Very Slow Copy Operation on HP Pavilion 15 p001tx

Hi everyone. I recently bought the HP Pavilion 15 p001tx. Here are the Specifications if you need them
Intel Core i5 4210U 1.7Ghz ,Turbo Boost to 2.4GHz
4 GB DDR3 RAM
1 TB HDD
Nvidia Geforce 830M 2GB DDR3
My problem is with extremely slow copying/moving operation on USB drives. I mean I could get only 5-15 Mbps while copying/moving.
I am aware that I am using a USB 3.0 Flash Drive connected to the USB 3.0 slot but a constant 5-15 Mbps is ridiculus. I have a friend who has the same model and he could get 35-40Mbps of transfer speed.
I ran the HP utility and installed the latest device drivers for Windows 8.1. I have not run into problems while copying / moving files within the harddrive as it runs at a decent 45 Mbps , in fact here is the CrystalDisk Mark benchmark of my HDD:
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 92.794 MB/s
Sequential Write : 89.059 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 27.382 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 34.493 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 0.355 MB/s [ 86.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 1.050 MB/s [ 256.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 0.975 MB/s [ 237.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 0.819 MB/s [ 199.9 IOPS]
Test : 1000 MB [C: 14.2% (64.9/455.6 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2014/09/17 20:37:37
OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)
Now this is the benchmark for a USB
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 15.174 MB/s
Sequential Write : 7.067 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 15.702 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 0.654 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 4.079 MB/s [ 995.7 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 0.006 MB/s [ 1.4 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 4.491 MB/s [ 1096.4 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 0.005 MB/s [ 1.3 IOPS]
Test : 1000 MB [H: 0.0% (0.0/3855.0 MB)] (x5)
Date : 2014/09/17 21:54:50
OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)
Please help me with this guys... I need to transfer lots of data to my external HDD.
I also have another problem which is the Bluetooth doesnt discover any devices around ,neither does any other device detect it. It just keeps saying searching forever.

I also have same problem which is the Bluetooth doesnt discover any devices around ,neither does any other device detect it. It just keeps saying searching forever.connected then within seconds it shows not connected

Similar Messages

Iphone 3G is very slow in operation

Hi,
My iphone 3G is getting very slow in operation. I have very less applications installed also. opening a message, a contact and any application is slow. I have done restart also. nothing is helping. kindly suggest.
chetan

chetan.sr wrote:
...nothing is helping. kindly suggest.
chetan
Some Users have Reported that a Restore as New has helped Resolve issues...
Backup and Set Up as New Device
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4137

Very slow copy and rm speeds

I've seen other postings about slow copy processes upon upgrading to Snow Leopard. However, none of the replies seem to address the situations I am experiencing. First, copy times between my MacBook Pro (2 Ghz, 2GB, 100GBHD, 15" - the first MBP introduced), and external USB2 Lacie HD have become very slow (1 hour for 4-6 files totalling ~4GB). Curiously, sometimes the same size transfer occurs in 3-4 minutes. I recently upgraded to SL from Tiger, and the Tiger times were in the 3-4 minute envelop. The external HD is a 1TB Poulton Lacie, with over half the disc free. My MBP HD has about 20GB free, and only the Finder, mail, occaisionally xcode, and occaisionally a browser, (either Safari or Firefox) are running during the transfer. The same sometimes occurs with only the Finder and the activity monitor running. The USB is connected directly to the MBP. So, in summary, the ext HD is directly connected, half empty, there is room on the internal HD, and the memory is not particularly burdened with other processes. The activity monitor slows less than half the CPU capability being used.
Secondly, another problem occurs using the unix secure erase, rm -Pr. It is very slow since upgrading to SL from Tiger. The finder's secure erase is too slow to use.
Any thoughts about why on either? Right now, I'm wishing that I stayed with Tiger. Thanks.

I suggest looking at your logs in Console.app to see if anything unusual is happening during the long file copies.
The SMART status isn't that useful. If it says the drive is dead, the drive it dead. If it says the drive is "verified", the drive could still be dead. A good indicator of this is if file copies take an hour instead of 3 minutes.
Is this the original hard drive in that machine? If so, I'm surprised it has made it this long. Notebook hard drives typically start failing at three years of age. You might not notice it until you do a major reoriganization of your files' organization on the disk - such as installing a new operating system.
I compared Finder's secure erase with rm and they seem more or less equivalent.
I think your internal hard drive is just failing. That's all.

