Flexense - Data Management Software (2024)

The purpose of this review is to compare the performance of file copy operations using the Windows built-in command line file copy utilities Robocopy and XCopy. The performance test was performed on a quad-core machine with 16 GB of system memory running the Windows Server 2012 operating system. The file copy operations were performed between two identical Crucial MX300 1TB SSD drives using the same data set containing 30,000 small and medium-sized files.

Performance CounterRobocopyXCopy
Disk Transfer RateFlexense - Data Management Software (3) 128.48 MB/SecFlexense - Data Management Software (4) 121.06 MB/Sec
Disk Read TransferFlexense - Data Management Software (5) 75.28 MB/SecFlexense - Data Management Software (6) 76.15 MB/Sec
Disk Write TransferFlexense - Data Management Software (7) 50.30 MB/SecFlexense - Data Management Software (8) 43.76 MB/Sec
Disk Transfer IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (9) 3701.72 IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (10) 2860.24 IOPS
Disk Read IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (11) 2208.20 IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (12) 1922.44 IOPS
Disk Write IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (13) 973.50 IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (14) 927.73 IOPS
Disk Average Request SizeFlexense - Data Management Software (15) 43.47 KBFlexense - Data Management Software (16) 55.52 KB
Disk Average Read Request SizeFlexense - Data Management Software (17) 44.61 KBFlexense - Data Management Software (18) 49.08 KB
Disk Average Write Request SizeFlexense - Data Management Software (19) 81.40 KBFlexense - Data Management Software (20) 67.74 KB
Disk Average Request TimeFlexense - Data Management Software (21) 0.59 ms.Flexense - Data Management Software (22) 0.32 ms.
Disk Average Read Request TimeFlexense - Data Management Software (23) 0.36 ms.Flexense - Data Management Software (24) 0.21 ms.
Disk Average Write Request TimeFlexense - Data Management Software (25) 0.51 ms.Flexense - Data Management Software (26) 0.52 ms.
CPU UsageFlexense - Data Management Software (27) 14.82 %Flexense - Data Management Software (28) 16.76 %
CPU Usage SystemFlexense - Data Management Software (29) 13.65 %Flexense - Data Management Software (30) 14.12 %
Process CPU UsageFlexense - Data Management Software (31) 51.31 %Flexense - Data Management Software (32) 56.75 %
Process Memory UsedFlexense - Data Management Software (33) 5.41 MBFlexense - Data Management Software (34) 3.93 MB
Process Data RateFlexense - Data Management Software (35) 151.02 MB/SecFlexense - Data Management Software (36) 160.40 MB/Sec
Process Data IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (37) 5026.04 IOPSFlexense - Data Management Software (38) 5331.92 IOPS

According to the performance results, Robocopy achieves better results in 10 out of 18 tests including: Disk Transfer Rate, Disk Write Transfer, Disk Transfer IOPS, Disk Read IOPS, Disk Write IOPS, Disk Average Write Request Size, Disk Average Write Request Time, CPU Usage, CPU Usage System and Process CPU Usage. On the other hand, XCopy achieves better results in 8 out of 18 tests including: Disk Read Transfer, Disk Average Request Size, Disk Average Read Request Size, Disk Average Request Time, Disk Average Read Request Time, Process Memory Used, Process Data Rate and Process Data IOPS.

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Transfer Rate

Flexense - Data Management Software (39) Robocopy128.48 MB/Sec
Flexense - Data Management Software (40) XCopy121.06 MB/Sec
More is BetterAverage: 124.77 MB/SecMin: 0.00 MB/SecMax: 312.22 MB/Sec

The average Disk Transfer Rate is better for Robocopy (128.48 MB/Sec vs. 121.06 MB/Sec), the minimum Disk Transfer Rate is better for Robocopy (23.52 MB/Sec vs. 0.00 MB/Sec) and the maximum Disk Transfer Rate is better for Robocopy (312.22 MB/Sec vs. 283.57 MB/Sec).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Read Transfer

Flexense - Data Management Software (41) Robocopy75.28 MB/Sec
Flexense - Data Management Software (42) XCopy76.15 MB/Sec
More is BetterAverage: 75.72 MB/SecMin: 0.00 MB/SecMax: 218.24 MB/Sec

