Comparing 20 Drive Imaging Software Backup/Restore Speed and Image Size

From https://www.raymond.cc/blog/10-comm...-features-and-backuprestore-speed-comparison/:

 

Some interesting results. Thanks for sharing.

 

You're welcome .

 

thanks MB for sharing. Very comprehensive test indeed.
However, 3 simple facts:
1. Reliability is the most important factor for an imaging app. There is no way to test this character in a short time, and the general consensus here is that Terabyte IFW/IFL is the winner in this category.
2. for acronis, I always use its high compression option, which could reduce the image size significantly at little time increase.
3. both acronis and IFW/IFL support backup of Linux OS - something to consider if you dual boot Win and Linux.

I use Acronis and IFL as my main imaging apps after trying almost all of the tested apps in this test, I always go back to these two over the years.

 

Very interesting, I´m about to buy a new machine and I was looking for good back up/restore solution, I guess I have some reading to do.

@ oliverjia and Peter2150, thanks for the feedback

 

I have been using Macrium reflect V4 myself without problems until i restored recently.
I restored a 4gig used partition 16gig full to a empty 12gig partition.
It messed up the previous (to the left) partition leaving me losing my OS on this partition.

No errors or warnings were shown before i did this restore so I am annoyed.

V4 is an earlier version than is what is available now so hopefully a warning is present or the bug is fixed now.

 

Fair enough.
Yes I agree, Acronis is a pain to remove, so I always install it on a spare machine, make a boot USB and use only the boot USB to backup/restore my other machines.

 

I agree with Peter on this one - try and decide.

However I have similar experience with EaseUS. It was slow and unreliable. AOMEI broke my OS upon restore, I had to repair boot to get my OS back. It's slow as well.. Macrium was working fine both backup and restore. However it's slower than Acronis and IFW/IFL, and the image file is 10%-15% larger than image files of Acronis and Terabyte. The tiny DriveSnapshot was good at speed and image size, but it does not work well with UEFI and secure boot the few times I tried it. If you have a simple BIOS based OS and simple partition layout then you might want to try DriveSnapshot. Cannot speak for its reliability as I only tried it a few times before.

 

Where exactly is "here"?
If by "here" you are referring to Wilders, I'd point you to a Backup Imaging software poll that places Macrium Reflect as the clear leader, at about a 3:1 ratio over IFW.
Not saying IFW is not good, just taking slight issue with you "general consensus here" comment.

 

Yeah yeah the "one's treasure is another's dirt" thing. AOMEI failed to restore on me and DriveImage XML doesn't backup MBR partition. I won't bother with those two anymore.

 

And I stay as far away as possible from Acronis since having to use the excellent advice proffered in this thread a couple of years ago to extricate myself from their grip.

 

Results form that poll is not a valid argument. Firstly it's about "what backup imaging software you use", and reliability not the number 1 factor for many ppl. Secondly, it neglected a very important fact that IFW/IFL is a paid software and most ppl here at Wilders only use the free version of Macrium. If IFW/IFL were free, it is possible they would choose IFW/IFL over Macrium. If the entity is "Macrium Reflect Professsional" then sure we can compare directly to each other, but right now it's just apples to oranges.

By consensus I mean from the comments form members here over the years regarding the reliability of imaging software. Your points are taken though, a plain and simple poll would be the best way to indicate which software is most reliable.

 

Not an argument, it's a poll, and imo, there is a lot to be said for data collected from a poll as compared to one individual's assertion that he or she knows what the consensus is. So be careful when you are tossing around words like "not valid". The same can easily be said for your claim.

Huh? Where did that tidbit come from? How do you know that reliability is not the number 1 factor for many people? If it isn't #1 on everyone's list, I bet it's way ahead of whatever is 2nd.

And you know this how?

First thing you've said that I agree with. It is possible. But since we're tossing around opinions, my opinion is that Macrium Reflect paid version is as popular or more popular than IFW. I use the paid version.

If you expect people to take your word for what the consensus is, predicated on what you say you've heard over the years, as opposed to a polling of the membership wherein actual results can be viewed, and you then point to the poll and question its validity, I am completely not in agreement.

First you have to start with usage. If 3x as many respondents use MR compared to IFW, and you ask, "Which software is most reliable?", the results will be skewed by the number of users. I think a poll such as you have described would be difficult to pull off... which is why asking members to simply vote for which backup software they prefer is most revealing.

 

wow, great efforts in your reply. Believe in what you believe.

 

That's one of the advantages of a poll, my good-humored friend... what others believe is readily available and visible.
PS- Nice job answering none of my questions.

 

I also do not install Acronis on my system. I just use it on WinPE or its Linux boot media.

 

@ Peter2150 and oliverjia

OK, copy that. Will do a bit of testing, but I have to admit, I think these backup and restore apps are not as "sexy" as security tools, so I don´t really feel like spending too much time on this. So it´s nice to know about your experiences.

 

well said...

 

Imaging and restoring is one of the main foundations of my security setup. What I like is that it doesn't matter what the problem is or what caused it, malware, disk failure or my own poor judgment, it makes fixing it and getting my computer back online and working fast and painless.

I've been partitioning my disks into system and data partitions for the last 12 years or so and manually copying data to external disks for backup and imaging system partitions. I first used Powerquest Drive Image and Partition Magic and when they became too dated, finally moved to the Aomei programs after experimenting with several others. One thing I would say is there is no absolute answer to what is the best program. Everyone's system and way of working with it is a bit different and what works for someone will not always work for someone else. I've had great results with the Aomei programs but I already had a well worked out system of partitioning, imaging and restoring with the old Powerquest programs and I was looking for something that would do exactly the same and work with newer hardware and the Aomei programs worked for me.

 

wow, MB, reading the first part of your second paragraph in the above pots, I almost thought I wrote it because that's exactly what I have been doing in the past 11 years or so (partition disk into OS partition + data partition, and manually backup data), and I also used Powerquest DI and Partition Magic.

I switched to Symantec Ghost after Powerquest was acquired by Symantec, and recently to Acronis and Terabyte IFL when the development of Ghost was stopped. For partitioning I used Paragon Hard Disk Manager after Partition Magic was acquired again by Symantec, and most recently switched to Terabyte Bootit Bare Metal, as Terabyte support UEFI secure boot the best.

It's a shame Symantec bought and killed the two once great apps.

 

The older versions of Partition Magic and Drive Image came with really good printed manuals that explained how hard disks worked and taught you everything you needed to know about mbrs and disk partitions. If you read those manuals you had a really good idea of what you were doing.

I still use these programs on a few older Xp laptops that they can handle.

 

Could you explain what do you mean? Why is TB support "the best"?