I already explained it. Yes, it is related to 'seeking' but its more related to the fact that the drive still only has one set of controlling hardware and read/write arm.
In a drive to drive file copy, the copy can be done asynchronously, since as I already mentioned, there can be some degree of parallelism.
In a same drive file copy, the copy is basically done synchronously, which is slow as heck. The computer has to sit and wait around for the IO operation to complete before it can do anything else regarding the task.
I don't know where the extra penalty is coming from. You'd have to take a very close look at what is actually going on behind the scenes to know this. My point is simply that reading big blocks to ram would only make the problem worse.
In a drive to drive file copy, the copy can be done asynchronously, since as I already mentioned, there can be some degree of parallelism.
In a same drive file copy, the copy is basically done synchronously, which is slow as heck. The computer has to sit and wait around for the IO operation to complete before it can do anything else regarding the task.
I don't know where the extra penalty is coming from. You'd have to take a very close look at what is actually going on behind the scenes to know this. My point is simply that reading big blocks to ram would only make the problem worse.