The average Disk Read Transfer is better for XCopy (76.15 MB/Sec vs. 75.28 MB/Sec), the minimum Disk Read Transfer is better for Robocopy (4.74 MB/Sec vs. 0.00 MB/Sec) and the maximum Disk Read Transfer is better for XCopy (218.24 MB/Sec vs. 213.22 MB/Sec).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Write Transfer

Flexense - Data Management Software (43) Robocopy50.30 MB/Sec
Flexense - Data Management Software (44) XCopy43.76 MB/Sec
More is BetterAverage: 47.03 MB/SecMin: 0.00 MB/SecMax: 133.27 MB/Sec

The average Disk Write Transfer is better for Robocopy (50.30 MB/Sec vs. 43.76 MB/Sec), the minimum Disk Write Transfer is better for Robocopy (0.39 MB/Sec vs. 0.00 MB/Sec) and the maximum Disk Write Transfer is better for XCopy (133.27 MB/Sec vs. 113.15 MB/Sec).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Transfer IOPS

Flexense - Data Management Software (45) Robocopy3701.72 IOPS
Flexense - Data Management Software (46) XCopy2860.24 IOPS
More is BetterAverage: 3280.98 IOPSMin: 0.00 IOPSMax: 8389.53 IOPS

The average Disk Transfer IOPS is better for Robocopy (3701.72 IOPS vs. 2860.24 IOPS), the minimum Disk Transfer IOPS is better for Robocopy (1166.57 IOPS vs. 0.00 IOPS) and the maximum Disk Transfer IOPS is better for XCopy (8389.53 IOPS vs. 7124.81 IOPS).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Read IOPS

Flexense - Data Management Software (47) Robocopy2208.20 IOPS
Flexense - Data Management Software (48) XCopy1922.44 IOPS
More is BetterAverage: 2065.32 IOPSMin: 0.00 IOPSMax: 3074.95 IOPS

The average Disk Read IOPS is better for Robocopy (2208.20 IOPS vs. 1922.44 IOPS), the minimum Disk Read IOPS is better for Robocopy (429.46 IOPS vs. 0.00 IOPS) and the maximum Disk Read IOPS is better for Robocopy (3074.95 IOPS vs. 2762.62 IOPS).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Write IOPS

Flexense - Data Management Software (49) Robocopy973.50 IOPS
Flexense - Data Management Software (50) XCopy927.73 IOPS
More is BetterAverage: 950.62 IOPSMin: 0.00 IOPSMax: 7899.08 IOPS

The average Disk Write IOPS is better for Robocopy (973.50 IOPS vs. 927.73 IOPS), the minimum Disk Write IOPS is better for Robocopy (29.51 IOPS vs. 0.00 IOPS) and the maximum Disk Write IOPS is better for XCopy (7899.08 IOPS vs. 5245.99 IOPS).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Average Request Size

Flexense - Data Management Software (51) Robocopy43.47 KB
Flexense - Data Management Software (52) XCopy55.52 KB
More is BetterAverage: 49.50 KBMin: 0.00 KBMax: 202.50 KB

The average Disk Average Request Size is better for XCopy (55.52 KB vs. 43.47 KB), the minimum Disk Average Request Size is better for Robocopy (6.04 KB vs. 0.00 KB) and the maximum Disk Average Request Size is better for XCopy (202.50 KB vs. 107.99 KB).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Average Read Request Size

Flexense - Data Management Software (53) Robocopy44.61 KB
Flexense - Data Management Software (54) XCopy49.08 KB
More is BetterAverage: 46.84 KBMin: 0.00 KBMax: 229.89 KB

The average Disk Average Read Request Size is better for XCopy (49.08 KB vs. 44.61 KB), the minimum Disk Average Read Request Size is better for Robocopy (6.47 KB vs. 0.00 KB) and the maximum Disk Average Read Request Size is better for XCopy (229.89 KB vs. 157.34 KB).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Average Write Request Size

Flexense - Data Management Software (55) Robocopy81.40 KB
Flexense - Data Management Software (56) XCopy67.74 KB
More is BetterAverage: 74.57 KBMin: 0.00 KBMax: 250.56 KB

The average Disk Average Write Request Size is better for Robocopy (81.40 KB vs. 67.74 KB), the minimum Disk Average Write Request Size is better for Robocopy (4.00 KB vs. 0.00 KB) and the maximum Disk Average Write Request Size is better for Robocopy (250.56 KB vs. 203.68 KB).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Average Request Time

Flexense - Data Management Software (57) Robocopy0.59 ms.
Flexense - Data Management Software (58) XCopy0.32 ms.
Less is BetterAverage: 0.45 ms.Min: 0.00 ms.Max: 2.62 ms.

