NFS vs Samba

[irobot]

Ok, so what is all the noise about Samba is slower than NFS. I am getting roughly the same speeds on both.

NFS: upload speed=19.1 MB/sec; download speed=27.3 MB/sec
Samba: upload speed=18.9 MB/sec; download speed 26.7 MB/sec

NFS is on my Goflex net with Sata drive NFS share (ext3)
Samba is on borrowed dockstar with USB drive share. (ext3)

Both have archlinux. Do I need to be optimizing NFS? if so what are the popular tweaks?

Should I even bother to setup NFS clients on windows PC or should simply configure Samba on my GFN

[moonman]

just stick with samba. samba 4 is actually pretty fast, depending on load i can get 40 MB/s

[SomeoneOnLine]

There are pros and cons to both from what I gather. I tent to use samba rather than NFS. I want to use NFS on my windows box to access NFS shares on NSA325 but never could figure it out. I think windows 7/8 support for NFS is lacking I guess.
I think a bigger part of speed depends on the cpu and memory of the device your are accessing. From what iv read NFS tents to get better speed on arm boxes with little memory and slower cpu's.

~SOL