Carbon Copy Cloner - 3.1comprehensive bootable backup solution |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
Feedback Summary:
| This Version: | |||||
| Overall Rating: | Features: | Support: | |||
| Ease of Use: | Quality / Stability: | Price: | |||
Key to Types of Feedback:
Reviews
Troubleshooting
Usage Tips
Developer Notes
Commentary
Featured Reviews
Speed Test Vs Superduper - Version: 3.1, 3/30/2008 06:03AM PST
(5 of 5 users found this comment useful)
trance
Speed Test Vs Superduper - Version: 3.1, 3/30/2008 06:01AM PST
(1 of 1 users found this comment useful)
trance
with all the comments about superduper being so much faster I did my own tests with a 29 GB boot drive ...identical clone conditions using SD 2.5 and CCC 3.1
Initial clone
Superduper - 56m
CCC - 49m
Sunsequent clone
Superduper - 9m 40s
CCC - 5m 23s
Initial clone
Superduper - 56m
CCC - 49m
Sunsequent clone
Superduper - 9m 40s
CCC - 5m 23s
speed? - Version: 3.1, 3/27/2008 12:35PM PST
neuralstatic
just cloned a g5 imac. it was about 2/3rds the speed of 3.01 going to a local drive via fw400.
anyone else notice? hopefully just a blip.
amazing product, either way. looking forward to new rsync use
anyone else notice? hopefully just a blip.
amazing product, either way. looking forward to new rsync use
Initial clone
Superduper - 56m
CCC - 49m
Sunsequent clone
Superduper - 9m 40s
CCC - 5m 23s