sata ssd to usb-what have you found thats decently fast?

[inquisitor1]

im using these on a few ssd I need to move between pc and theyre not fast at all. I didnt expect blistering speeds like 330mb/s I get with my nvme in their cases but I expected something decent and they are bad. I have 3 and all 3 are in the trash if I can find something decent.

what do you use?

anything for 10gbps speeds? obviously the usb ports I use support that speed but I get horrible speeds with these adapters

 

[lexluthermiester]

im using these on a few ssd I need to move between pc and theyre not fast at all. I didnt expect blistering speeds like 330mb/s I get with my nvme in their cases but I expected something decent and they are bad. I have 3 and all 3 are in the trash if I can find something decent.

what do you use?

anything for 10gbps speeds? obviously the usb ports I use support that speed but I get horrible speeds with these adapters

By the specs, 10Gbps is not really needed as the SATA bus limit is 6Gbps and most drives, even SSDs, can't saturate that much bandwidth. So anything USB3.0 is going to be a solid option.

 

[_roman_]

I bought ages ago USB SATA Bridge wiht UASP Protocol. UASP is missing most often.

I think last cases I bought were all 5Gbit/s.

I changed my backup strategy from usb sata bridge to usb nvme bridge. There is a big difference in backup times. From 27 minutes from sata with different SATA SSDs (around 5 different modells - all very expensive) to around 5 minutes. I'm not sure if your concern is backup time. Assuming you have a proper file system and a proper operating system you can reduce the backup time a lot. (I'm not talking about vfat or ntfs)
Some SATA SSDs brand are trash. In my case the companies are SANDISK and ADATA. Others did not have any flaws. Flaws in daily usage and as a backup media. In the past i had several drives which were just duplicates of my system.

 

[inquisitor1]

By the specs, 10Gbps is not really needed as the SATA bus limit is 6Gbps and most drives, even SSDs, can't saturate that much bandwidth. So anything USB3.0 is going to be a solid option.

I have to find something better. those adapters I have. they all suck across all 3 pcs in 3.0 in 3.2 in 3.2. they just suck horribly. cheap for a reason I guess.

I bought ages ago USB SATA Bridge wiht UASP Protocol. UASP is missing most often.

I think last cases I bought were all 5Gbit/s.

I changed my backup strategy from usb sata bridge to usb nvme bridge. There is a big difference in backup times. From 27 minutes from sata with different SATA SSDs (around 5 different modells - all very expensive) to around 5 minutes. I'm not sure if your concern is backup time. Assuming you have a proper file system and a proper operating system you can reduce the backup time a lot. (I'm not talking about vfat or ntfs)
Some SATA SSDs brand are trash. In my case the companies are SANDISK and ADATA. Others did not have any flaws. Flaws in daily usage and as a backup media. In the past i had several drives which were just duplicates of my system.

thanks, can you please show me a picture of what you use?

 

[kapone32]

I have one of these and I only use it to format Drives.

 

[inquisitor1]

I have one of these and I only use it to format Drives.

I use 3 with different ssd drives to transfer between pc's. slow af. maybe an ssd case? is it the controller thats the issue?

 

[GerKNG]

i had a lot of M.2 and 2.5" adapters and most of them are utter trash.
i recommend getting a new cable (i had many of them being stuck at ~10MB/s and with a 5€ cable it was full speed again. The only two adapters that i still have and which both wrote several TB without issues are Amazon Basics and one from "SALCAR" for 8€.

 

[DirtyDingusMcgee]

Works great.

https://www.startech.com/en-us/hdd/sdock4u313

 

[Dr. Dro]

The largest majority of SATA III (6 Gbps) devices, that is to say, pretty much all HDDs and most lower and mid-range SATA SSDs will successfully saturate their speed when connected to a USB 3.0 5 Gbps (SuperSpeed) port. You'll lose a bit of bandwidth on the highest end SSDs, but otherwise any speed woes you have are due to using a USB 2.0 enclosure or cable, or potentially something with a bad chipset. USB 2.0 (Hi-Speed) is limited to 480 Mbps, which is about a third of the bandwidth afforded by the original SATA standard (1.5 Gbps).

My enclosures have JMicron JMS579 SATA-to-USB controllers and they perform as expected.

