I used pscp to transfer that amount of data from Windows 10 to Linux with a TP-LINK 3G/4G MR-3420 router. Windows machine is connected with Cat5 cable and the Linux machine is with WiFi.

Is there any better tool for faster transfer?

  • 4
    About 48 Mbps, which might be OK-ish given this thing only has 100Mbps LAN ports, and the overhead of SSH and encryption. – muru Aug 5 '19 at 10:41
  • 5
    Depends on the used IEEE Standard. If 802.11n is used I would say it is a bit slow, but if 802.11g is used, this is almost full speed (max would be 54Mbps). Depends on your wifi card and drivers + settings. – pLumo Aug 5 '19 at 10:44
  • 1
    @pLumo, there's a mode under wireless status section and it is 11bgn mixed. – user358527 Aug 5 '19 at 10:55
  • 2
    Not knowing what the network hw is capable of, how the wifi protocols work, and what better tools to use in Windows (if any) is not a Unix problem as defined in our FAQ. There are better ways, either connecting the Linux via cable or using an external hard disk. – Rui F Ribeiro Aug 5 '19 at 14:35
  • 2

For the fastest transfer, I find that tar'ing the folders/files into one thing is best. When there are thousands of sub folders and files then the OS's become the choke point processing each during the transfer, especially with Windows. So tar or zip your stuff first, do a single file transfer, then tar -xf or unzip on the destination computer. And don't bother doing any compression, the resulting smaller file size usually won't save you more time in the transfer than the time it takes doing the compressing and the uncompressing.


one 10/100Mbps WAN Port, 4 10/100Mbps LAN Ports, support the auto-Negotiation and auto-MDI/MDIX

Local wireless HD video sharing, with speeds up to 300Mbps

per the specs it looks like your wired LAN ports are only 100 Mbps and not even 1gbps; that would definitely limit transfer speed. It seems this particular switch is meant more for wifi connecting/streaming?

your question of is there a better tool: the best answer might be (a) a faster switch or (b) connect both systems via wifi to make use of that up to 300Mbps which is better than the wired ports at 100Mbps.

first thing is check the negotiated network link speed on each system to know what you are working with

without getting technical into the whole GiB vs GB thing, 1gbps = 125 MB/sec max, I typically get around 100MB/sec transfer on a clean wired LAN with all hardware 1gpbs. At 100Mbps that would limit you to 12.5 MB/s max, 80% of which is ~10MB/sec. At 10 MB/sec expect 150GB to take at least 4.1 hours.

150 * 1000 / 10 = 15000 seconds; /60/60 = hours

on a good 1gbps connection at sustained 100 MB/sec rate would take ~25 minutes

  • For most of the MP4s, transfer rates were almost always 10/12 MBps, for AVIs and others, it dropped considerably, in some cases it was only around 300KBps! It'd many directories and subdirectories and the payload created identical directory structures in destination folder automatically. – user358527 Aug 6 '19 at 5:13
  • 1
    test_.iso 19% 1424MB 92.6MB/s 01:02 ETA for 7.2gb file using scp took 1:17; from that serving linux system using samba to copy to my win10 pc I get a sustained 101MB/sec rate, all over wired 1gbps; if you are using wifi then interference can easily reduce the performance unbeknownst to you unless you specifically check for that (easier said than done). – ron Aug 6 '19 at 14:35

Before relying on WiFi for any large file transfer, I would try to connect by Fast Ethernet.

If Fast Ethernet was absolutely, positively, not available (which, from your router, looks like), then I would make very sure I was on a 5GHz channel, that bonding of multiple channels was enabled, and that no 802.11a device was on that channel. (802.11b and 802.11g, notorious anchors for WiFi speed, will not work on the 5GHz band.)

Sadly, though, your router is incapable of 5GHz, as well as incapable of Gigabit Ethernet. I would suggest, if this is a regular occurrence, an upgrade to a router which will do 5GHz, 802.11ac and Gigabit Ethernet.

  • 1
    802.11a also detiorates easily into no more than 54Mbps, unfortunately. The ideal is having 802.11ac when near to the router – Rui F Ribeiro Aug 5 '19 at 20:15
  • 1
    Yeppers, which is why I suggested "no 802.11a device was on that channel." – K7AAY Aug 5 '19 at 20:27
  • 1
    It's only 2.4GHz, there were some other android, galaxy on network during transfer. Best option is to have a new 5GHz for such operations. – user358527 Aug 6 '19 at 5:32