Hi
New to FFS and testing out to see if it meets my simple requirements. Carrying out a couple of tests, first was a sync 'update' from OneDrive to USB disk, all good, Synchronising dialog provides excellent real-time feedback. However Syncing from C: (NVMe) folder to same USB 3 disk the Synchronising data appears to hang showing 1% and hasn't moved or shown any data in 30 minutes. 0 bytes/sec, 0.0 items/sec and flat graphs, rare movement of time trace. Task Manager shows 100% USB disk usage and USB HDD led flashing showing activity. Hands up it's an elcheapo 1TB USB 2.5", probably has no caching at all, however the locking up and failure to copy using FFS is a shame, works ok in File Manager.
A stop request just hangs too.
The folder syncing takes typically 20 minutes using File Manager so something is up.
Any advice for a nuub welcomed.
Cheers
Sync screen not showing activity - USB Drive
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 21 Dec 2025
-
- Posts: 4866
- Joined: 11 Jun 2019
Are you transferring the same file(s) in FFS and via File explorer? It's possible there is a bad sector or something that won't be encountered unless working with the same file(s).
What if you simply unplug and replug the USB cable? Or a different cable? Or different port?
What if you simply unplug and replug the USB cable? Or a different cable? Or different port?
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 21 Dec 2025
Cheers. It wasnt the same bunch of source files and I can reproduce with 5GB file using File Explorer. Running a chkdsk /f repaired 1000s of errors, but these were probably caused by me ripping the disk out the port in frustration after 30mins of nothing. All the Chkdsk errors were within the destination folder of FFS called 'Recycle......tmp'. I've tried USB 2 and various USB 3 ports, same difference.
Starting to become convinced that either USB external drives are a waste of my time, or my choice of el'cheapo is the culprit, however only ever seen issues since testing FFS.
I'll drill down to find root cause and report back. Have my eyes on a self powered 3.5" Seagate Expansion 4TB+ drive range as self-powered may also help as USB powered 2.5" drives have a habit of power issues depending on port power capabilities and tolerances I understand.
Update: I suspect the disk is shot, tried random smaller files and got 50KBs to 150KBs throughput and on other occasions 1MBs. Occasionally File Explorer just hangs.
Conclusion, the disk has had it or at least is too unreliable for its backup purpose! Last test will be using an older lappy just in case there's some bus settings causing the issue.
Cheers again
Lea
Starting to become convinced that either USB external drives are a waste of my time, or my choice of el'cheapo is the culprit, however only ever seen issues since testing FFS.
I'll drill down to find root cause and report back. Have my eyes on a self powered 3.5" Seagate Expansion 4TB+ drive range as self-powered may also help as USB powered 2.5" drives have a habit of power issues depending on port power capabilities and tolerances I understand.
Update: I suspect the disk is shot, tried random smaller files and got 50KBs to 150KBs throughput and on other occasions 1MBs. Occasionally File Explorer just hangs.
Conclusion, the disk has had it or at least is too unreliable for its backup purpose! Last test will be using an older lappy just in case there's some bus settings causing the issue.
Cheers again
Lea
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 21 Dec 2025
Update:
Having run CrystalDiskInfo to read the SMART the disk appears ok. I had a hunch it was interface related, AI suggested el'cheapo interfaces in unbranded 2.5" USB HDDs and ASUS Ryzen 7 laptops arent a great match so tested the disk in my old Intel i5 Del lappy, worked flawlessly, proving interface incompatibility. The disk did intermittently function in the Asus lappy using USB 2 port, but I wasnt convinced. So next step was to follow several USB controller/driver HDD cache settings changes in Device Manager, still no joy. Lastly I thought, why not try a USB powered USB 3 hub inline - boom, solved. The StarTech must act as a protocol sanitizer and the Asus USB 3 port and operation is excellent, throughput around 112MB read/write according to CrystalDiskMark. Before it would simply lock the disk up and only option was to pull it from the port.
Subsequently I tested FFS and of course it now rocks it!
However, now I'm up on interfaces I shall be building my own enclosure and disk combo:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sabrent-Tool-Free-Enclosure-Internal-EC-KSL3/dp/B08J5SLTJX - mid-class interface up to 22TB
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-BarraCuda-Internal-Drive-Cache/dp/B07D9C7SQH - Desktop drive for backup/cold storage.