The average Disk Average Request Time is better for XCopy (0.32 ms. vs. 0.59 ms.), the minimum Disk Average Request Time is better for XCopy (0.00 ms. vs. 0.10 ms.) and the maximum Disk Average Request Time is better for XCopy (1.36 ms. vs. 2.62 ms.).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Average Read Request Time

Flexense - Data Management Software (59) Robocopy0.36 ms.
Flexense - Data Management Software (60) XCopy0.21 ms.
Less is BetterAverage: 0.28 ms.Min: 0.00 ms.Max: 3.05 ms.

The average Disk Average Read Request Time is better for XCopy (0.21 ms. vs. 0.36 ms.), the minimum Disk Average Read Request Time is better for XCopy (0.00 ms. vs. 0.11 ms.) and the maximum Disk Average Read Request Time is better for XCopy (0.69 ms. vs. 3.05 ms.).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Disk Average Write Request Time

Flexense - Data Management Software (61) Robocopy0.51 ms.
Flexense - Data Management Software (62) XCopy0.52 ms.
Less is BetterAverage: 0.52 ms.Min: 0.00 ms.Max: 1.69 ms.

The average Disk Average Write Request Time is better for Robocopy (0.51 ms. vs. 0.52 ms.), the minimum Disk Average Write Request Time is better for XCopy (0.00 ms. vs. 0.03 ms.) and the maximum Disk Average Write Request Time is better for Robocopy (1.54 ms. vs. 1.69 ms.).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - CPU Usage

Flexense - Data Management Software (63) Robocopy14.82 %
Flexense - Data Management Software (64) XCopy16.76 %
Less is BetterAverage: 15.79 %Min: 0.00 %Max: 23.00 %

The average CPU Usage is better for Robocopy (14.82 % vs. 16.76 %), the minimum CPU Usage is better for XCopy (0.00 % vs. 7.00 %) and the maximum CPU Usage is better for Robocopy (21.00 % vs. 23.00 %).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - CPU Usage System

Flexense - Data Management Software (65) Robocopy13.65 %
Flexense - Data Management Software (66) XCopy14.12 %
Less is BetterAverage: 13.88 %Min: 0.00 %Max: 21.00 %

The average CPU Usage System is better for Robocopy (13.65 % vs. 14.12 %), the minimum CPU Usage System is better for XCopy (0.00 % vs. 7.00 %) and the maximum CPU Usage System is better for XCopy (19.00 % vs. 21.00 %).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Process CPU Usage

Flexense - Data Management Software (67) Robocopy51.31 %
Flexense - Data Management Software (68) XCopy56.75 %
Less is BetterAverage: 54.03 %Min: 28.57 %Max: 77.77 %

The average Process CPU Usage is better for Robocopy (51.31 % vs. 56.75 %), the minimum Process CPU Usage is better for Robocopy (28.57 % vs. 38.09 %) and the maximum Process CPU Usage is better for Robocopy (65.07 % vs. 77.77 %).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Process Memory Used

Flexense - Data Management Software (69) Robocopy5.41 MB
Flexense - Data Management Software (70) XCopy3.93 MB
Less is BetterAverage: 4.67 MBMin: 3.66 MBMax: 6.25 MB

The average Process Memory Used is better for XCopy (3.93 MB vs. 5.41 MB), the minimum Process Memory Used is better for XCopy (3.66 MB vs. 5.30 MB) and the maximum Process Memory Used is better for XCopy (4.18 MB vs. 6.25 MB).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Process Data Rate

Flexense - Data Management Software (71) Robocopy151.02 MB/Sec
Flexense - Data Management Software (72) XCopy160.40 MB/Sec
More is BetterAverage: 155.71 MB/SecMin: 28.07 MB/SecMax: 433.76 MB/Sec

The average Process Data Rate is better for XCopy (160.40 MB/Sec vs. 151.02 MB/Sec), the minimum Process Data Rate is better for XCopy (28.24 MB/Sec vs. 28.07 MB/Sec) and the maximum Process Data Rate is better for XCopy (433.76 MB/Sec vs. 423.57 MB/Sec).

