[Archived] Hasleo Backup Suite V5.5.2.1 Released!

[admin]

I have some more info that may help to explain why I am seeing a difference between the backup times using V5.4.2.5 and V5.5.2.1
The 2 PCs I have run the tests on previously are a 12thGen Intel i5 desktop and a 13thGen Intel i7 laptop.
Both of these CPUs have a mix of Performance and Efficiency cores. Its up to the thread director to allocate which cores perform which tasks.

I thought I would try the same tests on an older laptop with a  8thGen i7. This just has 4 regular cores with hyperthreading.

V5425:
Backing up to an internal SSD took 2m40s
Backing up an ext USB HDD took 6m14s

V5521:
Backing up to an internal SSD took 2m43s
Backing up an ext USB HDD took 6m14s

The external USB HDD was the same 2TB Toshiba device i have used in all my previous tests.
As you can see above, the backup times are now virtually identical between the 2 versions of Hasleo.

So, could my previous results be down to the way the cores are being allocated on 12th and 13th gen Intel CPUs?

I vaguely recall that you mentioned in another forum thread that you were developing  using AMD based PCs which don't currently feature the mix of Performance and Efficiency cores like recent Intel devices do.

Anyway, food for thought.

In fact, we conducted tests on computers with both Intel and AMD CPUs. As you know, SATA HDD speeds are typically slow (around 200 MB/s). Therefore, it does not require a powerful CPU to process data to reach the maximum write speed of an HDD. Furthermore, since you mentioned that the issue does not occur when the target drive is an SSD, the problem is unlikely to be caused by CPU performance.

Our recommendation is to please perform the backup again, ensuring that the source and target drives are exactly the same. While doing so, monitor the CPU and disk I/O usage, as this may reveal useful clues.

Thanks.

[garioch7]

As promised, I have completed my comparison of Macrium Reflect 8 [MR8], Easeus Todo Backup Home [ETBH], and Hasleo Backup Suite Pro [HSBP] today.  All programs were tested using the latest production releases of those programs.

To consolidate the comparisons, I am repeating repeating my previously-posted MR8 and ETBH results, so it is all in one post.


Backup/Check Image/Verify Image Times

2019 Dell XPS 8930 SE Desktop Computer
i7 CPU, 32 GB RAM
DELL GeForce RTX 2060 GPU (6 GB Memory)
Three Internal Drives:
Drive 0: ST2000DM008-2FR102 (ZFL0WX49) [1863 GB] D:
Drive 1: WDC WD4005FZBX-00K5WB0 (V30884SF) [3726 GB] G: (Target Image Drive)
Drive 2: SSDPEMKF010T8 NVMe INTEL 1024GB (5CD2_E428_9150_7048.) [953 GB] C: (Source Image Drive)



Common Defaults to all three programs:

High Priority
Full Disk/Partition Images (all partitions)
Source Drive: Internal Intel 1 TB SSD (Disk 2)
Target Drive: Internal WD Black 4 TB HDD (Disk 1)
Default Compression (Recommended)
OS: Windows 11 Pro 25H2 (26200.7171)



2025-11-14 (Times rounded off to the nearest minute)
Macrium Reflect 8 (latest version)
Disk 2 (6 partitions) Size: 238.3 GB
Macrium Reflect 8 Image Size: 167.3 GB

Start Image Backup Disk 2: 13:53 - 14:07 (14 minutes)
Start Image Verify Disk 2: 14:07 - 14:20 (13 minutes)
Total Imaging Time: 27 minutes



2025-21 (Times rounded off to the nearest minute)
Easeus Todo Backup Home [ETBH] (Latest Version)

Disk 2 (6 partitions) Size: 241 GB
ETBH Image Size: 182.7 GB

Start Image Backup Disk 2: 13:43 - 13:58 (15 minutes)
Check Image Time Disk 2: 13:59 - 14:20 (21 minutes)
Total Imaging Time: 36 minutes



2025-11-28 (Times rounded off to the nearest minute)
Hasleo Backup Suite Professional [HBSP] 5.5.2.1.
All Filters disabled, Smart Backup enabled, Highest Priority.

