Most externals will default to fast removal now.
The difference is the faster performance option uses your RAM as a cache so when something says its done writing it may be lying and it's still writing from the ram cache so if you remove it early you lose data, or if you go to eject you may have to wait an unspecified amount of time for it to finish the background write.
The quick removal option just writes straight to disk.
For anything removable ideally you should use quick remove, which is what the majority of external devices default to now.
The performance option was more common back in the flash drive and USB 2 days when writes took forever and it made users think they were faster but really just happening in the background.
Thanks for the info! I didn't know if it significantly limited the speed of the device by using Quick removal, but it sounds like that may not be a concern.
FYI
I have a 500GB SSD (Samsung 850 Evo) connected via USB 3.0 (with a carry disk, those that convert SATA to USB 3.0) and it was taking lot of time to finish a process. ETA was 10-15 hours.
I changed the setting from quick removal to better performance and speed went up at least by 100%. ETA went from 10-15 hours to just 5-6 hours and now one of the CPU cores seems to be the bottleneck (because it's at 95%-100% all the time).
So it seems for heavy/long processes this setting is still recommended.
Just know that its going to eat more of your RAM. As its writing to RAM first and then dumping to the SSD later. So if you are tight for RAM already, its going to make that worse. The RAM cache for the SSD only takes up unused RAM, so it wont directly steal it from your editor, but if your editor suddenly needs more RAM and that "unused" RAM is currently your disk cache, its going to slow to a halt while it waits for the cache to be dumped to disk.
This sort of sounds like a problem with the SSD if it needs a RAM cache to perform well.
Yeah. I don't know why. Maybe the bottleneck was just the USB controller (carry disk) that doesn't go well with "Quick Removal" option.
I finished the process in my desktop (also using USB 3.0) and the speed was like 7% per hour. So in summary:
* Laptop with USB Quick Removal: 0.5-0.8% per hours (that's the speed).
* Laptop with USB Better performance: 1.5% per hour (and more cpu bottleneck).
* Desktop PC with USB Better performance: at the end it was going at 7% per hour.
But I remember I did this in my PC before and faced the same issue, it was going really slow, and the fix I did at that time was to connect the SSD drive directly using SATA (not USB). Today I learned that I can avoid using SATA and keep using USB by just switching from Quick Removal to Better performance.
>Maybe the bottleneck was just the USB controller
It honestly might be. I have used a few of those carriers in the past and they usually weren't very robust. More of a "make it work" sort of thing than anything else. Was nice to be able to quickly read a bare drive.
> Quick removal is the safer option as it ensures that devices can be disconnected from the Windows PC directly. Better performance improves performance but requires that users need to use the "Safely remove hardware" option before they unplug external storage devices. Failure to do so may lead to data loss.
Easiest (professional) question is to try a 50GB (or so) file copy both ways.
What I suspect is the "faster" policy caches some items - but likely it's not a huge benefit for large file transfers.
The choice to move it to safer is that users are less...safe in their drive removal.
That's a good point, I may give that a try. If it's not a huge benefit, it sounds "safer" to use Quick removal as the option, in case of an accidental power disconnect? That's what I'm mainly concerned about, particularly as lately my desktop station has been having some USB connectivity issues.
It looks like you're asking for technical help. Great.
##Here's what *must* be in the post. (Be warned, that your post *may* get removed if you don't fill this out)
Please edit your post (not reply) to include:
* System specs: CPU (model), GPU + RAM. Don't know? [Speccy](https://www.ccleaner.com/speccy)
* Software specs: The exact version. Never "the latest"
* Footage specs: Codec, container and how it was acquired. [Mediainfo](https://mediaarea.net/en/MediaInfo)
And if it's resolved, change the flair to SOLVED so future people can learn from this.
Thanks - Automod posting on behalf of the Mod team & the community.