Robocopy vs. XCopy - Process Data IOPS

Flexense - Data Management Software (73) Robocopy5026.04 IOPS
Flexense - Data Management Software (74) XCopy5331.92 IOPS
More is BetterAverage: 5178.98 IOPSMin: 4057.79 IOPSMax: 6063.62 IOPS

The average Process Data IOPS is better for XCopy (5331.92 IOPS vs. 5026.04 IOPS), the minimum Process Data IOPS is better for XCopy (4523.74 IOPS vs. 4057.79 IOPS) and the maximum Process Data IOPS is better for XCopy (6063.62 IOPS vs. 5862.42 IOPS).

Flexense - Data Management Software (2024)
Top Articles
What's the Difference Between an LLM and JD Degree?
Step-by-step guide to reporting an online fraud – Bajaj Finserv
This website is unavailable in your location. – WSB-TV Channel 2 - Atlanta
Coindraw App
How to know if a financial advisor is good?
Optimal Perks Rs3
Paula Deen Italian Cream Cake
Delectable Birthday Dyes
The fabulous trio of the Miller sisters
Quest Beyondtrustcloud.com
Connect U Of M Dearborn
Sport-News heute – Schweiz & International | aktuell im Ticker
Vistatech Quadcopter Drone With Camera Reviews
Missed Connections Dayton Ohio
Joan M. Wallace - Baker Swan Funeral Home
Magic Seaweed Daytona
Dewalt vs Milwaukee: Comparing Top Power Tool Brands - EXTOL
Wisconsin Volleyball Team Boobs Uncensored
Cain Toyota Vehicles
Silky Jet Water Flosser
Culver's.comsummerofsmiles
Unreasonable Zen Riddle Crossword
Craigslist Efficiency For Rent Hialeah
Publix Daily Soup Menu
Kaiserhrconnect
Ixlggusd
Devotion Showtimes Near Mjr Universal Grand Cinema 16
Carespot Ocoee Photos
oklahoma city community "puppies" - craigslist
Bones And All Showtimes Near Johnstown Movieplex
Prior Authorization Requirements for Health Insurance Marketplace
Union Corners Obgyn
Riverton Wyoming Craigslist
What Is A K 56 Pink Pill?
Silive Obituary
Obituaries in Hagerstown, MD | The Herald-Mail
Tripadvisor Vancouver Restaurants
Traumasoft Butler
Dwc Qme Database
Unveiling Gali_gool Leaks: Discoveries And Insights
Sallisaw Bin Store
844 386 9815
Port Huron Newspaper
Jane Powell, MGM musical star of 'Seven Brides for Seven Brothers,' 'Royal Wedding,' dead at 92
Haunted Mansion Showtimes Near Millstone 14
1990 cold case: Who killed Cheryl Henry and Andy Atkinson on Lovers Lane in west Houston?
Craigslist Indpls Free
Black Adam Showtimes Near Cinemark Texarkana 14
Asisn Massage Near Me
Vt Craiglist
Southern Blotting: Principle, Steps, Applications | Microbe Online
Predator revo radial owners
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Foster Heidenreich CPA

Last Updated:

Views: 6353

Rating: 4.6 / 5 (56 voted)

Reviews: 87% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Foster Heidenreich CPA

Birthday: 1995-01-14

Address: 55021 Usha Garden, North Larisa, DE 19209

Phone: +6812240846623

Job: Corporate Healthcare Strategist

Hobby: Singing, Listening to music, Rafting, LARPing, Gardening, Quilting, Rappelling

Introduction: My name is Foster Heidenreich CPA, I am a delightful, quaint, glorious, quaint, faithful, enchanting, fine person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.