Aperture Library Very Slow Copy to LaCie Thunderbolt Drive

Just installed new LaCie Thunderbolt drive and copying various media files to it. Music and video files copied like a rocket. My Aperture folder is copying as slow as molasses. Right now it says 2 days to copy 211GB. Any help would be appreciated.

Sorry, I misread Mtn Ed's last note. My USB2 was stalling out at 2-3 MB per second. Quite a bit slower than the stated Thunderbolt rate to say the least. There is a portion of the Aperture Library that copies at a very slow speed, but after an hour or so it kicks back up to normal file transfer rates. Finder was originally estimating over 20 hours for the copy to complete. Now the total elapsed time will be about 3 hours for 350GB.

Very, very slow file operations

I needed to make a specific change to an exif field of some images. So what I did was to move identify the files that I needed to change in Lightroom (they were in various folders on my disk) and move them to other folders so they would be easy to operate on. Then I used exiftool to change the field in these files, and then I thought it would be easy to read in the changed data and move them back to their original folders in Lightroom. What I found included:
I tried to Synchronize Metadata on the folders after changing the exif field. One folder had about 500 images in it, the other about 2,000. After 3 hours, the progress bar had barely moved, and I aborted.
When I tried to quit Lightroom it said that it was "writing metadata", even tho the synchronization had changed the external data and it should only have been reading metadata. I quit anyways and rebooted.
After rebooting, and relaunching Lightroom I looked at the "metadata status" column in Grid view. It was (as always, it seems) completely wrong about which files were up to date.
I was able to "read metadata" on these 2,500 images in "only" about an hour or two. Note that I didn't ask Lightroom to update the cached images, only to read the metadata. Reading metadata at 1,000-2,000 images an hour seems exceptionally slow.
Now I am trying to move the files back to their correct folders. I dragged about 1,000 raw images (CR2 + xmp) from one folder to another in Lightroom. Three hours later it is about 50% finished according to the progress bar. I'm going to bed and hope it will finish by the morning. I have to move all the other images as well, but because Lightroom won't update the filter bars in Grid View while moving files, I can't start these moves until Lightroom finishes the first.
Do other people fine absolutely absurd speeds for file operations in Lightroom? Is there any solution other than quitting and rebooting (which doesn't always work)? I hate to quit in the middle of a synchronize, read metadata, or move files operation even when it seems to be barely chugging along, because I am afraid that when I abort the operation, I will somehow leave a file orphaned, or it's metadata out of sync (which happens to me all the time, but I never know why).
When I am doing other operations I also find that I can use Lightroom for only a few hours before it gets so slow that I quit and reboot, after which operations speed up considerably. This doesn't seem like it should be necessary for a "modern" program and operating system, but in my experience it is.
I'm using a Macintosh (4 core i7, 16 GB of RAM), Mavericks latest, Lightroom 5.5, and a RAID disk, so hardware shouldn't be limiting. During this last interminable copy operation, it appears that Lightroom is pegged at 100% of a processor (core).

Sorry, but I don't think your workaround works. I am moving a bunch of files from one folder to various folders (using Lightroom to discriminate between files based on their exif/iptc values), then I change them using an outside program (exiftool), then I put them back in their original folders. This involves having Lightroom read in the new data in the files, which is what is so slow. Reconnecting, if I understand it, is for when you move a folder of files to another location, and Lightroom needs to be informed of that move.
As I pointed out, the problem is that Lightroom gets progressively and painfully slower the more you use it. But quitting and restarting can be annoying if you are in the middle of an operation because you can lose context (especially if you restart your computer, which seems to help).
And I do optimize my database nearly daily when using Lightroom.
I would spend the time to fully document this problem and report it as a bug, but my experience is that Adobe shows no evidence of actually reading my bug reports, let alone responding to them.

Very slow image operation

Hello,
I have a strange problem.
Some of my images are VERY slow to load, scale... (any image operation).
I have those 2 images :
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat1.jpg (25Ko : 295x551 pixels)
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat2.jpg (24Ko : 295x551 pixels)
I wrote a little program which load and scale the image.
Here is the result :
cat1.jpg
Time to load image : 171 ms.
Time to scale image : 157 ms.
cat2.jpg
Time to load image : 1157 ms.
Time to scale image : 2578 ms.How can this huge difference explained ?
Thanks for your help.
The program :
public class Test
     private final static BufferedImage scale(BufferedImage source, float scaleFactor)
          int width = Math.round(source.getWidth()*scaleFactor);
          int height = Math.round(source.getHeight()*scaleFactor);
          ColorModel dstCM = source.getColorModel();
          BufferedImage dst = new BufferedImage(dstCM, dstCM.createCompatibleWritableRaster(width, height), dstCM.isAlphaPremultiplied(), null);
          Image scaledImage = source.getScaledInstance(width, height, Image.SCALE_AREA_AVERAGING);
          Graphics2D g = dst.createGraphics();
          g.drawImage(source, 0, 0, width, height, null);
          g.dispose();
          return dst;
     public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException
          String imagePath = "cat1.jpg";
          //String imagePath = "cat2.jpg";
          long t1 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          BufferedImage image = ImageIO.read(new File(imagePath));
          long t2 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("Time to load image : " + (t2-t1) + " ms.");
          t1 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          image = scale(image, 0.2f);
          t2 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("Time to scale image : " + (t2-t1) + " ms.");
}