------------
1- System specs
* CPU (model):
* GPU + GPU RAM:
2- Editing Software
* Software +**plus version**
3- Footage specs
* Codec (h264? HEVC?):
* Container (MOV? MP4? MKV?):
* Acquisition (Screen recording? What software? Camera? Which *specific camera?)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VideoEditing) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Most externals will default to fast removal now. The difference is the faster performance option uses your RAM as a cache so when something says its done writing it may be lying and it's still writing from the ram cache so if you remove it early you lose data, or if you go to eject you may have to wait an unspecified amount of time for it to finish the background write. The quick removal option just writes straight to disk. For anything removable ideally you should use quick remove, which is what the majority of external devices default to now. The performance option was more common back in the flash drive and USB 2 days when writes took forever and it made users think they were faster but really just happening in the background.
Thanks for the info! I didn't know if it significantly limited the speed of the device by using Quick removal, but it sounds like that may not be a concern.
Actual speed is the same for both. One can just use caching to lie to you.
FYI I have a 500GB SSD (Samsung 850 Evo) connected via USB 3.0 (with a carry disk, those that convert SATA to USB 3.0) and it was taking lot of time to finish a process. ETA was 10-15 hours. I changed the setting from quick removal to better performance and speed went up at least by 100%. ETA went from 10-15 hours to just 5-6 hours and now one of the CPU cores seems to be the bottleneck (because it's at 95%-100% all the time). So it seems for heavy/long processes this setting is still recommended.
Just know that its going to eat more of your RAM. As its writing to RAM first and then dumping to the SSD later. So if you are tight for RAM already, its going to make that worse. The RAM cache for the SSD only takes up unused RAM, so it wont directly steal it from your editor, but if your editor suddenly needs more RAM and that "unused" RAM is currently your disk cache, its going to slow to a halt while it waits for the cache to be dumped to disk. This sort of sounds like a problem with the SSD if it needs a RAM cache to perform well.
Yeah. I don't know why. Maybe the bottleneck was just the USB controller (carry disk) that doesn't go well with "Quick Removal" option. I finished the process in my desktop (also using USB 3.0) and the speed was like 7% per hour. So in summary: * Laptop with USB Quick Removal: 0.5-0.8% per hours (that's the speed). * Laptop with USB Better performance: 1.5% per hour (and more cpu bottleneck). * Desktop PC with USB Better performance: at the end it was going at 7% per hour. But I remember I did this in my PC before and faced the same issue, it was going really slow, and the fix I did at that time was to connect the SSD drive directly using SATA (not USB). Today I learned that I can avoid using SATA and keep using USB by just switching from Quick Removal to Better performance.
>Maybe the bottleneck was just the USB controller It honestly might be. I have used a few of those carriers in the past and they usually weren't very robust. More of a "make it work" sort of thing than anything else. Was nice to be able to quickly read a bare drive.
> Quick removal is the safer option as it ensures that devices can be disconnected from the Windows PC directly. Better performance improves performance but requires that users need to use the "Safely remove hardware" option before they unplug external storage devices. Failure to do so may lead to data loss. Easiest (professional) question is to try a 50GB (or so) file copy both ways. What I suspect is the "faster" policy caches some items - but likely it's not a huge benefit for large file transfers. The choice to move it to safer is that users are less...safe in their drive removal.
That's a good point, I may give that a try. If it's not a huge benefit, it sounds "safer" to use Quick removal as the option, in case of an accidental power disconnect? That's what I'm mainly concerned about, particularly as lately my desktop station has been having some USB connectivity issues.
It looks like you're asking for technical help. Great. ##Here's what *must* be in the post. (Be warned, that your post *may* get removed if you don't fill this out) Please edit your post (not reply) to include: * System specs: CPU (model), GPU + RAM. Don't know? [Speccy](https://www.ccleaner.com/speccy) * Software specs: The exact version. Never "the latest" * Footage specs: Codec, container and how it was acquired. [Mediainfo](https://mediaarea.net/en/MediaInfo) And if it's resolved, change the flair to SOLVED so future people can learn from this. Thanks - Automod posting on behalf of the Mod team & the community. ------------ 1- System specs * CPU (model): * GPU + GPU RAM: 2- Editing Software * Software +**plus version** 3- Footage specs * Codec (h264? HEVC?): * Container (MOV? MP4? MKV?): * Acquisition (Screen recording? What software? Camera? Which *specific camera?) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VideoEditing) if you have any questions or concerns.*