• 0

Question

Fast copy software for internal network traffics

Urgently required

Hello

Urgently for business ... looking for the most fastest software for data copy or data transfer in internal network between computers in the same network

I've goggled and found TeraCopy and RichCopy to be the most fastest tools around

When I test both of them I've found it is maximum 9:10 MB/second ... which is really slow for our needs

Please advise for a tool free or paid that could be as fast as possible?

Note: lan is about 20 node ... and daily data traffics in between is about 150:200 GB/day ... Yes we do work in that volume in a daily base ... so please advise for a suitable one?

Also all computers running windows 7 and XP

Recommended Posts

  • 0

why so many switches. we showed 1 large one for 100, you just spent 180 for something that could have been had for 100, unless you need those switches in different areas....

onboard is just fine. buffer size I wouldn't worry too much about that, I would worry about if it supports jumbo frames and if the cards support jumbo frames (again useless if only one supports not the other, all have to support). Jumbo Frames could squeeze out some more bandwidth.

  • 0
  On 30/03/2012 at 23:16, sc302 said:

why so many switches.

It was not my decision to buy them but it is my other co-worker as he was in the mall while we were discussing it here.

  On 30/03/2012 at 23:16, sc302 said:

we showed 1 large one for 100, you just spent 180 for something that could have been had for 100.

He has been advised by the guy in the mall to get them, and it was late to reach him I am afraid :( , but prices in local markets are not the same as newegg website but more cheap.

  On 30/03/2012 at 23:16, sc302 said:

unless you need those switches in different areas....

No, all are in one place, so now shall I continue using these switches and bridging each two switches to become a bigger one or still 0ne with 16 ports is far better?

  On 30/03/2012 at 23:16, sc302 said:

onboard is just fine.

Please I want to know if you mean it is the same performance as the performance of the pci cards or not?

  On 30/03/2012 at 23:16, sc302 said:

buffer size I wouldn't worry too much about that?

Why? isn't not important?

  On 30/03/2012 at 23:16, sc302 said:

I would worry about if it supports jumbo frames and if the cards support jumbo frames (again useless if only one supports not the other, all have to support). Jumbo Frames could squeeze out some more bandwidth.

Please I am still do not understand this Jumbo Frames thing correctly, please may you explain it more?

=> one last thing, regarding comparing brands, if I am comparing the same features for different brands, does it matter? or all are the same? cisco, d-link, tp-link?

Thanks a lot and too much appreciated.

  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 02:42, NoUserName said:

No, all are in one place, so now shall I continue using these switches and bridging each two switches to become a bigger one or still 0ne with 16 ports is far better?

Lets start with this, transferring on a single switch would be faster. When you start daisy chaining (what you are doing by plugging one switch into another) you are creating a potential bottleneck. A good switch will transfer to each port a 1Gb/s, if you are transferring multiple gigs from switch1 to multiple gigs on switch 2 the link between switch one and switch two will be the bottleneck and your transfers will suffer and be cut in half. You loose the ability to transfer 1Gb/s to each port, and it becomes halfed or even less. This is why 1 switch is better.

  On 31/03/2012 at 02:42, NoUserName said:

Please I want to know if you mean it is the same performance as the performance of the pci cards or not?

I have not noticed any gain with going with a PCI nic when doing file transfers.

  On 31/03/2012 at 02:42, NoUserName said:

Why? isn't not important?

Well it is sort of important, but not really. You are doing copies, it would help more if you had a ton of devices making different requests. Your goal is to transfer data, not going to see much benefit with buffer size.

  On 31/03/2012 at 02:42, NoUserName said:

Please I am still do not understand this Jumbo Frames thing correctly, please may you explain it more?

Basically the largest transmit unit or MTU most devices and switches can transfer at is 1500. Anything above 1500 is considered a jumbo frame. Frames close less times per large file transfer when you use Jumbo Frames. You can get a bit more speed out of the line if you use Jumbo Frames. This may help a little: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2009/03/the-promise-and-peril-of-jumbo-frames.html

  On 31/03/2012 at 02:42, NoUserName said:

=> one last thing, regarding comparing brands, if I am comparing the same features for different brands, does it matter? or all are the same? cisco, d-link, tp-link?

Thanks a lot and too much appreciated.

You want to compare features of different switches, brands really don't matter much.

  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 02:42, NoUserName said:
...

Please I am still do not understand this Jumbo Frames thing correctly, please may you explain it more?

...

Normally ethernet frames are 1500 bytes long, (That includes headers and such), jumbo frames allow you to increase the side of the frames, decreasing the amount of headers sent.

Both my gigabit switches support 9KB jumbo frames (so I can send around 9KB of data per header instead of around 1KB), my PC also supports it (but disabled by default) and my Mac makes no mention to whether it's supported or not.