Hello,
I have a strange problem.
Some of my images are VERY slow to load,
scale... (any image operation).
I have those 2 images :
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat1.jpg (25Ko : 295x551
pixels)
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat2.jpg (24Ko : 295x551
pixels)
I wrote a little program which load and scale the
image.
Here is the result :
cat1.jpg
Time to load image : 171 ms.
Time to scale image : 157 ms.
cat2.jpg
Time to load image : 1157 ms.
Time to scale image : 2578 ms.How can this huge difference explained ?
Thanks for your help.Using the Netbeans profiler, I can see that for some reason, the cat2.jpg image is resulting in a hot spot where the scale() method ends up performing a color conversion via ColorConvertOp. Placing a debugger breakpoint on this call and debugging the code using cat1.jpg, the method is never called. So, there is something different about the color models of the two images, or there is a bug in the image reading code that is misinterpreting the image data.
This bug may be what you are seeing:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4705399

Very slow copy speeds from my USB thumb drive. Why?

I have an 8GB USB thumb drive. When I copy files to/from it to my Mac Pro (Early 2008 2.8Ghz), the transfer speeds are very slow. But when I use it with my 2009 Macbook, the speeds are fast. Why would it work faster with a low end Macbook than with a Mac Pro? I'm using one of the USB ports on the front of the Mac Pro.

Anyone have an idea?

Very slow copying of files to external hard drive

Dear all,
I've been finding that my MacBook Pro (a 2007 model running Snow Leopard) is extremely slow to copy files over to an external hard drive. The hard drive is connected via Firewire and is perfectly fine with my (Tiger) desktop G5. When I say slow, I mean that the progress monitor is counting in individual bytes.
Any ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Roger

I've tried again with a different cable and the firewire 400 (which is certainly what I'm using) still proves appallingly slow when I'm trying to copy files from my MacBook to the drive. The other way round (External HD to computer) is just fine.
Sounds like a hardware problem. In order to troubleshoot it, you'd need to try a different FW HD. If it did the same thing, it would suggest an issue with the MBP's FW port/bus. If it worked fine, then it would suggest an issue with the first FW HD, likely with the circuitry, as has been surmised before (the HD itself may be just fine, and could be transferred into a different enclosure).
I would try firewire 800, but assume that you can't have a connector which is 800 one end and 400 the other: both HDs are firewire 400 and I want to carry on using them ...
800 is backwards compatible with 400, so you actually can, but it will operate at the 400 speed; in any case, no reason to mess with that here.
One of my HDs, a later model, has a USB connector built in. I tried copying from the MacBook to the HD using the USB and it was very fast.
Sounds like you've narrowed it down to a FW issue, as described above.
I'm wondering whether this is, as one of the other correspondents surmises, an OSX 6.3 problem ...?
I strongly doubt it. I'm on 10.6.3 and have done SuperDuper backups/Time Machine backups/large file transfers, and all have behaved just as they did before 10.6.3. I read all the posts that come through here, and there is no widespread issue (normally, when something like that happens, there will be many posts about it; if fact, there are usually many posts after any major update/upgrade, when people believe the update/upgrade has done something to their machines, but I've been surprised at the low number after 10.6.3, at least here in this forum, and 10.6.3 was a very large update).
Would be very interested to know your informed thoughts.
Some thoughts:
-as mentioned above, try a different FW HD on that same MBP port to determine if the port is operating correctly.
-if the port does function properly, get a new enclosure and install the HD from the FW enclosure (USB enclosures, if you're satisfied with their speed, are very inexpensive, sometimes as low as $10 or so). Check out Macsales, Newegg and Amazon for some ideas/examples, or if you want to see hundreds of them, google it.
-if the port is the issue, you may want to get used to using USB or get a FW800 HD enclosure. Obviously there is no guarantee the FW800 port/bus is functioning properly, but I think the odds would be good.
Message was edited by: tjk

Very slow copying text from microsoft word

Any idea why copying text from word (office 2004) should be v slow? Copying same text in OS9 no problem (am currently copying text from client supplied documents into other applications ie. Quark, so having to go to another machine running previous OS + apps. seems a bit 'unnecessary'!)
PowerBook G4 17" Mac OS X (10.4.5)

Use the smart paste (Ctrl + Shift v) and select plain text only. Otherwise, you're pulling in Word's formatting when you do a regular paste.

