Appropo of nothing, some Blackmagic speed test comparisons with a new dock

As my real projects were getting awfully hectic before the end of the year, I thought I should relax a bit with a fun, nerdy “project.” Since I just purchased the CalDigit TS3+ dock to help clean up my under-desk cable situation, I wanted to check if there were any data transfer improvements as well. I started with two daisy-chained Anker USBA 3 hubs attached to my M1 MBP with an A-to-C cable for most of the peripherals/storage. I also had an Inateck “toaster” style dock for bare drives attached separately to the MBP since it didn’t like to run through the hubs. And with no USBC ports on the hubs, the two SSDs had to plug in via adapters. I can’t comment on the accuracy or frankly the specific value of the numbers that the app measured; I’m more interested in the relative values of the different forms of connection. I ran the tests all at the 1 GB stress level; I. know, I know, 5 GB stress test is better because reasons, but again, I’m really interested in the % change, not the specific value. All the disks are APFS formatted except the bare WD Blue. All speeds are write / read.

Disk Direct connect Anker USBA 3 hub CalDigit TS3+ Column 4
Internal 1TB SSD 6951 / 5362
Sandisk Extreme 2TB SSD 795 / 857 401 / 360 830 / 899
Crucial X6 1TB SSD 719 / 667 398 / 362 718 / 662
WD Easystore 5TB HDD 113 / 113 114 / 119 113 / 117
WD Elements 2TB HDD 64 / 102 66 / 100 64 / 104
WD Blue 2TB HDD (toaster) 97 / 97 103 / 104 104 / 104
Samsung 860 SVO 1TB SSD (toaster) 340 / 370 322 / 218 414 / 421
2 Likes

Significant changes for the SSDs, it seems odd that attaching via the Caldigit seems a little faster than direct attachment for the SSDs.

Right. I didn’t understand that part. I ran all the tests numerous times, and the “final” numbers were all within a reasonable margin, say <5%. Is it an actual speed difference or reporting error?