This combo is technically superior to the Seagate Expansion 4TB and at only £20 more.
Happy days, and on with the FFS fun.
BTW - Ive never seen such an incredibly fast comparision - jee whiz, good work!
Cheers
Having run CrystalDiskInfo to read the SMART the disk appears ok. I had a hunch it was interface related, AI suggested el'cheapo interfaces in unbranded 2.5" USB HDDs and ASUS Ryzen 7 laptops arent a great match so tested the disk in my old Intel i5 Del lappy, worked flawlessly, proving interface incompatibility. The disk did intermittently function in the Asus lappy using USB 2 port, but I wasnt convinced. So next step was to follow several USB controller/driver HDD cache settings changes in Device Manager, still no joy. Lastly I thought, why not try a USB powered USB 3 hub inline - boom, solved. The StarTech must act as a protocol sanitizer and the Asus USB 3 port and operation is excellent, throughput around 112MB read/write according to CrystalDiskMark. Before it would simply lock the disk up and only option was to pull it from the port.
Subsequently I tested FFS and of course it now rocks it!
However, now I'm up on interfaces I shall be building my own enclosure and disk combo:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sabrent-Tool-Free-Enclosure-Internal-EC-KSL3/dp/B08J5SLTJX - mid-class interface up to 22TB
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-BarraCuda-Internal-Drive-Cache/dp/B07D9C7SQH - Desktop drive for backup/cold storage.
This combo is technically superior to the Seagate Expansion 4TB and at only £20 more.
Happy days, and on with the FFS fun.
BTW - Ive never seen such an incredibly fast comparision - jee whiz, good work!
Cheers
-
- Posts: 4866
- Joined: 11 Jun 2019
Yep, ran across many junk adapters/drives in my support career. Stick with name brands drives 100% of the time, except WD Green drives, those are AWFUL. Sabrent has been very good to me for docks/adapters. Currently using an ''inateck'" 3.5" dock at home that works fine also. USB docks are pretty much fine across the board and most use the same internals. Just make sure it's USB 3 or better. I exclusively use Seagate for HDDs at this point. Their warranty, performance, and reliability are second to none in its class.
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 21 Dec 2025
Cheers.
Looking at the differences between CMR and SMR in general and drives in the 4TB range. Barracuda ST4000DMZ04 is a potential CMR where as the non Z version a standard SMR. However, will I notice for the odd FFS cold storage backup from a single lappy, I doubt it, unless you have experience?
Three options: just grab a 4TB or better still a 6TB Seagate Expansion and save £££, but I'm left with an old proprietary Seagate USB to SATA interface which blocks much of SMART (apparently) and SMR.
Shuck a 4/6TB Seagate Expansion into a Sabrent EC-KSL3. This will also be SMR.
Or hope the individually available ST4000DMZ04 (note the Z) is CMR and couple with the Sabrent EC-KSL3. Most technically superior and flexi combo, but most expensive and least disk for £££ as 6TB individual disks are a huge jump in price, unlike the Seagate Expansion 6TB. This will practically limit me to 4TB.
But I guess the decision should focus around requirements, 4 or 6TB, cost and will I actually see any real-world difference between CMR and SMR and even if I do, will it really make any odds during once a month FFS sessions. Nope!
Too much tech fun!
Looking at the differences between CMR and SMR in general and drives in the 4TB range. Barracuda ST4000DMZ04 is a potential CMR where as the non Z version a standard SMR. However, will I notice for the odd FFS cold storage backup from a single lappy, I doubt it, unless you have experience?
Three options: just grab a 4TB or better still a 6TB Seagate Expansion and save £££, but I'm left with an old proprietary Seagate USB to SATA interface which blocks much of SMART (apparently) and SMR.
Shuck a 4/6TB Seagate Expansion into a Sabrent EC-KSL3. This will also be SMR.
Or hope the individually available ST4000DMZ04 (note the Z) is CMR and couple with the Sabrent EC-KSL3. Most technically superior and flexi combo, but most expensive and least disk for £££ as 6TB individual disks are a huge jump in price, unlike the Seagate Expansion 6TB. This will practically limit me to 4TB.