Very Slow Copying Files

I have My External Hard Drive connected to my air port extreme base station. I have the latest firmware update. While copying files or using time machine to back up my computer, the speed is extremely slow max speed is 2.2 mpbs but bounces from 200kbps to 2.2 mbps constantly. I am with in 5 feet of the base station everything else works fine including internet speed.

i have the same problem over here. Been looking around the internet, tried different configurations, nothing helps. 3min for 15M.
just wondering: is it possible my file is transmited over the internet and back, instead of directly over the local network to my Airport disk or other computer?
Not sure if it has anything to do with it but when I look at my filesharing config, it says: Other users can access shared folders on this computer, and administrators all volumes, at afp://xx-xx-xxx-xxx.access.telenet.be/ or "yyy". where x is my IP and yyy is my bonjour-name.
why is my provider in that afp-path?
anyone any idee?
Thx

Itunes very slow copying apps

Hi, I noticed a few months ago that itunes seemed to take forever to synch my wifes iphone 4. Now I have an iphone 5 with itunes 10.7.0.21 and it is taking hours to sync via usb. It is up top 'syncing apps to iphone' and it is up to nearly 2hrs and only app number 7. the total being synced is no more than 4gb, 2.7 in apps.
previously itunes while not fast, was much quicker than this.
Is it a fault with itunes? some setting that can be changed? Did apple just screw up the last few releases of itunes (seems most likely reason as it worked better before the last few updates)?
Thanks

UPDATE
Please disregard the above. While the above did improve performance for a short time, the problem returned. I spent the next week running a full Spinrite on all 4 1TB HDDs that were in the NAS. All drives were fine. I then did some research on the individual drives, and it turns out that 3 of them were 7200RPM Hitachi's and the latest drive added was a 1TB Western Digital GREEN drive (WD10EADS). This was the source of the issue.
Additional information available at http://www.readynas.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=32179
I replaced the WD10EADS with another 7200RPM drive (seagate this time) and the NAS has been working flawlessly again (again, disregard the above post)

Concatenated disc set very slow

Hi,
I have a 4GB concatenated disk set set up with Software RAID that is very very slow copying files.
Connected to a Macmini latest generation thru a firewire 800 port.
What I get copying files is very slow transfer rate. If I look in Activity monitor I get a 6.8/7.0 MB/S.
Doesn't matter if I copy from USB drive or internal drive. Same transfer speed.
Is there a way to correct? Is it supposed to be so slow with 2TB hard drives?
Cna I split the drives without loosing all the info?
I would expect around 60 MB/S from internal and 34 MB/S from USB drive.
Thanx

Be sure you are not having any drive problems first. Use some utility to check the access times and throughput. XBench is a good free app for that.
Be sure fragmentation is not a problem. Leaving your computer on one or two nights a week will allow it time to defrag itself.
Leopard loves to "cat-knap". Those WD drives aggravate the problem because they are slow to spin up. I've gotten used to it, I trained myself to have a little patience.
You can ease the problem in preferences > energy saver. Just uncheck the "put the hard disk(s) to sleep when possible" box and set the sleep timers accordingly or throw down some cash and get you one or two of those raptor drives.
Finally, Leo uses more memory than Tiger, be sure you have enough memory available at all times for your disk caches and your programs.
Kj

Very slow USB keyboard and mouse when performing scp copy

Hello,
As the title says, my Mac becomes very unresponsive when I copy large file via scp command. Keboard seems to read only a few letters than it "sleeps" acceptin a letter every ~2s, mouse moves "by hops" over the screen.
The scp seems to use available bandwith (~300kB/s), so seems ok. The CPU is 95% idle, so again seems OK. Disk is mostly idle.
My system configuration:
- Mac mini 5,1
- Lion
- USB keyboard + mouse (combo)
What else can I check to solve the problem? I need to use ssh/scp.
Update: Just when writing the post I got an idea to test Bluetooth keyboar+mouse. The result is that Bluetooth imput devices works without degradation, whilst at the same time the USB devices gets slow. I have tested the pendrive read/write and it is also affected by the SCP command. Any ideas why SCP over WiFi degrade USB operations? Is there any USB monitoring tool/command?
I do not want to stick with the crappy standard Bluetooth keyboard when I have a split ergonomic USB keyboard. Anyway, I was looking for a good ergonimic Bluetooth keyboard but was unsuccessful. However the exclusive, either scp either USB at a time, copy operation is also a hindrance.
Thanks in advance!

