What is the speed while using multiple SATA disc burners?

vbimport

#1

I was thinking of using multiple USB DVD/CD burners to my computer to burn things quicker (different compilations per burner). I inquired on the forums and found out that this was a bad idea because the speed will be the same and there may be more coasters due to the same channel being used.

So instead, I thought about just buying PCI SATA controllers to get more SATA ports on my computer, and then buying a couple SATA burners and attach them this way. Will this work? Will I be able to burn multiple compilations/images on each burner at the same speed I would be burning one?

If it’s a yes, would it work with dual independent channel PCI SATA controllers so I could hook up 2 burners per SATA controller card?

Thank you!


#2

It depends.

When you’re burning different compilations to different burners, with one or more harddrives as the source, then it’s difficult to predict where the bottleneck will be.

As an example I can burn large files or ISO images onto 3-4 burners simultaneously (at 8x) with 2 or three of them being externally connected by USB, with all files residing on just a single harddrive.

This is on an older P4 2.4GHz system with a 3-year old harddrive.

Using the exact same system but a 5-year old harddrive as source, it’s impossible to burn more than one compilation at a time, or the harddrive will thrash and almost completely stall the burns.

Newer systems should be better able to handle simultaneous burns, but just exactly how many and at what speed will depend a lot on the specifics of your setup.

Limiting burn speed to 8x will help (also helps reduce likelihood of bad burns) or at least no faster than 12x.

Using more than one harddrive as source will also help.

Using an SSD as source should help tremendously.

You’ll only really know how many simultaneous burns you can achieve by trying it on your own system.


#3

Thanks for the reply.

So the bottleneck isn’t actually the communication medium usb vs sata but the source?

So should I spend more money into getting SATA controllers and SATA burners, or stay with USB burners and just get multiple/faster hard drives?


#4

[QUOTE=ohxoh01;2461982]So the bottleneck isn’t actually the communication medium usb vs sata but the source?[/QUOTE]The bottleneck is whatever limitation hits you first - it’s difficult to say where the bottleneck will be. If you improve throughput somewhere in the system, the bottleneck will move somewhere else.

So should I spend more money into getting SATA controllers and SATA burners, or stay with USB burners and just get multiple/faster hard drives?
Why not try and see how much you can burn simultaneously with your current setup?


#5

if you can provide a copy of the source fil;e to each of the writers
independantly even if one has a snag others will push through ok.
since all need the cpu power to do the job total time taken is not going to reduce.
also different files burning will always be slow. more likely you may get under run error.


#6

On my Phenom2 550 box Win7 struggles to feed 2 Samsung burners (@ 4x speed) - using Imgburn I can watch buffers running dry and burning stops to recover buffers on both devices. The only way to sooth the problem is enabling “always use buffered I/O” then it can burn without buffer underruns.