What is the best technology to transfer data between two PCs?

Hi all,

What is the best way to transfer the data between two computers depends on the following factors.

1. Data transfer rate
2. Expenditure on such technology
3. Ease of use

I’ve made a poll option, and make your comments there.

Here’s what I thought on this case.

USB 2.0 supports data rates as high as 480Mbps, even in normal condition it can be around 50Mbps. So, to transfer 1GB of data it takes around 20 - 30 seconds. Easy to use, because the hot plug is supported. But it is expensive.

To use NIC (Network Interface Card), first need to install drivers or software, because some of the main boards don’t integrated NIC circuitry there. Data transfer rate of crossover cable is varied from 100Mbps to 10Mbps. So it takes more than 30 seconds to transfer 1GB of data. Especially the length of the cable determines that. Cheaper than USB 2.0.

At the end, two factors are satisfied (data transfer rate and ease of use) by USB 2.0, and seems to me it is fine.

If found the easiest way was a length of cross over cable, failing that a ton of floppies :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eranga262154

Hi all,

What is the best way to transfer the data between two computers depends on the following factors.

1. Data transfer rate
2. Expenditure on such technology
3. Ease of use

I’ve made a poll option, and make your comments there.

Here’s what I thought on this case.

USB 2.0 supports data rates as high as 480Mbps, even in normal condition it can be around 50Mbps. So, to transfer 1GB of data it takes around 20 - 30 seconds. Easy to use, because the hot plug is supported. But it is expensive.

To use NIC (Network Interface Card), first need to install drivers or software, because some of the main boards don’t integrated NIC circuitry there. Data transfer rate of crossover cable is varied from 100Mbps to 10Mbps. So it takes more than 30 seconds to transfer 1GB of data. Especially the length of the cable determines that. Cheaper than USB 2.0.

At the end, two factors are satisfied (data transfer rate and ease of use) by USB 2.0, and seems to me it is fine.

---

I would say swapping hard-drives would be the fastest way. 750 GB in 5 min, and a reboot of course. Assuming your OS isn't on the Hard Drive.

Use a SATA drive and you won't even require a reboot.

I don't advise trying this with an IDE drive though. Been there, done that...

I prefer networking because it's mostly a basic fact of plugging in the cable.
The only USB transfer I've seen, needs a driver setup + an additional transfer application.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eranga262154

To use NIC (Network Interface Card), first need to install drivers or software, because some of the main boards don’t integrated NIC circuitry there. Data transfer rate of crossover cable is varied from 100Mbps to 10Mbps. So it takes more than 30 seconds to transfer 1GB of data. Especially the length of the cable determines that. Cheaper than USB 2.0.

---

I vote NIC, but if your gonna do a lot of transfers then I would say to invest in some Gigabit lan cards instead of the 100Mbps cards. If we are talking a 1 time transfer NIC is usually the easiest, if both PCs have nic cards. If they don't it may just be faster (and cheaper) to take the advice above and pull the hard drive out of 1 machine and put it into the second machine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by penagate

Use a SATA drive and you won't even require a reboot.

I don't advise trying this with an IDE drive though. Been there, done that...

---

Ok, if I want to do it in IDE, what should I do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eranga262154

Ok, if I want to do it in IDE, what should I do?

---

I believe the comment was made about using hot swapping with an IDE drive. So what you should do is shut down the machine before you remove the IDE drive.

That's the traditional way I work on. So, it is not easy to use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBigB

I prefer networking because it's mostly a basic fact of plugging in the cable.
The only USB transfer I've seen, needs a driver setup + an additional transfer application.

---

Ditto. That is the reason why I use Ethernet for my modem, and not USB.

And you don't need cables, you can do it over wireless, but that then makes things a bit complex.

Although with the advent of up to 8gb on a flash drive ive often used that rather than fiddling with cables.

best method is usb hard drive. Quick and easy if you aren't trying to move an OS.
have to clarify some stuff: divide 480mbps by 8. it is megaBIT not byte.
Also of note: gigabit lan is not actually running at 1000mpbs. it runs 400mbps.

But here USB hard drives are little expensive. And also it is quite difficult to use, isn't it. Need to plug on one PC and remove to plug the other one. Actually I'm looking a fixed way to do it. So no need to work on regularly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Orwell

Also of note: gigabit lan is not actually running at 1000mpbs. it runs 400mbps.

---

Umm... no?

Half-duplex, perhaps, but even that would reach a theoretical peak of 500 Mb/s.
So I don't know where you're getting a figure of 400 from.

You say that, the data transfer rate at least 500 Mb/s or above in a gigabit lan? How did you achieve to that figure?

Gigabit = 1000 bits.......

