Laptop with fastest flashing time (Ecutek)
 

We've been debating for some time about what "cheap" laptop/tablet device to get to flash.

I am looking not for the cheapest, but for the FASTEST in flashing. (I have a Mac and my sole purpose with it is flashing that IT).

Please leave out the OSX vs Win discussions, that's what off topic is for.

Also don't tell me "flash via bootcamp, parallers, vmware, et. al" I have already tried all and what I'm looking for is to reduce flashing time from the current 3-430 minutes it takes on my mac.

First world problems, yes, but when you are fine tuning the car, it means you have to flash the car 3-4 times in one run (I've been doing so the whole week) and that means 112-16 minutes of doing nothing in the car..
Even worse, on the dyno it can mean 1 more hour of dyno time $$$$

Please add your current flash time and specs on your device.


:thanks:


On to the list:

Samsung Ativ Pro Tablet- 1 min flash time tops. Closer to 45s.

Dell Venue Pro 8 1:30

Lenovo Miix 2 (tablet)- 1:35

Asus T-100 (tablet): 1:30

Bootcamp/Parrallets etc. (Laptop)- 3:30-4:30

Lenovo 2 Yoga (not-pro) 1:10

.................

Asus T-100 (tablet): approximately 1 to 2 minutes

I'm on my phone so if I make mistakes, blame Sportsguy83

Would you be able to time it next time :D

LOVE your signature BTW :bellyroll:

When @nelsmar sends me another map, sure.

I'm on my phone so if I make mistakes, blame Sportsguy83

add a usb 2.0 hub to your laptop and connect the EcuTek cable via that

it'll greatly reduce the flash time

I was 2.0

SLOW ASS really bad.. like 5 minute flash!

From the other thread, relevant info

I suspect it is more to do with the usb "chipset" than anything else. The ecutek driver probably plays nicer with certain chipsets than others. I don't buy the storage system argument at all, your talking about a file that is less than 2 megs in size, unless the file read process used by ecutek ludicrously inefficient the drive should not matter.

Agreed its on your storage speed rather than the computers raw power.

My little netbook that is 3-4 years old just has upgraded ram and an SSD in it and flashes in about ~1.5 minutes IIRC

I cannot imagine that the speed has anything to do with the "host" computer.

A typical ROM file is 1.25 MB (1310720 bytes or ~10,000,000 bits)

Even the old USB 1.0 specification, which was introduced in January 1996, defined data transfer rates of 1.5 MB/s.
So in 1996 you could transfer an entire ROM image in under 10 seconds.

For a flash to take >2 minutes across an interface that can transfer the data in a couple of seconds, means that it is the target that is the bottleneck.
So which USB interface or what Hard Drive you have on the host has nothing to do with it.

I am guessing it is the Flash memory write times combined with the handshaking that takes so long.

Im using an samsung ativ pro tablet, 1 min flash time tops. Closer to 45s.

http://www.samsung.com/us/business/c...XE700T1C-A03US

For $1200, it had better (nice overall laptop)

I'm on my phone so if I make mistakes, blame Sportsguy83

:laughabove::laughabove::laughabove::laughabove:

Added.

Would be nice if @EcuTek knows what exactly makes a difference.

I'll time mine when I get home

Has anyone tried the Dell Venue 8 Pro?

Iirc @charged86 ?

In another thread I mentioned I used one, it works great. No exact time on how long it takes, I can time it tonight.

You need an OTG adapter and 2 port usb hub/cable, but they are super cheap on ebay/amazon

Its my main flashing/datalogging tablet
Ecutek tablet ftw

Thank you sir, and now that you mentioned it I remember you saying so.

I have a local one for sale at a great price. If you can confirm time is a minute and a half or less, I'm getting it.

any recommendations for the micro usb to 2 usb adapter?

I want to get a quality one, but all I see is CHEAP...

Tonight I can link exactly which ones I got, and will try to time the flash. Its been flawless for me so far.

Im actually looking for virtual usb software, we use it at work to have virtual dongles on multiple computers over a network, it would be nice to only require the cable and not the dongle on a device with only a single usb port...

My end goal is to install the dongle/cables/hub out of sight so I just plug in the single usb connection to the tablet. Maybe have the connector hidden in the center console or something.

You need the same thing with the T100, unless you use the dock/keyboard, in which then you only need a usb hub, but it's easier to just use the thing in tablet form without the keyboard.

