Not sure what hdparm does, but I get identical rates on ext4 and ntfs partitions: 36MB/s
Have you checked the CPU load while doing the tests?
From my experience, using extfat/ntfs is a pain for performance, as it costs CPU resources (and you can see the performance impact especially on fast systems).
For loads of data with small chunks, the company I work for currently uses XFS (Even though I do not agree with them, as the stability is quite bad). For all the rest we tend to use ext4fs.
And we need to have fast systems with loads of I/O.
If you really want to test the I/O of a filesystem, fall back to FIO for the testing.
Check the following 2 pages for this. But that becomes more complexâŚ
Did the tests:
osmc@osmc:~$ lsblk
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 465.8G 0 disk
`-sda1 8:1 0 465.8G 0 part /media/EXT_HDD_500GB
mmcblk0 179:0 0 14.6G 0 disk
mmcblk0boot0 179:32 0 4M 0 disk
mmcblk0boot1 179:64 0 4M 0 disk
mmcblk0rpmb 179:96 0 4M 0 disk
osmc@osmc:~$ sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sda1
/dev/sda1:
Timing cached reads: 1770 MB in 2.00 seconds = 884.92 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 104 MB in 3.02 seconds = 34.49 MB/sec
I also watched CPU usage indicator in Kodi while doing test. It reached roughly to 40% max.
That should be OK. 34MBytes/s is ~272Mbps - question is if the movie will be accelerated in hardware or if it CPU has to jump in, and in either case if the RIP is clean and does not cause errors.
Also - you need to make sure nothing else runs during playback (Plugin etc.).
As I mentioned before, HW acceleration was working. I have checked that in info window in Kodi while video has been playing.
With this all tested, I think it confirmed, that with that 250Mbits file, the USB 2.0 was bottleneck in this case. Because when I tried to play the same file from Veroâs internal storage, it plays ok.
Fortunately the 4K UHD specification comes under half that bitrate at 128Mbps.
Sam
Yes. It was just exceptional hight bitrate test file. But it is good that Vero still can play it from its storage. 
I donât think this necessarily confirms that itâs the USB.
Maybe you should try playback of that file from a locally connected USB HDD formatted not NTFS (try ext4fs or FAT). Or maybe try a USB memory stick.
If it doesnât stutter, then itâs the HDD format.
hth
Well, with about 300GB of media on that HDD, I just dont have time to format it and then put everything back againâŚ
I know you have a point, with ext3, or ext4 it will be surely faster under Veroâs OS - I did those tests before, when I was using LibreELEC which is esentialy the same OS. With NTFS it was about 40MB/s with ext3 it was 70-90MB/s - the limits of HDD itself limit transfer speeds.
I would reformat the HDD when we watch majority of media stored on it, so I will need to put back just a fraction of its size âŚand also I must solve its accessiblity under Windows.
A bit pricey for my taste, but iâm saving up to it. Using the freeware version works but itâs limited in speed
The main thing is, that if Vero would have except its gigaibit LAN also usb3.0, you dont need to bother with any optional extFS drivers for windows. External HDD can be connected to Vero forever and formatted to ext4. You can directly move files over gigiabit LAN to that HDD, without any bottleneck or need to connect that HDD somewhere else = possible problems with reading/writing support to extFS 
I used to do it like this on my old HTPC.
In current time, there are two bottlenecks on Vero4k: 100Mbit LAN and usb2.0.
On Verok4+, which have gigabit LAN, the usb2.0 still remains as bottleneck.
Small correction, using samba the CPU would be a possible bottleneck. Vero is a mediacenter not a fileserver
2 Likes
Without usb3.0, its impossible to test this⌠
But I think that just file copying cannot be a problem, even for ARM CPU.
Before, I have Athlon 5350 for AM1 socket, which was not powerful CPU. And while copying, it was used for 10-20%.
I disagree on that. Depending on the hardware, CPU will play a big role. As soon as you add some little features like compression or SSL etc., CPU will be the bottleneck.
For NAS - I always have encrypted filesystem for private data. Also, for network access outside our NAS, VPN comes into play and on that one I compress the data. So double work for the CPU here.
Reason I have decent hardware for my Media-data provider.
My point is to move media files from PC through LAN to external HDD connected to Vero4k over USB3.0. With no bottleneck. And then play them from it.
For this, you dont need any SSL, any encryption.
You can access OSMC NFS server just fine with W10Pro. And you can even run your own NFS server on Win10, there would not be a need for Samba. @shiro35 is definitely making the case for a Vero4K+ Ultra Premium to be sold next to the Vero4K+ 
But besides USB3 I would rather see an internal SATA3 connector, ability to install a 2.5" HDD and a USB3.1 gen1 port (USB-C), perhaps 2, one to power the Vero so I donât need the dedicated power port. Oh and while we are at it, DisplayPort or video out via USB-C would be fun 
Of course a faster SoC & RAM that would support all this I am sure plenty of people would pay twice the price of the Vero4K+ (which already has a very good price for what you get). Because the Ultra Premium would definitely qualify as single bay NAS with ability to add a secondary HDD via USB.
/dreaming
There are always people that have to push what ever they own to the limit. I for one have bought a Vero 4k+ because it is an upgrade to my Pi3 it will do everything I want it to do in the real world and more. Almost plug and play bar a bit of tinkering to get it the way I like to operate. I would imagine with the amount of pre sales there are for the 4k+ ( yes I am waiting too ) that 95% of the new owners think the same way. If this does not do what you want then donât buy it simple buy something else that you can tinker with to your hearts content. I understand you can make things better by doing this that or the other but we are buying a working package. I am still building Pi3 media centres for other people I dont think they are bad I just wanted to move on to something else.
sam_nazarko I am looking forward to receiving my 4k+ I just want to use it out of the box as my media centre and enjoy
Im not implying that Vero is bad. Its the best device for its price, when you include support which Sam offering for it. If I wanted a device, which will have all what I demand, it will be much more expensive, bigger and power hungry HTPC.
Although I miss some features, the pros of Vero heavily outweight its cons.
2 Likes
Ping me when there is a 4K Vero box with usb 3 and I will buy one. I really wanted to want one.
But Mmy use case includes
- local USB-3 media storage
- backup to NAS via ethernet
- berryboot boot loader to free me to test various configurations of OSMC and other OSâ
So for now my best choice is OSMC on a RPI-4 and home-spin a berryboot img for OSMC or use another media OS.
I know the Pi-4 doesnât do 4K right now, but most of my library is HD and I can live with that for now.
The hardware on both boards will allow 4K, so that will ship shortly as software for the Pi-4, I expect.
I would prefer the sleek, professional build of the Vero.
The slow USB port is just a deal-killer.
Hi,
The Pi 4 wonât do 4K for some time Iâm afraid. While the device supports it in hardware - support for things like HDR has not even begun yet.
It will be a while before such functionality is supported and for a while, an older Pi is going to do a better job than the Pi 4 with regards to a lot of content. For example, VC1 will play better on a Pi2/3 than a Pi 4, and thatâs not likely to change for a long time, or possibly newer model of Pi. Hopefully we have managed these expectations properly on the blog.
May I ask why you specifically need USB3? USB2 is good enough to play two 4K UHD rips at the same time. We will add USB3 to the next model, but we suspect its primary advantage will be the ability to deliver more current downstream, and in some use cases, eliminate the need to externally power drives with a power supply or powered USB hub