TI 9.0.3567 Home hours to backup

I bought and loaded 9.0 Home on an older PC and runs like molasses. It's a 1.8 Mhz processor and the drive has 37Gb on it. Does 6 hours sound about right for time?

 

Is that really 1.8 MHz or is it 1.8 GHz?

 

There have already been other reports of #3567 being slower than the previous build. Can you describe briefly what kind of system you have, maybe it has something to do with that.

 

I can back up and verify 40 GB onto an external firewire disk in 58 minutes (using windows, not the Linux recovery CD), using "normal" compression.

This is not significantly slower than the previous build.

Danny
---

 

Hello shieber,

Thank you for choosing Acronis Disk Backup Software.

If you would like us to investigate the issue then please provide us with the following information:

- Please create Acronis Report.
- If you are running Acronis True Image from under Windows then please create Windows System Information.
- If you are running Acronis True Image while booting from Acronis Bootable Rescue Media or by using Acronis Startup Recovery Manager then please create Linux system information (sysinfo.txt).

You can find the instructions on how to create the above-mentioned diagnostic information in Acronis Help Post.

Please submit a request for technical support. Attach all the collected files and information to your request along with the step-by-step description of the actions taken before the problem appears and the link to this thread. We will investigate the problem and try to provide you with the solution.

Thank you.
--
Kirill Omelchenko

 

Oops. Yes. GHz is correct.

 

It's a 4 year old IBM, 1.8Mhz intel processor, with USB 1.1 ports and a single HD. The back up was to a USB drive, however, trying a file backup to the same HD was also extremely slow. I was just wondering if it's just an old slow computer or some kind of software issue. I put in a USB 2 card and the speed was about the same. The computer is used to control the locks and security cameras in an office bldg but that software was unloaded when I tried the backups.

 

Are you sure about the 1.8 *MHz* ... I don't think CPUs were made that were that low in speed. Even in the days of DOS, the lowest I can remember is 33Mhz. If it is 1.8, then that's your problem.

 

It has to be 1.8Ghz which would be fairly typical of a 4 yr-old PC. Heavens, the very first "IBM PC" ran at 4.77Mhz in 1980 or so.

 

What operating system are you running? What brand was the USB 2 card? Adaptec cards which use the NEC USB chipset work well. ALI and VIA chipsets sometimes do not work well at all.

Most USB drives work well, but there are exceptions. Western Digital and Maxtor brands have been reported to work well. What brand is yours?

How much of the hard drive is used? The 37GB? In my experience, backing up a drive with 4-6GB used to a USB 1.1 connected drive would take about an hour, so 37GB would indeed take around 6 hours.

 

USB 1.1 won't give you even 1 MB/second, so what do you expect?

Also, a backup to the same HD is a guarantee for bad performance, no matter what backup utility you use.

Danny
---

 

Thanks folks. Sounds like it's just a PC built for those unspoiled by current technology

 

I installed a second Hddrive inthe PC, no the full image backup takes about 18 for backup and about that for verify.

Who says USB (1 or 2) is the future? ;-)

sh

 

Here are some facts from my machine:
It takes , as per the log, about 1min and 40 seconds to do an incremental backup with build 3567 of about 9GB of data with normal compression (changes are quite heavy) to an external hard disk connected to the usb port and about 36 minutes to verify backups in archive in the secure zone, the size of the zone being 34.22 GB.
I am quite scared if I have GOOD BACKUPS though on verification the archive is shown as OK.
My system has Pentium 4 with 3 Ghz HT processor with 1 GB of DDR RAM on XP Home SP2 with all updates