PDA

View Full Version : Compared to Carbon Copy, wow slowwwwww


dedmonds
02-07-2007, 07:18 PM
I have to admit that I will probably go back to Carbon Copy. While the scheduling and some other features are nice, I usually do a complete weekly backup which entails the whole disk.

While the Incremental back does seem fairly fast the whole disk back up is painfully slow when compared. I talking almost an hour longer vs. Carbon Copy.

This has been tested on numerous different systems just to rule that aspect out. The slowness is exponential across the board. I guess I don't understand why unless there is so much checking and cross checking going on. Oh well.

dnanian
02-07-2007, 07:36 PM
Honestly, I can't see how this would be. Nearly all objective tests we've seen done show that SD! is significantly faster than nearly everything out there, and certainly CCC.

Could you send me a log from one of these slow runs, as well as a system profiler report?

sdsl
02-08-2007, 02:55 AM
We purchased copies of SuperDuper at work and used it on a PowerBook G4 (10.3.9) and on an Intel Macbook Pro Core 2 Duo (10.4.8). After seeing how well it worked, I also bought copies for our iMac G5 (10.4.8) and iMac G3 (10.3.9) at home. For these computers, the initial full copy takes 10% to 40% less time on SuperDuper versus CCC, which is one of the reasons we use SuperDuper now. For the Smart Update, SuperDuper seems 2-5 times faster. On the Intel Macbook Pro running 10.4.8, the Smart Update is so fast it completes (with a disk that has 40 GB of data, of which several hundred MB has changed and hence is copied over) in less time than it takes me to go down the hall to get a cup of coffee and walk back.

By the way, SuperDuper diagnosed a disk that was going bad at work. I alternate backups between two external FW drives, and we noticed one was taking longer and longer. It turned out that this particular external drive was going bad and we are now replacing it. Maybe in his spare time (ha!) Dave can add some disk diagnostics to SuperDuper ...

Gryzor
02-08-2007, 06:40 AM
I too, was a CCC user. When I saw SD! i was a wondering "why pay" if CCC is "donationware" ?

So I downloaded SD! to give it a fair try. Back then I had only an external FW drive and did a clone "more or less everyday". (It saved me once tho!).

When I first saw SD! i wasn't really "impressed"... until I figured out the smartupdate... it really takes no more than 5-10 minutes. Then when you start using SD! you realize that even when there are things that I'd change or improve (Greatly), it's way much faster and complete than CCC. I mean no disrespect for CCC, which is an excellent piece of donationware software if all you need is clone a drive from time to time. But SD provides much more control and allows you to run custom scripts, etc.

I'd recommend it to anyone over CCC. The only reason why I wouldn't pay for SD! if, as I've said before, all I need are a handful of Full Clones (this sounds like Star Wars, no pun intended) from time to time. But even then, SD! can do that possibly faster.

GOod luck.