I apologize for the Google Drive Links, but the maximum attachment allocations are restricted on this Forum, as is the case with other Forums I frequent.

Google Drive Link to the Partition Structure Screenshot Before Imaging: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mZu-bv5...sp=sharing

HBSP-5-5-2-1_Partition_Structure.png - Google Drive
Sign in

Google Drive Link to the New Imaging Operation Screenshot: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EyVsxSl...sp=sharing

HBSP_New_Backup_Task_Screen.png - Google Drive
Sign in

Disk 2 (6 partitions) Size: 238 GB
HBSP Image Size: 174.42 GB

Start Image Time Disk 2: 14:17 - 14:32 (15 minutes+)
Check Full Image Time: 14:32 - 14:47 (15 minutes+)
Total Imaging Time: 31 minutes
Google Drive Link to a screenshot of the Final Imaging Screen: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I68S3i8...sp=sharing

HBSP_Final_Imaging_Screen_2025-11-28.png - Google Drive
Sign in

Google Drive Link to a screenshot of the Operations Log: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vwczx9f...sp=sharing

HBSP_Backup_Operation_Log.png - Google Drive
Sign in

There was an impressive reduction in the HBSP Check Full Image time from 31:35 three weeks ago, to today's testing time of 15+ minutes.
HBSP is now outperforming ETBH, but it is still not as fast as MR8.

My congratulations to the HBSP development team.  Hasleo Backup Suite Pro is now really competing with the "big guys." 👍  It is a serious competitor in the imaging software market, according to my testing.  I have every confidence that HBSP will continue to evolve and enhance its performance and features as resources permit.

Have a great day.

Regards,
Phil

[admin]

As promised, I have completed my comparison of Macrium Reflect 8 [MR8], Easeus Todo Backup Home [ETBH], and Hasleo Backup Suite Pro [HSBP] today.  All programs were tested using the latest production releases of those programs.

To consolidate the comparisons, I am repeating repeating my previously-posted MR8 and ETBH results, so it is all in one post.


Backup/Check Image/Verify Image Times

2019 Dell XPS 8930 SE Desktop Computer
i7 CPU, 32 GB RAM
DELL GeForce RTX 2060 GPU (6 GB Memory)
Three Internal Drives:
Drive 0: ST2000DM008-2FR102 (ZFL0WX49) [1863 GB] D:
Drive 1: WDC WD4005FZBX-00K5WB0 (V30884SF) [3726 GB] G: (Target Image Drive)
Drive 2: SSDPEMKF010T8 NVMe INTEL 1024GB (5CD2_E428_9150_7048.) [953 GB] C: (Source Image Drive)



Common Defaults to all three programs:

High Priority
Full Disk/Partition Images (all partitions)
Source Drive: Internal Intel 1 TB SSD (Disk 2)
Target Drive: Internal WD Black 4 TB HDD (Disk 1)
Default Compression (Recommended)
OS: Windows 11 Pro 25H2 (26200.7171)



2025-11-14 (Times rounded off to the nearest minute)
Macrium Reflect 8 (latest version)
Disk 2 (6 partitions) Size: 238.3 GB
Macrium Reflect 8 Image Size: 167.3 GB

Start Image Backup Disk 2: 13:53 - 14:07 (14 minutes)
Start Image Verify Disk 2: 14:07 - 14:20 (13 minutes)
Total Imaging Time: 27 minutes



2025-21 (Times rounded off to the nearest minute)
Easeus Todo Backup Home [ETBH] (Latest Version)

Disk 2 (6 partitions) Size: 241 GB
ETBH Image Size: 182.7 GB

Start Image Backup Disk 2: 13:43 - 13:58 (15 minutes)
Check Image Time Disk 2: 13:59 - 14:20 (21 minutes)
Total Imaging Time: 36 minutes



2025-11-28 (Times rounded off to the nearest minute)
Hasleo Backup Suite Professional [HBSP] 5.5.2.1.
All Filters disabled, Smart Backup enabled, Highest Priority.