Edit: After messing around with settings and testing it, all the devices on my network support jumbo frames, so my systems can now pass around 9KB of data in a single Ethernet frame. It seems faster, but I need to do actual testing.

  • 0

Please I would like to ask if using ftp will be any good to do the transfer after done the hardware upgrade to gigabit:

ftp server in the boxes I am copying from.

ftp client to the boxes I am copying to.

and does file zilla considered a good option or there is a better software?

  • 0

don't use ftp you will be just fine with windows transfer esp with jumbo frames...once the copy starts ftp would be near useless anyway. you won't gain much at all from ftp.

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16833129035

  • 0

I don't want to come off like an ASS, but perhaps the OP needs to actually hire a network engineer. It sounds like you don't have a clue about this stuff, don't understand networking, OS's Protocols, etc. I'm all for people learning, but you don't understand the basics, if you really need this for a business, you should hire someone who knows this stuff to set things up for you to fulfill your business need.

  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 04:39, sc302 said:

don't use ftp you will be just fine with windows transfer esp with jumbo frames...once the copy starts ftp would be near useless anyway. you won't gain much at all from ftp.

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16833129035

Ok, thanks

Another point: I've found a Jumpo frame option in the network adapter setting from device manager for the motherboard gigabyte built-in network in the motherboard.

But for the one in the Dell OptiPlex GB620, I did not found and mention for the Jumpo Frame. so in such a case the network pci card we had may include this option or not?

  On 31/03/2012 at 05:04, SirEvan said:

I don't want to come off like an ASS, but perhaps the OP needs to actually hire a network engineer. It sounds like you don't have a clue about this stuff, don't understand networking, OS's Protocols, etc. I'm all for people learning, but you don't understand the basics, if you really need this for a business, you should hire someone who knows this stuff to set things up for you to fulfill your business need.

You are right about us, but wee found it a bit expensive to hire an engineer so we are do it ourselves the hardway.

Also we almost there and about to finish the network setup (thanks for all of you guys).

  • 0

Don't use jumbo frames.

That's just adding more pain to this than you need. The jumbo frames will make a minute difference at best. Just run with what you have.

Gigabit networking will likely bring your speed up to ~100MBps. At this point, as Budman observed, you are more likely to be capped by your computers hardware than the network.

Just set it up, stop thinking about it so much and just do it.. This is a basic thing.

  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 08:45, articuno1au said:

Don't use jumbo frames.

That's just adding more pain to this than you need. The jumbo frames will make a minute difference at best. Just run with what you have.

Gigabit networking will likely bring your speed up to ~100MBps. At this point, as Budman observed, you are more likely to be capped by your computers hardware than the network.

Just set it up, stop thinking about it so much and just do it.. This is a basic thing.

EXACTLY - talk about mulling over every insignificant detail there is ! --

2 switches or 1 ? WOW - by using 1 you saved yourself an entire .00000001 seconds !

Dont need to be a network guru to understand things like that.

If you get near 100MB/sec - you are moving files unbelievably fast over ethernet - even if it peaks @ 70MB - be happy & dont sweat pointless details that will only show a benefit if you did it 24/7 over the next 10 years.

Curious, what kind of business is this ?

  • 0

I am sorry I did not realized your replies because been making the print screen :(

  On 31/03/2012 at 08:45, articuno1au said:

Don't use jumbo frames.

That's just adding more pain to this than you need. The jumbo frames will make a minute difference at best. Just run with what you have.

Gigabit networking will likely bring your speed up to ~100MBps. At this point, as Budman observed, you are more likely to be capped by your computers hardware than the network.

Just set it up, stop thinking about it so much and just do it.. This is a basic thing.

Ok, Thanks a lot for you and for all other good people input in this thread, really saved us a lot of money indeed for a consultant.
  On 31/03/2012 at 09:07, TEX4S said:

EXACTLY - talk about mulling over every insignificant detail there is ! --

it is just I am really worry for getting started then have a problem ... but I will listen to your advise my friend.
  On 31/03/2012 at 09:07, TEX4S said:

2 switches or 1 ? WOW - by using 1 you saved yourself an entire .00000001 seconds !

Dont need to be a network guru to understand things like that.

I am sorry, but please, do you say that as an example to clear your idea to do not worry about details?

Or you mean for real that using two switches and bridge both of them will almost make no differences?

Thanks for this tip and sorry if I am asking silly or stupid question ... please be patient :)

  On 31/03/2012 at 09:07, TEX4S said:

If you get near 100MB/sec - you are moving files unbelievably fast over ethernet - even if it peaks @ 70MB - be happy & dont sweat pointless details that will only show a benefit if you did it 24/7 over the next 10 years.

That would be really amazing thing to be achieved and I never ask for something more indeed.

  On 31/03/2012 at 09:07, TEX4S said:

Curious, what kind of business is this ?

