PDA

View Full Version : Imanging computers a comparison



gary67
15-11-2012, 09:31 AM
Last night i imaged both desktops in our house, one XP home premium, one Win7 home premium.

Identical hardware, same network to the same server running Amahi. Only the C drives were imaged and the boot sector of the Win 7 computer. Both C drives contain approx 35Gb of data

Desktop 1 running XP home, imaged with Acronis true image 11 took 17 minutes

Desktop 2 running Win 7 home, imaged with active@ took 5h 15mins.

both images work as have been tested so anyone have any ideas as to why active will only image at2mb/s?

wainuitech
15-11-2012, 10:43 AM
That's really an invalid test.

Two different PC's regardless if they are the same make hardware in both, AND two different OS's from two different Imaging software products.

You need to do a back to back tests, 1 PC, try both pieces of software on the same PC, same OS.

One piece of software may compress the image more, and the more it compresses it the longer it takes.

As for transfer rate, doing a Windows XP image to one of my servers right now with Active@, its between 9-15MB/s @ medium Compression.

1101
15-11-2012, 01:50 PM
I think its a fair test . He said the PC's had identical hardware
One piece of software worked perfectly, as is. The other ran as slow as a dog: as is.

Ive seen this with some PC's & various imaging software. It happens. Just the way it is.
Sometimes you just need to try other imaging software that you wouldnt normally need to use.
None are perfect :cool:

gary67
15-11-2012, 02:36 PM
It is a bid odd i admit. Acronis allowed to set the priority to high which active doesn't apart from that i'm happy it works

Nomad
15-11-2012, 03:18 PM
What was the compression being used? I know with a linux utility high compression could often be in the hours .. .

wainuitech
15-11-2012, 04:12 PM
I think its a fair test . He said the PC's had identical hardware
One piece of software worked perfectly, as is. The other ran as slow as a dog: as is.

Ive seen this with some PC's & various imaging software. It happens. Just the way it is.
Sometimes you just need to try other imaging software that you wouldnt normally need to use.
None are perfect :cool:

Just tried it (tested) The same XP PC that I sent an image to the server before using Active @ took 9min 35 seconds according to the timer.

Same PC same OS, nothing changed, but this time I Dug out and used Acronis 11 = 9 minutes 5 seconds (close to it anyway). Close enough to comparative speeds.

Then turned off the PC, attached a different HDD, and pulled back the Acronis Image, took more or less the same amount of time, within 10 seconds anyway.

After that, took the same images, and dragged them back to another PC, took approx 5 minutes longer for each one and the PC actually is higher specs. (sure it would have blue screened had I tried to start it afterwards.)

From doing that test on My network, both Active@ and Acronis are very close to one another speed wise, certainly not the huge difference Gary got ?

gary67
15-11-2012, 04:59 PM
Yes thats what i can't work out will have to have another look at it

gary67
21-11-2012, 08:59 AM
Re imaged my C drive last night, no compression applied got it down to 1 hour 10 mins this is all done from within windows, have just upgraded active@ to the latest and made a new boot USB drive but couldn't remember how to access my server, so had to go and watch the video Wainui made for me a year or so ago. Will have another try later in the week or early next week, things are a bit hectic here at the moment