I apologize for the Google Drive Links, but the maximum attachment allocations are restricted on this Forum, as is the case with other Forums I frequent.

Google Drive Link to the Partition Structure Screenshot Before Imaging: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mZu-bv5...sp=sharing

Google Drive Link to the New Imaging Operation Screenshot: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EyVsxSl...sp=sharing

Disk 2 (6 partitions) Size: 238 GB
HBSP Image Size: 174.42 GB

Start Image Time Disk 2: 14:17 - 14:32 (15 minutes+)
Check Full Image Time: 14:32 - 14:47 (15 minutes+)
Total Imaging Time: 31 minutes
Google Drive Link to a screenshot of the Final Imaging Screen: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I68S3i8...sp=sharing

Google Drive Link to a screenshot of the Operations Log: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vwczx9f...sp=sharing


There was an impressive reduction in the HBSP Check Full Image time from 31:35 three weeks ago, to today's testing time of 15+ minutes.
HBSP is now outperforming ETBH, but it is still not as fast as MR8.

My congratulations to the HBSP development team.  Hasleo Backup Suite Pro is now really competing with the "big guys." 👍  It is a serious competitor in the imaging software market, according to my testing.  I have every confidence that HBSP will continue to evolve and enhance its performance and features as resources permit.

Have a great day.

Regards,
Phil

Thank you for conducting the tests and providing the data.

I'm curious about why the image file created by Macrium Reflect 8 is smaller than that created by Hasleo Backup Suite, so I searched online and discovered that Macrium Reflect 8 is configured to automatically exclude files such as the pagefile and hibernation file by default. Please refer to page 407 of the Macrium Reflect v8.0 User Guide for details:
https://info.macrium.com/hubfs/macrium_r..._guide.pdf

macrium_reflect_v8.0_user_guide.pdf

Have a nice weekend!

[garioch7]

@admin,

Thank you for that information.  I have no hiberfil.sys on my computers because I turn off hibernation using Windows Terminal "powercfg" command when I first set up a computer.

I am managing my own pagefile.sys at 4 GB, and I have confirmed that is the size of the file on my computer.  MR8 recommended compression was used, as it was with HBSP.  The MR8 image file of the six partitions on my SSD Disk 2 (OS Disk) was 167.3 GB. By contrast, the size of the HBSP image file 174.42 GB.  The source disk size was 238 GB, plus or minus, for both at the time of imaging, so I do not understand why the HBSP image size was 7 GB larger, since my uncompressed pagefile.sys file is only 4 GB.

The obvious answer is that MR8 has slightly better recommended image file compression than the current version of HBSP.  Paramount Software has been "in the game" a lot longer, and has considerably more resources than Hasleo.  I think the current HBSP statistics make it a serious contender in the imaging software market.  MRX apparently has even better compression than MR8.

HBSP continues to improve and evolve.  My test results left me very impressed with HBSP for such a "young" product.  Kudos to the development staff!

Have a great day.

Regards,
Phil

[al3x]

The source disk size was 238 GB, plus or minus, for both at the time of imaging, so I do not understand why the HBSP image size was 7 GB larger, since my uncompressed pagefile.sys file is only 4 GB.

There might be differences in size on folders like C:\System Volume Information. If I remember correctly you stated somewhere that you disable all filters on HBS.
So there might be useless Windows snapshots in that folder that got saved together with your backup.

If you care to find out, you could mount both backups, HBS and Macrium, and compare sizes of the drives with 2 instances of WizTree, a software that will give you a quick overview of the biggest folders in a treeview.
Make sure to start WizTree as admin on both instances so you won't have problems to scan system folders.

I used this a lot to spot differences in backup sizes in the past.

[admin]

The obvious answer is that MR8 has slightly better recommended image file compression than the current version of HBSP.  Paramount Software has been "in the game" a lot longer, and has considerably more resources than Hasleo.  I think the current HBSP statistics make it a serious contender in the imaging software market.  MRX apparently has even better compression than MR8.