But I guess the decision should focus around requirements, 4 or 6TB, cost and will I actually see any real-world difference between CMR and SMR and even if I do, will it really make any odds during once a month FFS sessions. Nope!
Too much tech fun!
-
- Posts: 4866
- Joined: 11 Jun 2019
SMR vs CMR, the great debate. I always go with CMR. SMR uses "shingled" sectors, meaning overwriting a certain spot on the disk requires rewriting surrounding spots as well. The more you write, the quicker a drive fails. In a camera system, this is awful because they are usually configured to overwrite continuously 24/7. They are great for archiving because you typically write to them once and then rarely or never again.
For your use-case, you will likely never notice the difference, but I would recommend CMR anyway. The specs listed on the manufacturer's website will specify CMR vs SMR.
In either case, it shouldn't matter because a proper backup solution can mitigate these risks. Shucking is fine, some drives needed a certain power rail pin covered to work properly in other enclosures of computers. Shucking does come with warranty considerations though, as the entire unit is the device under warranty, and opening the unit is likely to cause friction during that process.
6TB is wildly more expensive because it's an odd size. The next step from 4TB is 8TB for most people. Losing SMART is also something I would never do. It isn't the end-all-be-all for health monitoring or preventing data loss, but it is better than finding out a drive is unhealthy because it is no longer accessible.
If you are backing up a single laptop, do you even need that much space? An external SSD is way more reliable and much quicker.
- 1TB Samsung SATA SSD + enclosure is $130
- 1TB Samsung NVME + enclosure is $130-$180
- 4TB Seagate NAS 5400rpm 64MB cache + enclosure is $120
- 4TB Seagate NAS 7200rpm 256MB cache + enclosure is $150
If you only need to back up 500GB or less, you should get an SSD instead for the same price range.
Be careful though. You are about to start a journey that led me to building my own home server that houses my 5x4TB ZFS1 NAS
lol
For your use-case, you will likely never notice the difference, but I would recommend CMR anyway. The specs listed on the manufacturer's website will specify CMR vs SMR.
In either case, it shouldn't matter because a proper backup solution can mitigate these risks. Shucking is fine, some drives needed a certain power rail pin covered to work properly in other enclosures of computers. Shucking does come with warranty considerations though, as the entire unit is the device under warranty, and opening the unit is likely to cause friction during that process.
6TB is wildly more expensive because it's an odd size. The next step from 4TB is 8TB for most people. Losing SMART is also something I would never do. It isn't the end-all-be-all for health monitoring or preventing data loss, but it is better than finding out a drive is unhealthy because it is no longer accessible.
If you are backing up a single laptop, do you even need that much space? An external SSD is way more reliable and much quicker.
- 1TB Samsung SATA SSD + enclosure is $130
- 1TB Samsung NVME + enclosure is $130-$180
- 4TB Seagate NAS 5400rpm 64MB cache + enclosure is $120
- 4TB Seagate NAS 7200rpm 256MB cache + enclosure is $150
If you only need to back up 500GB or less, you should get an SSD instead for the same price range.
Be careful though. You are about to start a journey that led me to building my own home server that houses my 5x4TB ZFS1 NAS
lol
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 21 Dec 2025
Thanks for such a detailed and useful reply, appreciated.
I hadn't really researched camera recording patterns and their effects on SMR, useful tip, cheers! But I am (now) reasonably up on CMR / SMR, it's great to learn new things. From my background, we'd just buy NAS/Enterprise rated disks, money wasn't an object, and that's what you do running corporate storage systems, it's more often about risk mitigation, branded supply etc, however that's large commercial business, not personal use where costs become far more of a driving factor.
My story isn't simply backup from one lappy (1TB NVMe, although only 1% use as OneDrive carries most the weight), it's actually replacing my 15 year old 2.7 TB (used space) IcyBox NAS which I wont be considering cloud for, the UK isn't well at the moment introducing snooping rights on all cloud storage! Yes I could use encryption, however 2.7TB in the cloud, no thanks, only got 50Mbs internet (another story and way off-topic, even moreso for this thread/product).