It's going to depend if they are doing a full write or just a write changes. If it is only changes, flash time will depend on the number / size of the changes. If they are doing a full write every time, it will be down to hardware compatibility (USB chipset). I would imagine the ecutek software installs a usb to serial driver so if you can dig around the installer or installed files you may come up with something you can google.

I THINK it has to be a full wirte up. It takes the same amount of time everytime no matter how much or little I change on the file.

Now I'm confused. Who is right? Does Ecutek always flash the whole 1.25MB ROM?

Like I said, it has to be a full write because if I change three tables OR if I flash a whole new Rom file it takes the same amount of time

@jamesm

it seems to me to be a full write, all 1280kb every time. it doesn't seem to matter how many changes are made to the rom itself.

As @stugray said, I doubt any laptop built within the last decade would be bottle-necked flashing a 1.2MB ROM. All USB specs and storage access speeds can transfer the entire ROM within a second (far less actually). Just make sure you have the latest usb controller driver and everything should be good.

I have a crappy Asus laptop that was like 300 bucks. The 3.0 USB port on it flashes the car in a minute or so if that. If I use the 2.0 port, its significantly slower.

which one?

+1 @stugray @Deathreaper would expect the bottleneck to be in the speed of the OBD link and the write time of the flash memory in the ECU.

If your laptop is significantly slower than others its probably a setup problem (anti-virius firewall usb drivers ect)

You could always lobby ECUTEK to offer an incremental or write changes only option when flashing :):)

Ultimately it will depend on the performance of your processor and how much available RAM you have. Also, the lesser amount of running processes the better.

Is it possible to run Linux with what your trying to do? Linux uses the least amount of processing as well as memory. Which would translate into faster boots time, faster processing while using software, etc.

If not, I would try making sure whatever OS you are using only runs the needed processes + whatever software you are using, otherwise the computer will bottle neck or in other words will be using the hardware in too many places at once. You want to strip the OS of all unneeded software, as well as make sure that any processes that auto-start once booted are not running. Also, if you're hard drive is near full, or very full, that can also hinder performance. If you can use a SSD that will speed things up a lot for everything. USB 3.0 will also help a lot too because the speeds are much higher than 2.0

I would think this is limited by USB 3.0 capability which the cable most likely is not. Anything higher than an i5-2500k probably performs the same. The cable definitely has limitations on transfer rate. My I7 3510QM and 1600mhz 8gb ram is overkill for this on Win 8.1. I'd have gotten an I5 if I didn't get a great deal on it.

nope and i embarrasingly will have to say i dont know what that is.

Yeah when I built my desktop in 2012 I went with the i5 sandy bridge instead of the i7 sb, the type of things an i7 can do are amazing, but an i5 is just as solid for almost everything else too. I'm not playing a video game, while video editing, while surfing the web on 3 monitors hahaha

HhHaha its @DJCarbine then


Sent from my IBrick

I have a bottom of the line dell with USB 2.0. This laptop cost $400 CDN about five years ago. It takes me ~ two minutes to flash. This one http://www.pcworld.com/product/55298...-notebook.html

If you want to have a good idea of the resources the application takes when flashing, keep the task manager open and look at CPU & RAM use. I pretty certain the thing won't use more than 10% CPU and 350MB ram at any time. Would be interesting if you could report back on that

Some of you guys talking about optimizing performance on a modern computer system to write v....e....r...y s....l....o.....w....l....y across a lightning fast interface are missing the point.

It's kind of like saying that a 600HP monster FI BRZ can go through the automated car wash faster than a stock BRZ....

Lets put it in perspective: USB 3.0 runs at 10Gbps.
To transfer 1.25 MB in ~3 minutes means that the fastest the USB interface has to run is ~56kbps (old phone modem speed).

So the ROM write function is using 1/5,000,000th of the bandwidth of the USB interface.
If your computer is bogged down so badly that your USB 3.0 Interface is bottlenecked to 56kbps speeds, then you have some serious problems.

Ok, so another thing to consider about the flash process... They are most likely doing a write verify write verify sequence so they are verifying the bits as they are being written. I'm sure cpu is important but as others have said, anything in the last few years should be plenty fast for flashing.

And, I'm willing to be the usb 3.0 is a different chipset from the usb 2.0 on the laptop @Calum is using.

Yup, i'm gonna keep beating that dead horse :)

@Sportsguy83 , did you try all your usb ports? Just thinking it could also be a resource sharing issue depending which "hub" the port is connected too.