I’ve just discovered I can install CoreELEC on an mSata disk and boot from a USB enclosure.
Is there any benchmarking program I can run to compare the two instances?
As far as I know there is no all-in-one solution.
You can use hdparm and dd to test read and write performance.
hdparm -Tt /dev/sda
With mSata:-
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 1684 MB in 2.00 seconds = 842.17 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 114 MB in 3.01 seconds = 37.84 MB/sec
With SD (Class 4) in USB adapter:-
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 1664 MB in 2.00 seconds = 831.48 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 114 MB in 3.02 seconds = 37.71 MB/sec
With SD (Class 4) in TF slot:-
/dev/mmcblk1:
Timing cached reads: 1630 MB in 2.00 seconds = 814.93 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 66 MB in 3.05 seconds = 21.64 MB/secThe best performances that you can have in KIII Pro with USB 2.0 port is with a conventional USB hard drive or SSD. The speeds reach the 35 MB/s that is the maximum for a USB 2.0 port. Obviously the installation of CoreELEC in the internal memory would be faster but this solution I think is not mature enough. The advantage of SSDs is that the power consumption is very low (less than 2 W), the response time is very high, and the price is affordable for 120 GB. Hardly a flash memory (microSD or USB) can achieve these performances.
I have tried a variety of boot solutions on my S912 boxes and I had hoped that booting from an external SSD would be the most efficient solution but the limitations of the USB 2.0 port speeds (which will also vary from box to box) just didn’t give the advantage I was hoping for.
I also found that from time to time I would boot up and the OS would be corrupted.
The best solution for me is running the OS from eMMC and using the external SSD as one of the data sources, along with a MicroSD card, which is used for OTA TV recording.
It’s a case of trying different things to see what benefits you and your device for the uses that you put it too.
X92 Installed to internal (S912 16GB Flash)
Livingroom:~ # hdparm -Tt /dev/data
/dev/data:
Timing cached reads: 1672 MB in 2.00 seconds = 835.43 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 370 MB in 3.01 seconds = 122.86 MB/sec
Livingroom:~ #Mecool KM8 P Installed to internal (S912 8GB Flash)
CoreELEC:~ # hdparm -Tt /dev/data
/dev/data:
Timing cached reads: 1678 MB in 2.00 seconds = 838.50 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 310 MB in 3.01 seconds = 103.05 MB/sec
Mecool KM8 P Installed to Class 4 SD (S912 8GB SD)
hdparm -Tt /dev/mmcblk1p2
/dev/mmcblk1p2:
Timing cached reads: 1602 MB in 2.00 seconds = 800.95 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 58 MB in 3.10 seconds = 18.71 MB/sec
Mecool KM8 P Installed to Class Trandsend V30 SD (S912 128GB SD)
CoreELEC:~ # hdparm -Tt /dev/mmcblk1p2
/dev/mmcblk1p2:
Timing cached reads: 1608 MB in 2.00 seconds = 803.78 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 68 MB in 3.08 seconds = 22.04 MB/sec
A95X Installed to SD Card (S905 apacer 32GB)
bedroom:~ # hdparm -Tt /dev/mmcblk1p2
/dev/mmcblk1p2:
Timing cached reads: 1760 MB in 2.00 seconds = 879.44 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 60 MB in 3.01 seconds = 19.94 MB/secI’m hoping to get one of these:-
https://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemVersion&item=133043010645&view=all&tid=1599448331003
It’ll be interesting to see how well it performs. It seems like the TF slot is significantly faster than SSD… but as has been mentioned the USB 2.0 slots could be the bottleneck.
Good Look but if you buy a 512gb micro SD for £11.79 you wont need to worry about the speed it will most likely be an 8GB doctored to appear to look like a 512GB. I always use H2testw or similar to test usb/sd drives after receiving fake SanDisks through Amazon.
Agreed. At that price it’s 100% going to be fake.
Should pop across to hotukdeals where right now there is a particularly good deal on a 256Gb card, which is more than enough for most things.