Video Screencast Help
Search Video Help Close Back
to help
New in the Rewards Catalog: Vouchers for "Symantec Technical Specialist" and "Symantec Certified Specialist" exams.

Transfer Speeds While Imaging

Updated: 23 May 2010 | 4 comments
Corey Wilson's picture
0 0 Votes
Login to vote

I am curious to hear what kind of transfer speeds others are getting when imaging their systems over both 100 and 1000mbps links.

I seem to lucky to average about 420MB/min on our Dell 745/755's on a 100mb link (deployment network). This is using a unviseral network bootdisk to a command prompt and then mapping a drive letter to images server and running. Even running through ghost cast server the performance is not much better if at all.

Just wondering if its the ndis drivers causing that kind of performance.

Thanks



Message Edited by Corey Wilson on 04-23-2008 05:49 AM

discussion Filed Under:

Comments

ENSMM's picture
23
Apr
2008
0 Votes 0
Login to vote

Hello,
I have 300MB/Min average on a 100Mb link

Paul Hirose's picture
23
Apr
2008
0 Votes 0
Login to vote

That sounds like a decent enough number.  Rates vary.  Remember, the throughput reported by the Ghostcast Server may be different than what the Ghost client reports, if you're using compressed images (one reports uncompressed rates, the other compressed rates.) 

I've always found it's worth the time and hassle of working my way through several drivers, DOS versions, etc to determine the "best" mix for a system I will be working with.  My turn-over rate is about 3-4 years, so it's definitely in my best interest to take the time/effort to go through all these gyrations.  It may not be for you, especially if this is a one-off situation. 

Generally, I create many NIC templates in Ghost Boot Wizard.  for the 755's for example, the 82566DM-2 NIC driver has changed a few times.  I always use the one from Intel, rather than from Dell or built-in the Symantec disk.  But  when I first started, I tried two different versions from Dell, one from Symantec and three from Intel along with MSDOS vs PCDOS.  Yah, it's a pain, but it's worth it for us.  No surprise, for us, the MS-DOS + Intel version worked best.  I've not yet checked the latest Intel version.  I rarely see much (if any) difference that I can reliably reproduce and as we all have seen the vagaries of network bandwidth and throughput vary drastically from day to day.  But if you're in a closed, controlled, isolated network environment (I wish I was!) you may be able to reproduce a solid set of stats for yourself.

Good luck,
PH

Corey Wilson's picture
24
Apr
2008
0 Votes 0
Login to vote

Thanks for the responses.

Topper's picture
24
Apr
2008
0 Votes 0
Login to vote

I have seen 600 - 700 using real tec nics on the clients and 3 com nic on the server. Again all lines have to be set at the switch on 100 full. No autos and no phone ip's on the vlan.