Ya I know that penagate,:o

My question is the how 1000 makes to 500 in Half-duplex. I have never heard that, half-duplex make exactly to the half value:rolleyes:

Amazing isn't it.

100% it is amazing to me. Please give some feedback on it. I don't want to start a new thread for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by penagate

Umm... no?

Half-duplex, perhaps, but even that would reach a theoretical peak of 500 Mb/s.
So I don't know where you're getting a figure of 400 from.

---

i got that figure from the Cisco a+ network study guide.

Here's a link to a white-paper on a gigabit ethernet processor, stating clearly it supports data throughput of 400mpbs even though the standard gives a much higher theoretical limit.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...080091db8.shtm

Are sure Lord, that you have put the correct link here. I got that requesting page is not available. Even I'm unable to find any study guide on A+ there.

well it was there when i posted it. Just do a google search for Cisco 400mbps and you get dozens of links

try this one
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...80169bf0.shtml

Of course. I'm on the Google now.:wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Orwell

try this one
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...80169bf0.shtml

---

This article isn't saying that the max throughput for a Gigabit lan is 400mps, just that the specific Gigabit Ethernet HWIC they are referring to is limited by the bus interface.

Quote:

---

The HWIC bus interface is limited to 400 Mbps of full duplex. The actual throughput of the Gigabit Ethernet HWIC is limited by the throughput of individual platforms.

---

BTW you could just wait for the 10 Gigabit Ethernet to roll out ;)

i'm waiting on wi-max roll-out. Or you could always run two cards in duplex and double your speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProphetBeal

This article isn't saying that the max throughput for a Gigabit lan is 400mps, just that the specific Gigabit Ethernet HWIC they are referring to is limited by the bus interface.

---

So, it can be 500Mb/s as well. What is the reality of penagate talking about in his last few posts here.

From a purely practical point of view, NICs with a router (or crossover cable) are probably the best.

Changing the drive means getting a screwdriver out (if you don't have an external drive or caddy), reducing the DTR to minutes instead of seconds for relatively small transfers. USB sticks are slow. USB cables expensive. And wireless - well, it's ok, but (call me a luddite if you wish) I prefer hard wiring for security, reliability, a decent speed and outlay.

As a guide, try estimating the cost per Gb transferred for a 5 year period. Bear in mind, for instance, that a drive could be dropped or simply fail, USB sticks lost, trodden underfoot, end up in a washing machine. The initial outlay for wireless is high, and repairing it ?

The cost of a damaged ethernet cable is nothing by comparison, and NICs are cheap.

Well, that's my tuppence worth (it's what I like to pay, too)

Why did you say that USB sticks are slow. It is relatively slow with Gigabit Ethernet, right. What I've found is that, USB 2.0 transfer rate is close to 500Mb/s. On the other hand here in my country, easy to find USB rather than Gigabit Ethernet. So? USB is easy to use, just plug the device.

eranga, when you transfer data via an intermediate medium such as a USB drive, you have to halve the transfer rate because you're transferring double the amount of data (once to the drive, once from it).

The USB sticks that I have are slow ;).

When I re-decorated my house a few years ago, I buried ethernet cables in the walls to every room - excluding bathroom :). To do this with USB cables would have been impossible, given the limitation on cable length that existed then. Some of these runs exceed 60 feet (@ 20 metres) (I'm not sure if there's still a length limit). All the cables go to a router (with wireless) - provides for a server, 2 desktops and a wireless laptop). No problems. Low cost, decent speed, and I don't even have to get out of my armchair.

USB 2.0 doesn't reach anywhere near 480 Mb/s in real-world conditions anyway. Firewire's rated at 400 Mb/s and I've found it consistently faster.

Anyway, in the time that this thread's been going all of the data could have been transferred several hundred times. :)

Now I got the point, crossover cable use separate lines to send and reserved data. Correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schoolbusdriver

To do this with USB cables would have been impossible, given the limitation on cable length that existed then.

---

Correct. There is a limitation on length of the cable if I've use USB. Actually I'm talking about two PC, just few meters apart each other.

The reason for the "crossover" is to ensure that, for instance, "earth" gets connected to "earth" on the respective PCs. On 2 way transfers, the limitation would be the disk access speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schoolbusdriver

The USB sticks that I have are slow ;).

When I re-decorated my house a few years ago, I buried ethernet cables in the walls to every room - excluding bathroom :). To do this with USB cables would have been impossible, given the limitation on cable length that existed then. Some of these runs exceed 60 feet (@ 20 metres) (I'm not sure if there's still a length limit). All the cables go to a router (with wireless) - provides for a server, 2 desktops and a wireless laptop). No problems. Low cost, decent speed, and I don't even have to get out of my armchair.

---

yeah there is a length limit but it's basically because of signal attenuation. 100 feet. but you can get repeaters.