. eSATA based on SATAIII is faster than USB 3.0 either way.

eSATA is better than USB 3.0

edit: I should add the intel and asmedia USB 3.0 controllers aren't that bad. They real finicky on device performance though. Some devices hit their rated speed on both and some devices hit their rated speed on one or the other... it's new so what can we expect?

[The_Beast]

Depends on what you're using it for. If it's a flash drive/small external, USB 3.0 for sure due to it's backwards compatibility with USB 2.0 and it does offer powered connection (enough for most 2.5" Hdds). But if it's an external HDD, I'd go for esata because you get higher sustained speeds which is REALLY nice when transferring large amounts of data.

But if you don't do a lot of large data transfers, then I think USB 3.0 wins. Then again, I haven't seen any benchmarks of esata on a 6Gbps connection.

Semi-related, if it was USb 2.0 vs esata, I would for sure go with esata (ofc with a backup USB connection encase you have to the drive on a unfamiliar computer that may not have a esata connection)

[Netdewt]

On today's Apple computers, or on many laptops I would imagine, there are no eSATA options. Better to get a Thunderbolt->eSATA adapter ($200), or to rely on USB3 / USB3->eSATA adapter ($20)?

[The_Beast]

I hate apple, a Thunderbolt cable is $50 because it has firmware. That's right a cable with firmware, so that no 3rd party makers can reproduce the cable and sell them for what they are worth ($3-$5).


I wouldn't deal with adapters, if your device doesn't natively have esata you might as well just get USB 3.0. An esata connection using an adapter will only be as fast as connection at the other end of the adapter. example: plugging an esata into a USB 1.0 connection will only be as fast as a USB 1.0 connection, maybe even less depending on how good the adapter is

[Netdewt]

I know, it's lame. I'd rather have eSATA than Thunderbolt. Apple tries too hard, but I love their OS. Please don't start another Mac vs. PC debate here.

[IvanIvanovich]

Get enclosure with both esata and usb3. Use whichever is the best available on the pc you need to connect it.

[Wildcard]

eSata all the way. However I'm not going to complain about USB 3.0, which is still relatively fast and backwards compatable with USB 2.0 & 1.1 devices.

On the topic of Thunderbolt, we're talking a 10 Gbit/s connection that can be used for video, lan, and storage all on the same cable. Very universal and almost twice as fast as the Sata III version of eSata.

Yes the cable is expensive, but this is new technology and other third parties are finally stepping up to the table to release their own cables. The chip inside is used to make it an active cable to improve communications.

[kbafewx]

USB 3.0 > eSata.

[Netdewt]

I decided to go with a laptop without USB3 anyways. I'll either be FW800ing it for a while or getting that Lacie Thunderbolt adapter box.

[Malphas]

Rather than make a new thread I'd like to ask how USB 3.0 (and Thunderbolt) compare to Gigabit Ethernet.

[IvanIvanovich]

Really it's all pretty much the same when talking about using any of them with mechanical hard drive. You will hit limitation of the speed of disk at 80-120MB/s before the link is saturated in most cases. If using external ssd you will saturate gigabit before peak read / write speeds on most so thunderbolt, esata or usb3 definitely has advantage there.

[Netdewt]

Feel free to use this thread to discuss I/O stuff. It's much more complicated than I understand most of the time. Converting between bits/sec and bytes/sec is a pain all by itself, then introduce the limitations of computers, storage devices, and transfer methods... ugh.

[Malphas]

Really it's all pretty much the same when talking about using any of them with mechanical hard drive. You will hit limitation of the speed of disk at 80-120MB/s before the link is saturated in most cases. If using external ssd you will saturate gigabit before peak read / write speeds on most so thunderbolt, esata or usb3 definitely has advantage there.

Ah. The reason I asked is that I'm considering upgrading my Drobo (which uses USB 2.0 and is painfully slow) for a Drobo FS (which uses ethernet) or a new Drobo 5D (which uses USB 3.0/Thunderbolt).

[Internetlad]

USB will never be the bona fide data transfer standard, simply because it was not meant to be the bona fide data transfer standard.

USB was and always will be made for backwards compatibility and connectivity of a wide range of devices from mice and keyboards, GPS, Printers, the list goes on. It's in the name "Universal Serial Bus".

eSata (and to some extent Thunderbolt) is made simply to be blisteringly fast data transfer standards, and nothing else.

I'll still use and prefer USB because the mac users at Apple hate it, though.

[IvanIvanovich]

For NAS type solution like drobo I personally prefer to go with ethernet. It just makes the most sense and gig-e is plenty fast for mechanical mass storage.