Is moving or copying a file faster?

[Spev]

Please only respond if you are 100% sure of the answer. Is moving or copying a file faster, assuming it's on the same drive?

[stconquest]

I am 100% sure it is the same thing.

 

...I thnk...

 

jk

[Statik]

You're moving it to a different spot on the same drive? I would just move it.

 

Is it an SSD or HDD?

 

I dragged my entire steam library (over 100gb) from my 256gb ssd to my 500gb ssd, and it took under 10 mins.

[BurgerBum]

You're moving it to a different spot on the same drive? I would just move it.

 

Is it an SSD or HDD?

 

I dragged my entire steam library (over 100gb) from my 256gb ssd to my 500gb ssd, and it took under 10 mins.

well no shit theyre both ssds...

[BurgerBum]

if its from one drive to another it wont make a difference, however why not just move it? it makes more room on the 1st drive.

 

if its on one drive all its doing is changing the information the drive needs to find it, i believe.

[Spev]

You're moving it to a different spot on the same drive? I would just move it.

 

Is it an SSD or HDD?

 

I dragged my entire steam library (over 100gb) from my 256gb ssd to my 500gb ssd, and it took under 10 mins.

I'm thinking it's moving the file, because copying (with a larger file would be noticeable) could possibly have a visible load time where you can see a progress bar copying a large folder for example. However if you simply move the file it will simply re-assign the file path of the file/folder, making it faster?

 

It doesn't matter if SSD or HDD I need to find out the answer to the question in general. I'm assuming which ever is correct would apply the same to both SSD and HDD.

[Spev]

if its from one drive to another it wont make a difference, however why not just move it? it makes more room on the 1st drive.

 

if its on one drive all its doing is changing the information the drive needs to find it, i believe.

I understand what you're saying. I have to know the answer of this question as part of a bigger project for a class I'm taking, so factors like having more space on the first SSD/HDD doesn't apply here. I just simply need to know which is physically faster for a fact.

[Statik]

I understand what you're saying. I have to know the answer of this question as part of a bigger project for a class I'm taking, so factors like having more space on the first SSD/HDD doesn't apply here. I just simply need to know which is physically faster for a fact.

it's the same...

 

Both involve moving the entirety of the content from point A, to point B.

 

Difference it copy pasting leaves a copy of the content in both locations.

[communistwatermelon]

In Windows, moving on the same SSD or HDD is incredibly fast, because you're just updating the table that says where a file is located. Copying a file involves opening the file, reading the file, and writing the identical information to the new location. 

Moving between SSDs or HDDs is essentially just copying the file to the new drive, and deleting the original.

[Spev]

Moving on the same SSD or HDD is incredibly fast, because you're just updating the table that says where a file is located. Copying a file involves opening the file, reading the file, and writing the identical information to the new location. 

Moving between SSDs or HDDs is essentially just copying the file to the new drive, and deleting the original.

That's what I'm thinking. It just has to re-assign the file location, compared to re-creating a copy of all the contents.

[Enderman]

it's the same...

 

Both involve moving the entirety of the content from point A, to point B.

 

Difference it copy pasting leaves a copy of the content in both locations.

moving a file (within the same partition) will just change the pointer to the file location of the data. It does not physically move the bits to another place unless it is a different partition.

this is pretty much instant

 

copying a file will actually duplicate all the bits to a SECOND location, while also creating a separate pointer to the new file.

this will be limited to the write speed of the drive the file is being copied to, aka not as fast

[communistwatermelon]

That's what I'm thinking. It just has to re-assign the file location, compared to re-creating a copy of all the contents.

Exactly. 

 

The MS professional in this thread seems to agree.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/23085-45-copy-move-command

[manikyath]

if its on the same drive moving doesnt actually "move" the files, it just changes their path. meaning that when its on the same drive, moving will always be faster. (moving a 50GB folder can take less than a second if its not a lot of files)

 

when copying on the same hard drive, you'll be working at (about) half of the read/write speed of the drive, since you're constantly both reading and writing. while copying from one drive to an other will be either limited on the read speed of the first, write speed of the second, or the link in between (eg. if its over a slow network)