It is as I mentioned on the beginning of the thread here

  Quote
We are a small media producing company that are working under short term contracts out sourced for some local TV channels to record its shows on a daily base and do video encoding to various format like .avi, .rm, .flv, .mp3 ? and upload it to famous websites plus a .mpeg copy to be given to the channel itself.
  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 09:07, TEX4S said:

2 switches or 1 ? WOW - by using 1 you saved yourself an entire .00000001 seconds !

Dont need to be a network guru to understand things like that.

This is not accurate. This would depend on how many computers are being copied from and to. You can bottleneck on the uplinks between switches. It shouldn't take a math genius to figure out that you can't pull 2 or more through something that is only capable of 1. And the 1 will get divided by the computers trying to pull data through it, 2 computers pulling will only get 500mb, 3 pulling 333mb and so on. But if all of the computers are on the same switch they can maintain 1Gb/s between all of them, they aren't sharing a 1Gb connection.

Make sense now? He needs it for massive file transfers not connecting pcs to a network that will browse the internet and pull small docs from a server. He needs all available bandwidth, but if he is only copying to 1 computer it is a moot point.

  • 0

OP, can you walk us through how you copy? Do you do one machine at a time or multiple?

And how do you copy? Are you "moving" the file to another computer, or do you copy it from the recording computer to the editing computer, leaving the original on the recorder.

  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 15:45, cybertimber2008 said:

OP, can you walk us through how you copy?

So far I was using the copy software tera copy and winmend software ...

  On 31/03/2012 at 15:45, cybertimber2008 said:

Do you do one machine at a time or multiple?

Yes it is a one file from a one machine in a time, as I open the copy software and drag and drop the file from various network computers and place them all in queue then it is copying one by one ... so no parallel transfer under any circumstances as I read that multi transfer increase the time 0f transferring.

  On 31/03/2012 at 15:45, cybertimber2008 said:

And how do you copy? Are you "moving" the file to another computer, or do you copy it from the recording computer to the editing computer, leaving the original on the recorder.

Yes exactly this is what I am doing ... then after finishing the transfer I do delete the file from the recording machine (using remote desktop) then do a restart or a shut down, and setup ccleaner to run when computer start to clean everything to save space on the hard drive as each computer from the recording machine using a 80 gb hard drive and make it on big partition as making two r three partitions will lose a lot of space.

But please let me ask if moving the files is any better instead of copying, but I use the copy way in case anything wrong happened during the move process.

  • 0

I've just come back from the mall now and bought this switch:

D-Link 16-Port Gigabit Switch DGS-1016D:

http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=337

And will use another cisco one I mentioned earlier ... so we will have two small network, and two adsl routers ... that is all I think :)

And got two kind of cables to try and test:

- Patch cord cat 6 premium line

- Patch cable cat6 blue molded intellinet

Both are 5 m length but premium line is more expensive then intellinet (I do not know of any given reason and the guy in the mall did not know as well, so if any one can advise for this regard that would be awesome).

Also for short cables (10 m maximum) will it make any differ in my case for performance? or almost all cables are the same?

Thanks a lot and too much appreciated :)

  • 0

Cat 6 is not needed unless you're going 100m or more in length. A good Cat5E-cable will work.

Connect everything, see if every computer goes in Gigabit mode (you can see that in the network properties in Windows, status of the adapter states the link speed). If all computers are in Gigabit mode, you're ready to go. You shouldn't even have to replace cables. Just first replace the slow switch(es) with the new one, and see if it works. It probably will.

More expensive cables will not give you faster transfer speeds. As long as the link speed is Gigabit, you're always fine. Always.

  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 21:41, NoUserName said:

I've just come back from the mall now and bought this switch:

D-Link 16-Port Gigabit Switch DGS-1016D:

http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=337

And will use another cisco one I mentioned earlier ... so we will have two small network, and two adsl routers ... that is all I think :)

And got two kind of cables to try and test:

- Patch cord cat 6 premium line

- Patch cable cat6 blue molded intellinet

Both are 5 m length but premium line is more expensive then intellinet (I do not know of any given reason and the guy in the mall did not know as well, so if any one can advise for this regard that would be awesome).

Also for short cables (10 m maximum) will it make any differ in my case for performance? or almost all cables are the same?

Thanks a lot and too much appreciated :)

My 2c, the switch will be fine. Forget the premium cables... just return those.

As far as Cat5/5E/6... use 5E if you already have it... if not, use 6 (forward compatibility, a little more robust, little less interference, yadda yadda)

  • 0
  On 31/03/2012 at 11:45, sc302 said:

This is not accurate. This would depend on how many computers are being copied from and to. You can bottleneck on the uplinks between switches. It shouldn't take a math genius to figure out that you can't pull 2 or more through something that is only capable of 1. And the 1 will get divided by the computers trying to pull data through it, 2 computers pulling will only get 500mb, 3 pulling 333mb and so on. But if all of the computers are on the same switch they can maintain 1Gb/s between all of them, they aren't sharing a 1Gb connection.

