Hi bro its me mak better u try to uninstall tera copy and reinstall tera copy if it does not fix the problem then install the previous version of tera copy then it will work smoothly without ny issues........have a nice day!!!!!!!!!!!! AND ALSO U CAN GET ALL OLDER AND LATEST VERSIONS OF TERA COPY ON WWW.FILEHIPPO.COM
Last edited by MAK5577; 29-07-2011 at 03:35 PM.
Reason: INTERNET ADDRESS EDITING
First of all, no one can ever be sure that they don't have any malware. Just because your AV doesn't find any, it doesn't mean that you don't have them. I'm not saying that your problem is caused by malware, but it's something to keep in mind.
You left out one piece of info: What are the source and destination of the file you're copying? Are they both in the same HDD, HDD to HDD, thumb drive to HDD, DVD to HDD, etc.?
Even 14 MB/s is quite slow. My configuration (AMD 7750+ & 4GB) is roughly comparable to yours and I get 40-55 MB/s copying partition-to-partition within the same HDD. Copying to and from thumb drives and CD/DVDs are much slower.
AV progs and file fragmentation can slow things down, but not to the speeds you're getting. Assuming that you're copying within the same HDD, the slow speed could be caused by a bad sector, a corrupt file system, some background task with a high CPU usage. What is your CPU usage when idle and while copying? Are other tasks also running slow?
Copying to a thumb drive at 5.3 MB/s is not too slow. It's not super-fast, but it's well within reason. What makes it difficult to judge the speed is that thumb drives differ widely in speeds. I've tested drives at write speeds from less than 1 MB/s to >15 MB/s for the same file. Even different samples of the same model differ in speed.
Another thing is that write speed is always lower than read speed for the same drive. If you get a read speed of 14 MB/s and a write speed of ~5 MB/s with the same unit, that's within the normal range for thumb drives.
Still another thing is that speed can vary widely between a single large file and a number of small files.
does 'tera copy' copy the file faster then default copier ?
__________________
"Those Who Are Afraid OF Falling Will Never BE Able To Fly"
>>Intel dual core 2.20 GHz
>>Asus P5GC-MX/1333
>>2Gb Ram
>>500Gb Seagate
>>Asus Eah4350 Silent Graphics Card
>>Windows 7 ultimate X64
does 'tera copy' copy the file faster then default copier ?
Depends. For small copying tasks, TeraCopy can actually make things slower, mostly because of the time it takes to load the prog. But for large amounts of data, it's definitely faster than the Windows copy tool.
TeraCopy has an option to make it the default copier or not. I turn it off as the default and turn it on when I want to transfer large amounts of data.
__________________
"Those Who Are Afraid OF Falling Will Never BE Able To Fly"
>>Intel dual core 2.20 GHz
>>Asus P5GC-MX/1333
>>2Gb Ram
>>500Gb Seagate
>>Asus Eah4350 Silent Graphics Card
>>Windows 7 ultimate X64
There are so many names.
???= CONFUSED=??? in selection.
__________________
"Those Who Are Afraid OF Falling Will Never BE Able To Fly"
>>Intel dual core 2.20 GHz
>>Asus P5GC-MX/1333
>>2Gb Ram
>>500Gb Seagate
>>Asus Eah4350 Silent Graphics Card
>>Windows 7 ultimate X64
I'm not sure if people are still discussing about TheMost's problem, but as per my experience I've seen that file copying to pendrives is typically slow comparing to other USB HDDs
I've 3 external HDDs 1TB,2TB and 3TB. I get avg. 35 to 40MBps in each of them.
But for pen drives (2-8GB sized ones) the avg speed is close to 8-10MBps.
__________________
"My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right."
"I'm never wrong. Once I thought I was wrong, but I was wrong"
^^yeah pendrives usually gives this much speed only..
15MB/s thats wht i get with my PD.. its transcend 8gb..
and from HDD to HDD its 30 to 60MBps max..
__________________
I'd explain it to you, but your brain would explode... Trust me :hot:
i5 760, Asus P7P55D-EVO, Zotac GTX 460, VX550, Win7 64bit,4GB RAM @1600MHz, WD 500GB Caviar Black
There are so many names.
???= CONFUSED=??? in selection.
Just try out a few of those mentioned by name. In cases like this, it's more a matter of what suits you than of which one is the absolute best.
E.g., Prog 1 may be slightly faster than Prog 2, but you may find Prog 2 more suitable to your usage habits, in which case you should go for Prog 2 and just ignore the benchmarks. If someone else prefers Prog 1, then he should use it. That's all, really.
What reviewers and other users say should be used as a guide, but you should not feel compelled to follow their preference.