 

[kapone32]

I use 3 with different ssd drives to transfer between pc's. slow af. maybe an ssd case? is it the controller thats the issue?

I would have to study that, I use the front ports on my MB and we all know how good those usually are. For formatting drives it does not take long at all. I also have one of those Amazon retro Game drives that is also using USB 3.0 but the Cable that came with it sucked, so I used one of my thick USB 3 cables and it improved performance. Copying that drive from External to an Internal NVME, took almost 6 hours for 2.5 TB of Data so I guess we could also say it comes down the what factor of drive cable and port matter. I started testing External NVME but that format can be so finicky. I have a Kingston NV2 that I bricked by plugging it into another PC externally after formatting it on 1 without creating the Volume. Even putting it back in the original port made no difference. I won't be doing that again anytime soon.

 

[Commander-CB]

i have the same one - same issue -
you need a intel processor and TB3
other than that .....
thinking-
ok
ummmm
use the internal port m2 or the network card ..... to oculink adapter to thunderbolt to sata

this should work --- something like a external egpu

find a egpu solution that works and instead of a gpu use a sata or whatever
__________________________________________________________________________________

 

[inquisitor1]

The largest majority of SATA III (6 Gbps) devices, that is to say, pretty much all HDDs and most lower and mid-range SATA SSDs will successfully saturate their speed when connected to a USB 3.0 5 Gbps (SuperSpeed) port. You'll lose a bit of bandwidth on the highest end SSDs, but otherwise any speed woes you have are due to using a USB 2.0 enclosure or cable, or potentially something with a bad chipset. USB 2.0 (Hi-Speed) is limited to 480 Mbps, which is about a third of the bandwidth afforded by the original SATA standard (1.5 Gbps).

My enclosures have JMicron JMS579 SATA-to-USB controllers and they perform as expected.

jmciron, that company is on my blacklist. maybe it changed hands since ocz core ssd.....I got screwed massively with the ssd with jmicron controller when they had their issue. what pisses me off is anandtech played it down. it was expensive for me to buy it back then when ssd were starting to come into the masses. jmicron is a no go unfortunately.

 

[A&P211]

I use this with a Samsung 870 qvo SSD.

Amazon.com

Maybe its also that the SSD's cache gets filled up with large transfers so the SSD slows down. I use that USB enclosure with a 8tb 870 qvo, the cache is only 79gb. Anything over this, the SSD slows down to 150mb/s. Before that, tops out around 500mb, normal speeds for SATA III.

 

[A Computer Guy]

im using these on a few ssd I need to move between pc and theyre not fast at all. I didnt expect blistering speeds like 330mb/s I get with my nvme in their cases but I expected something decent and they are bad. I have 3 and all 3 are in the trash if I can find something decent.

what do you use?

anything for 10gbps speeds? obviously the usb ports I use support that speed but I get horrible speeds with these adapters

This external enclosure supports UASP and TRIM which seems to be uncanny and rare for external enclosures for some reason. I have two, they are cheap, and they seem to work well.

ORICO 2.5 inch Hard Drive Enclosure USB C to SATA III 6Gbps Clear External Hard Drive Case for All 7mm 9.5mm 2.5 inch SATA SSD HDD Up to 6TB, Tool-Free, Support USB 3.2 Gen 2 UASP
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BM9FYM4Z

 

[lexluthermiester]

TRIM

This is not needed. All drives since 2016 have TRIM built in. It would only be useful for drives before that time that don't have the function built in.

 

[A Computer Guy]

This is not needed. All drives since 2016 have TRIM built in. It would only be useful for drive before that time that don't have the function built in.

I have quite a few drives prior to 2016 so it's handy for them.

 

[Dr. Dro]

jmciron, that company is on my blacklist. maybe it changed hands since ocz core ssd.....I got screwed massively with the ssd with jmicron controller when they had their issue. what pisses me off is anandtech played it down. it was expensive for me to buy it back then when ssd were starting to come into the masses. jmicron is a no go unfortunately.

That's probably the weirdest boycott I ever heard about. And one of the most unfounded, too.

JMicron just sells controller chips, they're a mere component for the enclosure. OCZ... hasn't been around for about 10 years, give or take a couple. The company merged with Toshiba, which has since become Kioxia, which makes the NAND for basically half the SSD market anyway. If you hold grudges for what's decades at this point, you're missing out big time.