Make sense now? He needs it for massive file transfers not connecting pcs to a network that will browse the internet and pull small docs from a server. He needs all available bandwidth, but if he is only copying to 1 computer it is a moot point.

meh - youre asking me to read the whole thread ? nonsense

  • 0

I am afraid that after using the 1 gb it is still not fast and only 38 mb/s maximum:

Fdc9N.png

Please advise what shall I do now and which settings I should tweak or adjust.

Transfer done exactly in 07:34 minutes for a file sized = 16 gb

Thanks a lot

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • NTLite 2025.06.10473 by Razvan Serea NTLite is a Windows configuration tool that allows you to modify your existing Windows install or an image yet to be deployed, remove Windows components, configure and integrate, speed up the Windows deployment process. Reduce Windows footprint on your RAM and storage drive memory. Remove components of your choice, guarded by compatibility safety mechanisms, which speed up finding that sweet spot. Windows Unattended feature support, providing many commonly used options on a single page for easy setup. Easily integrate a single or multiple drivers, update or language packages. Package integration features smart sorting, enabling you to seamlessly add packages for integration and the tool will apply them in the appropriate order, keeping hotfix compatibility in check. One of the important new features of NTLite (compared to its predecessors) is the ability to modify an already installed the operating system, by removing unnecessary components. Supports Windows 11, 10, 8.1 and 7, x86 and x64, live and image. Server editions of the same versions, excluding support for component removals and feature configuration. ARM64 image support in the alpha stage. Does not support Checked/Debug, Embedded, IoT editions, nor Vista or XP. NTLite 2025.06.10473 changelog: Upgrade UI: Text size now set as host, more readable on some systems Post-setup: Loading progress improvement for the 99% delay Components: ‘Snipping tool’ compatibility option UI-Translation: Thanks for Romanian (Coman) Fix Updates: Parallel WinRE integration getting stuck Updates: Download overwrite previous Defender updates Settings: Win10 News widget disabling Download: NTLite 64-bit | 21.5 MB (Free, paid upgrade available) Download: NTLite 32-bit | 19.3 MB Link: NTLite Home Page | NTLite Features | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • You will be on builds 26100.4349 (24H2) No, some machines are on 26100.4351 updated 12 hours after the official release
    • I’d be wanting to offload it fast too, wasted desk real estate.
    • AMD Ryzen 9600X 6-core AM5 CPU is just $185 and you get a free 512GB NVMe SSD too by Sayan Sen If you are on AMD's AM4 socket or older Intel and are looking to upgrade your processor, AMD has the Ryzen 9600X for just $185 (purchase link down below), plus you get a free NVMe SSD as well. The deal comes hot on the heels of Intel also offering the Core i5-14600K for as low as just $200, which includes a 240 mm AIO liquid cooler. Check that deal out in this article if you want to go Team Blue. The AMD Ryzen 9600X is based on the latest Zen 5 design and is the company's best chip to date. This desktop CPU has six cores and 12 threads; it competes with Intel's 12th Gen i7 for productivity performance, and is almost as good as the 14th Gen i7 for gaming. The SKU does not include a cooler and so you will need to buy one separately. The technical specifications of the Ryzen 5 9600X are given below: Architecture: Zen 5 Process Technology: TSMC 4nm FinFET manufacturing process Core Count: 6 cores Thread Count: 12 threads Base Clock Frequency: 3.9 GHz Max Boost Clock Frequency: 5.4 GHz Total Cache: 6 MB + 32 MB (L2 + L3) Thermal Design Power (TDP): 65W PCI Express Version: PCIe 5.0 28 lanes (usable: 24) Overclocking: Unlocked for overclocking TjMax: 95 C Platform Socket: AM5 Memory capacity support: max 192 GB DDR5 Memory Speed: 2x1R DDR5-5600, 2x2R DDR5-5600, 4x1R DDR5-3600, 4x2R DDR5-3600 Get it at the links below: AMD Ryzen 5 9600X (includes Radeon 2CU Integrated Graphics) - 100-100001405WOF: $184.99 (Shipped and Sold by Amazon US) | $189.99 (Shipped and Sold by Newegg US + free 512 GB NVMe SSD) This Amazon deal is US-specific and not available in other regions unless specified. If you don't like it or want to look at more options, check out the Amazon US deals page here. Get Prime (SNAP), Prime Video, Audible Plus or Kindle / Music Unlimited. Free for 30 days. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      elsafaacompany earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Yianis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Veteran
      Travesty went up a rank
      Veteran
    • One Month Later
      somar86 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      somar86 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      260
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      186
    4. 4
      +FloatingFatMan
      177
    5. 5
      snowy owl
      132
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!