I have a dual boot PC. When I copy a folder from the windows (Windows 7 Pro) it copies at 110MB per second over gigabit network. Linux (ubuntu dekstop 16.04) on the same PC never copies faster than 45MB per second so it takes basically twice as long to copy THE SAME FOLDER.

What could the issue be, obviously all the hardware is exactly the same? I checked in dmesg, Ubuntu does see this as a gigabit network and connects as such.

PS, I am copying to a Windows shared folder, in case this might make a difference.


  • This is a rather broad subject, it could come down to the NIC drivers, or from the implementation of the SMB protocol to the filesystem used, to CPU load, to the software implementation of software used, and how it buffers things around, to the file systems involved or even the occupation rate of the disks of both file systems, or even Windows declaring the files are transferred while they are still in buffers waiting to be transmitted. Could you advance more details? May 25, 2017 at 19:10
  • 1
    What filesystem type are you using in Linux? May 25, 2017 at 19:13
  • On the linux I am using EXT4 and copying to a windows share. Also @drewbenn, I just measured the time it took, and linux and windows show at what speed they are copying. It literally took the Linux twice the time to copy the folder (10 400mb files) TO the share than it did the Windows.
    – warhansen
    May 26, 2017 at 9:57

1 Answer 1


You say you're copying the same folder on the client. It's dual boot, so odds are you're using NTFS. Linux systems write to NTFS systems via the FUSE subsystem, which uses user-mode code to implement the filesystem access code. Every block written or read has to go through this FUSE interface, which is far far slower than kernel-native code.

You also say that you're copying the same folder from a remote Windows share. On Linux systems that's implemented through SAMBA, which is also user-mode code. So that's another bottleneck.

If you were to use Linux-native solution (which I grant, in this case you can't) you would find that was as fast as the Windows-native solution.

  • Your answer make a lot of sense. I am copying TO a windows share, first from the windows "half" of the dual boot and then I restart and PC to the the linux "half" and then copy to the same windows share. I will try and get a linux pc on the network and test again. It was just interesting to me to see the remarkable copy speed difference.
    – warhansen
    May 26, 2017 at 9:58
  • You'd probably see a similar speed difference if you set the share to use ext2 instead of ntfs, then used the ext2 driver on windows and native on linux.
    – Lizardx
    May 27, 2017 at 16:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .