If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
On 05/27/2018 1:20 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Scott wrote: If it helps, the faster one is a Kingston Data Traveler 16GB. The slower one is a Toshiba TransMemory 16GB. Any analysis appreciated. Kingston stick is USB 3.0. Theoretical speed of up to 5Gbits/second. Toshiba stick is USB 2.0 Theoretical speed of 480mbits/ second. Search is your friend (not necessarily Google). Okay, thanks. Except I don't think the port is USB3. usb 3 ports cant make a usb 2 device go any faster. Seeing we are on the subject and I am about to buy 3 or 4 new sticks, What are the preferred programs for bench marking read and write speeds? Rene |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
In article , Rene Lamontagne
wrote: Seeing we are on the subject and I am about to buy 3 or 4 new sticks, What are the preferred programs for bench marking read and write speeds? any disk benchmarking app. or check other people's results: http://usb.userbenchmark.com |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:20:51 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Scott wrote: If it helps, the faster one is a Kingston Data Traveler 16GB. The slower one is a Toshiba TransMemory 16GB. Any analysis appreciated. Kingston stick is USB 3.0. Theoretical speed of up to 5Gbits/second. Toshiba stick is USB 2.0 Theoretical speed of 480mbits/ second. Search is your friend (not necessarily Google). Okay, thanks. Except I don't think the port is USB3. usb 3 ports cant make a usb 2 device go any faster. My point exactly. In the context of the earlier comment, being USB3 cannot account for Kingston being faster than Toshiba unless the port is USB3, which it isn't. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:40:38 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Rene Lamontagne wrote: Seeing we are on the subject and I am about to buy 3 or 4 new sticks, What are the preferred programs for bench marking read and write speeds? any disk benchmarking app. So every one is equally good then? or check other people's results: http://usb.userbenchmark.com |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
On 27/05/2018 19:36, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
Seeing we are on the subject and I am about to buy 3 or 4 new sticks, Why buy "new sticks" when you can buy portable hard disks for almost the same price and more robust? Are you out of your mind old man? Go and buy couple of 1TB portable hard disks from big brand names and you are sorted for the rest of your life. at your age you don't have much time left on this planet. Allah will take care of you. Ask Yousuf Khan who is currently recruiting suicide bombers to help people like you who wants to reach Allah quicker than the rest of us. /--- This email has been checked for viruses by Windows Defender software. //https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/comprehensive-security/ -- With over 600 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
Scott wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2018 12:21:32 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote: If it helps, the faster one is a Kingston Data Traveler 16GB. The slower one is a Toshiba TransMemory 16GB. Any analysis appreciated. Not enough information. What are the USB standards? I don't know where to find this information. Does your computer have USB3 jacks? Are your two sticks usb 2 or 3? USB 3 jacks and sticks have 9 pins. They are usually blue. Sometimes yellow. USB 3.1 jacks are usually red. USB 2 has 4 pins. They are usually black. USB 1 is usually white. https://www.usb3.com/usb3-info.html |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
Scott wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2018 11:21:46 -0500, VanguardLH wrote: Scott wrote: Two different USB sticks, both 16GB and both formatted NTFS. One writes about three or four times as fast as the other, using the same files. Any ideas? Could this mean the very slow one is on its way out, and is there a way of testing it? Oh, you want peer analysis of UNIDENTIFIED brands and models of USB flash memory. Uh huh. I am glad you have recognised this is difference between brands, from the limited information. I thought there might be other factors, such as age or variability. If it helps, the faster one is a Kingston Data Traveler 16GB. The slower one is a Toshiba TransMemory 16GB. Any analysis appreciated. Toshiba makes a "stable" of such sticks. Look for the part number on the stick in tiny print. https://www.bestbuy.com/site/toshiba...?skuId=3516967 # Model: PFU016B-1BLR $9 ******* These are USB2, and only the u202 lists specs for read/write. https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...cification.php https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...3/overview.php https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...2/overview.php Read: Up to 18MB/s , Write: Up to 5MB/s They make USB3, but few have specs listed. https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...cification.php Read Speed Up to 120MB/s When you're ashamed of your write speed... it shows. https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...cification.php Read Speed Up to 150MB/s Still no write speed. I'll just assume it's 10MB/sec, for safety sake. https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...cification.php Read: Up to 70MB/s https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...cification.php Read/Write Speed* 16GB - Read: Up to 130MB/s Write: Up to 25MB/s Alright, a product that's come out of moms basement, to live on its own. https://pc.toshiba-asia.com/storage/...I/overview.php Read/Write Speed* 32GB - Read: Up to 222MB/s Write: Up to 130MB/s OK then, they're getting it now. So they make one