Acronis versus Ghost

I have a main PC with two internal hard drives and one external hard drive. I have been using Norton Ghost as part of Norton SystemWorks for a good many years now creating images of my main partition (containing the system files etc) to both internal and external drives. After reading on the forum as to the merits of Acronis True Image, I purchased the latest version V11 and created an image using it.
Today I thought I would create fresh images of my main partition (37Gb) using both Acronis and Ghost for like for like comparison.
Ghost took forty minutes to create the image and verify it from scratch to an internal drive.
Acronis spent 35 minutes analyzing the partitions before any image creation began, subsequently creating and verifying the image taking a further thirty minutes. This resulted in a total time of 65 minutes.
Whereas I accept the fact that time is not the important attribute in the exercise and they are fairly close in that anyway, I query the analysing by Acronis of the partitions and the time being taken to do it.
Could I be doing something wrong in the way I am using Acronis?

 

It would be good to know if these were sata or ide drives, raid or not, and what OS, XP or Vista. Make the bootable Rescue cd for True Image, boot with it and make the Backup from the boot cd menu.

 

IDE with XP Home

 

You might find a solution in this thread: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=208493, particularly post #6 and thereafter.

 

CatFan432
That thread was the bee's knees.
Thanks you for that.