Skip to main content

Extracting files from TIB

Thread needs solution

Yesterday, I had to extract older copies of some files from an Acronis File and Folder backup in TIB file format.

The tib archive had 5 incremental backups and the full backup was approximately 200GB in size. It took an exceeding long time (hours) to recover the files and I realized that I have an unsustainable problem moving forward. I need to upgrade the PC that I use for backups. It's quite old.

I'd like to know what's the best 'bang for my buck'. Where's the processing bottleneck? I don't know if the software makes use of single or multi-thread processing.

  1. Can someone please let me know if it makes sense to spend extra money on a core i7 CPU vs a core i3 or i5?
  2. Should I be spending more on memory (64GB vs 32 or 16GB)?

Assume the PC will only be used for doing Acronis backups and recoveries. I'd rather not spend money on components that won't make a difference in the recovery speed.

 

0 Users found this helpful

Paul, welcome to these public User Forums.

Acronis is currently still a 32-bit application when used within Windows regardless of the OS being 64-bit.  This may change when Acronis complete the full rewrite of the new ACPHO version, assuming that they will do so as a 64-bit application and take advantage of the extra options this can offer.

In terms of the host PC being used, then having a more powerful CPU coupled with a good amount of memory will always be a good combination, but the bottlenecks for recovering files from backup archives are more likely to be from a different area!

The main cause of poor performance is simply the degree of file / folder nesting levels that may be present, especially when very large archive files are involved.  The companion issue is the storage media being used for the backup archives and how this is connected to the host PC.

Use of external USB storage can slow down recovery simply due to the USB standard / port / cables etc as well as the speed and size of the storage drive.  In this case larger does not mean faster or better!

From a personal perspective, I haven't seen many issues with recovery performance but my own backup archives very rarely get anywhere near to your 200GB size, my storage drives are typically only 1 or 2 TB in size apart from my Synology NAS which has 2 x 6TB drives in RAID configuration (where any performance limitations would be my network).  I have a mix of PC's with the main laptop being an i7 CPU with 32GB RAM, 1TB NVMe SSD but others are very much older with Core 2 Duo CPU and 4GB RAM, so definitely very slow in comparison.