12 replies to this topic

[El_Capitan]

I tested two different high-end USB 3.0 Flash Drives on my blog:
http://computerhardw...on-vs-64gb.html

[IVIYTH0S]

Cool doug, I am not in the market for a 64GB but nice to see what's up there.

16GB has always been nice size for me, I run a 16GB ADATA S102 USB 3.0 drive which is pretty nice, writes aren't too peppy compared to faster USB 3.0 drives but I knew that 95% of its use on computers that aren't mine would be USB 2.0 so... Got it for $5 too

Debating getting one of these for purely bootable stick tools: http://www.buydig.co...F8GXPUSB&ref=cj (I have my 16GB doing it all, but it's a pain shifting data around when I'm swapping around what I want it booting as)

[phil69]

Thanks for the info. I'm looking for a 32GB but this gives me a starting point.

Phil

[IVIYTH0S]

Thanks for the info. I'm looking for a 32GB but this gives me a starting point.

Phil

If we go 50/50 on one and get a nice pair of scissors to split it, I'm down. (I call the side with the usb port )

[Waco]

The small file write speeds on that Lexar are abysmal! I've had crappy USB 2.0 drives perform better on the 4K write test by a HUGE margin. 46 KB/s? ROFL.

[IVIYTH0S]

The small file write speeds on that Lexar are abysmal! I've had crappy USB 2.0 drives perform better on the 4K write test by a HUGE margin. 46 KB/s? ROFL.

yeah I didn't know if I read that right.

Cap did you try retesting it at all on that??

[phil69]

If we go 50/50 on one and get a nice pair of scissors to split it, I'm down. (I call the side with the usb port )

I tried 50/50. She got the car, I got the payments; She got the house, I got the payments; etc.

[Waco]

yeah I didn't know if I read that right.

Cap did you try retesting it at all on that??

I'm betting it uses the new Flash with larger sectors as well as a very high density chip (hence the cost). Random write (or even sequential small writes) are terrible on Flash like that without a good controller. Flash drives don't have good controllers in general and without a bunch of dies to split the writes up on...you get performance like that.

[IVIYTH0S]

I'm betting it uses the new Flash with larger sectors as well as a very high density chip (hence the cost). Random write (or even sequential small writes) are terrible on Flash like that without a good controller. Flash drives don't have good controllers in general and without a bunch of dies to split the writes up on...you get performance like that.

Performance like what, I think that's just the wind

[Waco]

Wind implies it moves at some point. That's more like a baby fart.

[SpikeSoprano]

Thanks for the info Capi, good to know what speeds the 64 gb's give, my $20 16 gb gets about 75 read and 22 write. Only proves you get what you pay for.

[El_Capitan]

I'm actually testing a real-world transfer of my downloads folder (8,924 Files, 731 Folders, 22.7GB from my RAMDisk). Results are interesting. Will be updating in a bit.