xboxscene.org forums

Author Topic: Internal Vs External Hdd Performance  (Read 72 times)

Saosin7

  • Archived User
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Internal Vs External Hdd Performance
« on: January 12, 2010, 12:31:00 PM »

Hi all,

This is my first post at Xbox-scene so I hope I'm not breaking any rules or anything.

I've been searching for some benchmarks on running games with XBReboot and XeXLoader using an external USB 2.0 drive vs running games from the internal SATA interface with the "internal" drive. Is there any difference? If so, how much?

Also I'm wondering if there's any point to installing the games to HDD in the menu? Or is this how the games are actually run with XeXLoader?

I haven't received my exploitable 360 yet so sorry if my questions seem noobish...
Logged

jeffrey92

  • Archived User
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 105
Internal Vs External Hdd Performance
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2010, 01:21:00 PM »

internal is going to be faster... as SATA is a faster interface than usb... I dont know how much though

You can install games via XEXloader or with the hacked NXE as well. The difference is that in the next version of xexloader it will automatically patch the files so you can just run them from the hard drive. If you do it with NXE you are more likely to be successful in ripping the game but you will have to patch some files in order to play without a disc
Logged

dinzy

  • Archived User
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 83
Internal Vs External Hdd Performance
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2010, 09:49:00 AM »

nominally  SATA 1 can do 1.5 Gb/s and USB can do 480 Mbps.  I bit the bullet and bought a 320GB 7200 RPM internal drive and installed it with a broken HDD's case I got off ebay for 15bucks because I figured it would be the fastest, most cost effective solution and would keep the system in 'one' piece.


As far as XEXloader goes, I can't get it to rip Darksiders without erroring out, a problem many others are having with various games.  I think this is why the next rev is taking a while.   What I am really hoping is that the HDD will reduce load times for mass effect2.

Logged

farmboynick

  • Archived User
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Internal Vs External Hdd Performance
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2010, 08:01:00 PM »

QUOTE(Saosin7 @ Jan 13 2010, 06:31 AM) *

Hi all,

This is my first post at Xbox-scene so I hope I'm not breaking any rules or anything.

I've been searching for some benchmarks on running games with XBReboot and XeXLoader using an external USB 2.0 drive vs running games from the internal SATA interface with the "internal" drive. Is there any difference? If so, how much?

Also I'm wondering if there's any point to installing the games to HDD in the menu? Or is this how the games are actually run with XeXLoader?

I haven't received my exploitable 360 yet so sorry if my questions seem noobish...

if you want maximum speed then you need to install a 3.5" hdd into your 360 i done an internal 3.5" sata hdd mod on mine a and the load times are pretty much non existant
Logged

twisted89

  • Archived User
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Internal Vs External Hdd Performance
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2010, 11:57:00 PM »

can the xbox power a 3.5" hard drive by itself? or did you add another power source? would expect a 3.5" to suck to much power through the one connection.
Logged

farmboynick

  • Archived User
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Internal Vs External Hdd Performance
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2010, 03:15:00 AM »

QUOTE(twisted89 @ Jan 17 2010, 05:57 PM) *

can the xbox power a 3.5" hard drive by itself? or did you add another power source? would expect a 3.5" to suck to much power through the one connection.

the xbox 360 has more than enough extra power to run any 3.5" hdd i have mine installed inside a jasper and use a 150 watt psu i just use the 5v from the small hdd 5v mosfet leg and the 12v comes direct from the main rail
Logged

Saosin7

  • Archived User
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Internal Vs External Hdd Performance
« Reply #6 on: January 17, 2010, 07:48:00 AM »

Thanks for all your answers.

I know the SATA-bus is much faster than the USB, but has anyone actually done any testing? Would be nice to see a Youtube vid or something like that!
Logged