Dear Phil,

Hasleo Backup Suite 5 and Macrium Reflect X both use the ZStd compression algorithm, which can provide a certain improvement in compression ratio. It is unclear whether the latest version of Macrium Reflect 8 also uses the ZStd compression algorithm, but it is almost certain that this is not caused by the compression algorithm.

As mentioned by @al3x, Macrium Reflect 8 might be filtering out snapshot files or other files by default. Alternatively, among the six partitions being backed up, there may be non-Windows partitions that Hasleo Backup Suite does not support, such as EXT4 partitions. Please also verify that your pagefile.sys is indeed only 4GB in size.

Have a nice weekend!

Best regards,

[garioch7]

@admin,

Thank you for your post.  You asked:

Please also verify that your pagefile.sys is indeed only 4GB in size.

I already answered that question in my previous post.  Please note the bolded part.

I am managing my own pagefile.sys at 4 GB, and I have confirmed that is the size of the file on my computer.

@al3x,

I don't use Windows Snapshots.  I use FastStone Capture for my screen snapshots.



I must say that I am surprised that there is so much controversy about a 3 GB increase in the size of the HBSP image size compared to the MR8 image size.  I am deducting the size of my pagefile.sys at 4 GB, from the 7 GB difference that my testing showed between the two products, based on the information that @admin shared.

To me, the image size file difference is really not that consequential when backing up 238 GB of source data from a physical disk.  At least, it is not for me.

I will rerun my tests of all three products again over the next three weeks on Friday afternoons, and post my results in due course.

Thank you for your interest in my findings.  Have a great day.

Regards,
Phil

[al3x]

@al3x,

I don't use Windows Snapshots.  I use FastStone Capture for my screen snapshots.

That’s not what I meant. I was talking about image (drive) snapshots and other NTFS related system files that Windows automatically saves in that mentioned system folder. You could look at that folder and compare sizes with a tool like WizTree.

[admin]

@al3x,

I don't use Windows Snapshots.  I use FastStone Capture for my screen snapshots.

That’s not what I meant. I was talking about image (drive) snapshots and other NTFS related system files that Windows automatically saves in that mentioned system folder. You could look at that folder and compare sizes with a tool like WizTree.

In fact, MR8 only skips backing up the data of excluded files but retains their file entries. Therefore, after mounting the image, you can still see the excluded files (such as pagefile.sys), though their data is all zeros. Precisely for this reason, tools like WizTree that rely on the file system structure may be unable to identify which files MR8 has excluded.

[garioch7]

@admin,

In your post here: https://www.easyuefi.com/forums/thread-8...l#pid11063, you quoted the MR8 User Manual.  That image from the MR8 User Manual states that pagefile.sys and hiberfil.sys are excluded from its image.

I have told you I have no "hiberfil.sys" file, confirmed by an "Everything" search, because I turned off hibernation; and, my pagefile.sys file is listed as 4,096 MB, as I stipulated, when I stopped permitting Windows 11 to manage my "pagefile.sys" file over a year ago, because Windows 11 was reserving far too much space.  I have 32 GB of RAM on this computer, and it has never had performance issues, even when doing Full High Definition video editing and production with my smaller pagefile.sys allocation.

I don't understand the import of the post by @al3x about VSS snapshots.  Nothing has been stated about MR8 excluding those.  I do have 17.9 GB dedicated to System Restore Points on my Drive C:, one of the six partitions on my Disk 2 SSD.  I would like to have those System Restore Points available if I had to do a Restore.

I don't have WizTree, but I do have Windirstat and Folder Size.

I fail to comprehend all of this conversation about a net difference of 3 GB in the image sizes produced by MR8 and HBSP in that test result.  For me at least, it is not an issue, so I can't understand what mounting an MR8 image and examining it with one of those programs is supposed to prove ... ?  I am very happy with HBSP now that the Full Check Image times have been substantially reduced.  That was my primary and only complaint.

That said, I would like HBSP to adopt an enhancement so that I can permanently select my backup default options ONCE, and have them apply to all future images, instead of having to go through the backup options with each and every image to configure the backup image options to what I prefer.

Thank you, and have a great day.

Regards,
Phil