Running speeds when using WinPE Recovery disks

I am in process of looking for new imaging software. I would like to find Software where the recovery disk runs as fast as the windows version of the software. I have tried making three WinPE recovery disks. One was created with Acronis True Image 2013, and two were created using Macrium Reflect 5.2 (WinPE 3.1 and WinPE 4.0).

All WinPE version backup times are much slower than doing the backup while using windows.

I would like to know what other users experiences are. Do all WinPE recovery disks run much slower than the windows version of the software?

For Macrium Reflect the backup time under:
Windows: 10 minutes
WinPE 3.1: 24 minutes
WinPE 4.0: 35 minutes

The other trend I am seeing is that a Linux version of a recovery disk will run at speed(Same speed as windows versions).

Linux is good and WinPE is bad.

This is the response I got from Macrium Reflect Support:

"Windows drivers are optimized and working in conjunction with VSS will always give better read speeds. Drivers shipped with WinPE, however, will be unoptimized and generally give poorer performance."

 

I can't be sure whether it was faster or slower since I didn't measure it and I have different sizes of backups. One thing for sure is that I had a bad experience with Linux recovery media. Plus, WinPE 4 supports Windows 8 secure boot feature so you don't need to disable it when you want to recover (no idea about Linux recovery media). Even if it's slower, it works better for me so I'll just leave the backup process while having a dinner.

P.S. : I'm using a bootable USB pen drive as the recovery media instead of burn it to discs. Just in case if it makes any difference.

 

well, the stick will load the program in memory much faster than an optical disk.

that's at least that.

 

I made some measurements recently. The results are described in https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=350899.

I didn´t run the programs from Windows, as I always use a WinPE boot medium. But I found that, in the particular hardware that I used, the USB 3.0 drivers make a big difference. The Windows 8 drivers used in WinPe 4.0 are very slow compared to the Renesas drivers that I manually add to the WinPE 3.0 media.

The drivers used are indeed important in these comparisons.

 

Robin A: I looked at your previous post.

In my case I do not have a Hard drive attached to the USB3 port. The USB3 drivers do help to get my keyboard and mouse working.

I did notice that your backup speeds were a lot longer than what I am expecting. When I do a backup I am creating s 50GB image in about 10 to 12 minutes as opposed to your best time of 14:30 minutes with a backup size of 16.9GB.

I have done some other testing and I did find that the WinPE version of Paragon Hard Disk Manager Suite 12 (I built the WinPE disk 9 months ago) would run as fast as Windows 7 based backups. WinPE does not have to run slow.

What I do not know is if the Macrium Reflect 5.2 WinPE could run faster if the right drivers were injected during the build process?

My current system configuration is as follows

Operating system: Windows 7 x64 SP1 all updates
CPU Intel I7-4770K stock speed
MotherBoard: Asus Z87-Deluxe
Hard Drives: Samasung 840 pro 256GB SSD boot drive connected to Intel 6GB/sec SATA port.
: (2) Seagate ST3000DM001 7200 rpm 3TB hard drives both connected to Intel 6GB/sec SATA ports.

I am backing up the SSD hard to one of the Seagate drives. So I am only using the Intel 6GB/sec SATA ports and the Z87 motherboard chipset while doing Backups.

I have been using Acronis for years(7?) and their Linux recovery CD was always as fast as their windows version. I am looking for alternatives for my Acronis Software.

 

The initial results correspond to an external USB 2.0 disk (connected to a USB 3.0 port), and using WinPE 4.0 in all cases.

Check the "Update", Post # 5, which corresponds to a USB 3.0 disk connected to the same USB 3.0 port, and compares WinPE 4.0 and WinPE 3.0.

 

I don´t think so.

In general, for a specific Windows version and standard hardware, the drivers “shipped” with WinPE and the drivers installed by Windows are the same. There are differences when “optimized” drivers for special hardware have been installed in Windows, or when the WinPE lacks some drivers and these must be added to it. But in these cases, it is usually possible to add the same “optimized” drivers to the WinPE. So, I don´t see why a WinPE should “generally give poorer performance”.

I would rather expect the opposite, better performance of the WinPE in many cases, because the Windows partition is static, there aren´t other processes running, and it takes time to “lock” VSS.

 

Theoretically, imaging software running in 64bit OS will faster than 32bit OS. WinPE will be the same as normal OS.

In my memory, Macrium Reflect's linux bootdisk is not supported backup operation. Are you talking about Acronis' linux bootdisk? If yes, have you also tested Acronis in WinPE?

 

You are correct the Macrium Linux Recovery Disk can only do recoveries (no backups). The Recovery operation using the Linux Recovery CD ran at the same speed as the Windows 7 version.


The Macrium WinPE that I created was 64bit and I am also using Windows 7 x64.

The Paragon Hard Disk 12 Suite, WinPE runs at the same speed as their Windows version.

My next imaging software I will test is Imaging for Windows(IFW). Will test sometime this weekend and report the results.

I really liked the Macrium interface, but I need it to run at the same speed while using WinPE.

 

I tried out Imaging for Windows(IFW). So far it works the best with my new Hardware (z87 motherboard). Imaging for linux backups and restores are as fast as the windows version.

Their linux disk is the only software that recognizes my wireless keyboard and mouse without building a Custom Windows PE boot disk.


The only problem I have is with Phylock taking time to lock. I believe it is due to my Antivirus software (Kaspersky does rootkit scans and software updates after boot). If it continues to be a problem I will try the VSS lock mechanism instead.

 

Jstar333,

Try reducing the Write Free Time (ms).