Found the root cause of the problem - dying battery in my wireless keyboard. Why it degraded in operation under such condition, with SCP running, and not otherwise is a great mystery but a few days later it started to degrade all the time.

Macbook Pro Is Operating Very Slow....

My Macbook Pro is 2 years old. I purchased it from New York . I live in India. Nowadays my macbook is operating too slow. Initial startup is very slow and also launching apps and other function are also working slow. I am little irritated with this,. I need a solution ASAP.

Launch the Console application in any of the following ways:
☞ Enter the first few letters of its name into a Spotlight search. Select it in the results (it should be at the top.)
☞ In the Finder, select Go ▹ Utilities from the menu bar, or press the key combination shift-command-U. The application is in the folder that opens.
☞ Open LaunchPad. Click Utilities, then Console in the icon grid.
The title of the Console window should be All Messages. If it isn't, select
SYSTEM LOG QUERIES ▹ All Messages
from the log list on the left. If you don't see that list, select
View ▹ Show Log List
from the menu bar at the top of the screen.Click the Clear Display icon in the toolbar. Then try the action that you're having trouble with again. Select any messages that appear in the Console window. Copy them to the Clipboard by pressing the key combination command-C. Paste into a reply to this message by pressing command-V.
The log contains a vast amount of information, almost all of which is irrelevant to solving any particular problem. When posting a log extract, be selective. A few dozen lines are almost always more than enough.
Please don't indiscriminately dump thousands of lines from the log into this discussion.
Please don't post screenshots of log messages—post the text.
Some private information, such as your name, may appear in the log. Anonymize before posting.

Very slow OCZ Vertex 3 SSD on Pavilion MSI MS-7184 problem

Hi guys,hat
I´ve becomed an gift from a friend in a form of an Pavilion Desktop PC.
The first problem is that I don't really know the Pavilion type of this one.
What's sure is that it is equipped with an
MSI MS-7184 motherboard
2 GB RAM
Radeon HD 6570 graphics and it has the
BIOS ver. 3.48
HP P/N: 5188-3246
Here is my second (big) problem with it:
I've buyed an OCZ Vertex 3 SSD hoping that I'll upgrading and boosting my WIN 7 Ultimate speed. Not my day .... it goes soooooo slooooow. I've tryed bothways, that is, copying the System partition to the new SSD, and new installing the WIN7 Ultimate on the SSD drive.
I've searched the net over SSD behaving slow issues and the only relevant things that I've found were that I have to enable the AHCI HDD access option in BIOS, option that I don't have in my BIOS.
Any help aprecciated!!!
Thanks.
This question was solved.
View Solution.

Hi,
Please post the HP product number for the PC.
Do you know what firmware level your Vertex 3 is running? Firmware version 2.22 is the latest. If your firmware is 2.06 of lower then you must update incrementally. I wouldn't update the firmware if you should decide to return the SSD. See my below information.
I believe that the MSI motherboard only has SATA I which is very slow for a VERTEX 3 which to run at full performance. Frankly, I am surprised that the VERTEX 3 even runs on a SATA I port as many SATA III SSDs will not run on a SATA I port. Review this OCZ VERTEX 3 document.
You might want to see if you can return and exchange the SSD for another that is backwards compatible to SATA I. Perhaps the Vertex-2 or Agility-2 would run better for your needs.
HP DV9700, t9300, Nvidia 8600, 4GB, Crucial C300 128GB SSD
HP Photosmart Premium C309G, HP Photosmart 6520
HP Touchpad, HP Chromebook 11
Custom i7-4770k,Z-87, 8GB, Vertex 3 SSD, Samsung EVO SSD, Corsair HX650,GTX 760
Custom i7-4790k,Z-97, 16GB, Vertex 3 SSD, Plextor M.2 SSD, Samsung EVO SSD, Corsair HX650, GTX 660TI
Windows 7/8 UEFI/Legacy mode, MBR/GPT

Very Slow Copy Operation on HP Pavilion 15 p001tx

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for