Cold storage has multitudes of benefits and online use isn't required so I'm fine with intermittent FFS backup to compliment the old NAS box archived on two new 4/6TB USB-SATA disks. Why two, because I've been in this game for too long, and also experienced personal HDD and PSU failures taking out 'backup' disks / single NAS boxes, leaving doubts in my own backup strategy, where I should know better. Lightening (storms) took some of my disks out in PCs too!
Ideally I'd like to double my current capacity, and with archived NAS at 2.7T realistically the priority swings towards disk space (6TB) over tech prowess (which I may practically never notice). I find there's always a compromise in life when £££ isn't endless.
For this reason, unless you can shed something I may have gravely overlooked, I'll be grabbing two Seagate Expansion 6TB (this is the HDD size/cost sweet spot, there's a huge jump up in price for 8TB) and compromising a little - but of course I retain some short lived warrantee. Turns out the Z in the single disks part numbers does NOT reflect CMR, but these are actually SMR, so I wouldn't gain CMR unless I opt for the exorbitant costs of 6/8TB Iron Wolf and these really are cost prohibitive for such a simple cold storage project. Cost vs benefit doesn't add up.
My next point of interest will be, will the Expansion drive OOB connect to my USB 3 ports ok and transfer without issue and without the Startech hub inline? I expect Seagate's proprietary interface will have been coded well (we shall see), and will each disk perform better running in separate USB 3 ports on the lappy vs both connected to the StartTech hub into one lappy USB 3. Technically USB 3 throughput after encoding is 4Gbs, well above the 150MBs HDD throughput even when both are connected, we shall see.
Again, if I've missed something please do shout.
Have a fab chrimbo and cheers again.
Lea
I hadn't really researched camera recording patterns and their effects on SMR, useful tip, cheers! But I am (now) reasonably up on CMR / SMR, it's great to learn new things. From my background, we'd just buy NAS/Enterprise rated disks, money wasn't an object, and that's what you do running corporate storage systems, it's more often about risk mitigation, branded supply etc, however that's large commercial business, not personal use where costs become far more of a driving factor.
My story isn't simply backup from one lappy (1TB NVMe, although only 1% use as OneDrive carries most the weight), it's actually replacing my 15 year old 2.7 TB (used space) IcyBox NAS which I wont be considering cloud for, the UK isn't well at the moment introducing snooping rights on all cloud storage! Yes I could use encryption, however 2.7TB in the cloud, no thanks, only got 50Mbs internet (another story and way off-topic, even moreso for this thread/product).
Cold storage has multitudes of benefits and online use isn't required so I'm fine with intermittent FFS backup to compliment the old NAS box archived on two new 4/6TB USB-SATA disks. Why two, because I've been in this game for too long, and also experienced personal HDD and PSU failures taking out 'backup' disks / single NAS boxes, leaving doubts in my own backup strategy, where I should know better. Lightening (storms) took some of my disks out in PCs too!
Ideally I'd like to double my current capacity, and with archived NAS at 2.7T realistically the priority swings towards disk space (6TB) over tech prowess (which I may practically never notice). I find there's always a compromise in life when £££ isn't endless.
For this reason, unless you can shed something I may have gravely overlooked, I'll be grabbing two Seagate Expansion 6TB (this is the HDD size/cost sweet spot, there's a huge jump up in price for 8TB) and compromising a little - but of course I retain some short lived warrantee. Turns out the Z in the single disks part numbers does NOT reflect CMR, but these are actually SMR, so I wouldn't gain CMR unless I opt for the exorbitant costs of 6/8TB Iron Wolf and these really are cost prohibitive for such a simple cold storage project. Cost vs benefit doesn't add up.
My next point of interest will be, will the Expansion drive OOB connect to my USB 3 ports ok and transfer without issue and without the Startech hub inline? I expect Seagate's proprietary interface will have been coded well (we shall see), and will each disk perform better running in separate USB 3 ports on the lappy vs both connected to the StartTech hub into one lappy USB 3. Technically USB 3 throughput after encoding is 4Gbs, well above the 150MBs HDD throughput even when both are connected, we shall see.
Again, if I've missed something please do shout.
Have a fab chrimbo and cheers again.
Lea
