Posts: 4
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation:
0
Hi, I know that NFS is generally considered to be more efficient, but I was wondering whether that remains the case when the server and client machines are both running Windows (Server 2008 and Windows 8.1 respectively).
I already have NFS enabled on my server (from when I used to use a Popcorn Hour) so can access my shares in XBMC via either SMB or NFS. Which would be your preference?
Posts: 181
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation:
0
I find that SMB is much faster for me than NFS. My server runs on Windows,as do my XBMC clients.
If I remember correctly, OpenELEC preferred NFS but with windows I get better results with SMB.
Posts: 190
Joined: Sep 2008
Reputation:
5
magao
Senior Member
Posts: 190
If you're on wired ethernet (preferably gigabit, but 100Mbit is OK too) then you probably won't notice any difference.
If you're on wireless then NFS is probably going to be a bit better for you (it's a less chatty protocol).
FWIW my current server is Windows, so I'm using SMB (since it's easiest), and I can play back decrypted Blu-Ray images via 100Mbit on my ATV1200 (running XBMCLinux) though it takes quite a bit longer to get to the title selection than my HTPC that has gigabit ...