product worth owning in the USB3 camp. ******* And "Kingston Data Traveler 16GB" probably spans a few generations, and some of the early ones might not be listed in the spec table today. Picking something at random. DT100G316GB (Turns out, I have one of these, and it just says "G3" and "16GB" on the body. The connector color on mine isn't right, so perhaps this isn't the same one.) https://www.kingston.com/en/usb/pers...siness/dt100g3 No spec there. https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...9SIA12K3742665 "DT100G3/16GB $8 Read Speed up to 100MB/s Write Speed up to 10MB/s " So there we have it, yet another smoking example. The sad part is, you can pay $20 for two entirely different USB3 sticks, one with the stinky 10MB/sec write rate, and the second one actually worth owning. The price is not the sole factor of interest, if shopping at Staples, as they'll pile good and bad sticks into their "$20 range". Your job as a shopper, is to ferret out these details, and say "no" to the lame/gimp ones. This is definitely *not* an impulse buy item, due to the level of dishonesty involved. Plan your strategy at home, then go shopping. Paul |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
Scott wrote:
Kingston Data Traveler 16GB A search on just that ended up with matches on: DataTraveler SE9 USB Thumb drive 8-64GB DataTraveler microDuo 3.0 USB DataTraveler G4 USB flash drive 8GB-128GB That's why I asked for a model. Still have the sales receipt? Did you order this through an online account (Newegg, eBay, Amazon, Walmart, etc) where the sales transaction has the details? Toshiba TransMemory 16GB A search on that turned up several hits; however, it became apparent from most hits that this is likely USB 2.0 flash versus the Kingston which is likely USB 3.0. There's your massive speed difference right there - assuming you have a USB 3 port to use both drives instead of using a USB 2 port which will throttle the USB 3 flash drive down to USB 2 speed. USB 2.0 - 480 Mbps ( 60 MBps) USB 3.0 - 5 Gbps (640 MBps) Those are the theoretical limits. You'll never achieve those, especially if you hook more than one active device to the same USB controller, but you get the point: you are comparing a USB 2 flash drive to USB 3 flash drive. Find the model numbers. Then go to the manufactures sites to get their specifications (and realize they're pushing their specs). All flash memory is self-destructive due to oxide stress in the transistor junction: the more you write to it, the sooner it will catastrophically fail. Until then, blocks that go bad get masked to other blocks. The redirections for the masking cause lag in access hence the memory gets slower. You've probably been using (writing to) the USB 2 flash drive a lot longer than the USB 3 flash drive. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
Scott wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:20:51 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Scott wrote: If it helps, the faster one is a Kingston Data Traveler 16GB. The slower one is a Toshiba TransMemory 16GB. Any analysis appreciated. Kingston stick is USB 3.0. Theoretical speed of up to 5Gbits/second. Toshiba stick is USB 2.0 Theoretical speed of 480mbits/ second. Search is your friend (not necessarily Google). Okay, thanks. Except I don't think the port is USB3. usb 3 ports cant make a usb 2 device go any faster. My point exactly. In the context of the earlier comment, being USB3 cannot account for Kingston being faster than Toshiba unless the port is USB3, which it isn't. Context that you never before stipulated. How do you know it is only a USB 2 port and not a USB 3 port? Just because it is "flash memory" doesn't mean there is only one way to construct that memory, just like "car tire" doesn't stipulate the compound, tread pattern, or other characteristics. Without the model numbers, there is no information regarding what the manufacturer claims for read and write speeds. Besides their own proprietary designs, there is also the basic constuction. We don't know if your flash drives are SLC, MLC, or TLC. SLC is fastest with least density per die but the most costly versus MLC with highest density but slowest and cheapest. Consumers going only by price and capacity don't bother looking at whether they are getting SLC or not because SLC is outside their price range. They want high capacity at cheapest cost without regard to speed. The problem with most retailers (online or physical store) is that they do not divulge the cell layout of the flash memory - because they don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_...s_of_operation SlC is lower density, faster, and more expensive. MLC and QLC are more dense, slower, and cheaper. Without knowing about cell design differences, consumers see a 16 GB USB drive for $10 or another for $35. Which do they buy? The cheaper one, of course. The cheapy uses MLC and is USB 2. The pricier one uses SLC and is USB 3. Consumers are ignorant of the specs. They don't look. Research takes time. They think all flash memory is constructed the same and that's why they end up getting cheap and slow flash drives. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
On Sun, 27 May 2018 18:22:27 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
Scott wrote: On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:20:51 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Scott wrote: If it helps, the faster one is a Kingston Data Traveler 16GB. The slower one is a Toshiba TransMemory 16GB. Any analysis appreciated. Kingston stick is USB 3.0. Theoretical speed of up to 5Gbits/second. Toshiba stick is USB 2.0 Theoretical speed of 480mbits/ second. Search is your friend (not necessarily Google). Okay, thanks. Except I don't think the port is USB3. usb 3 ports cant make a usb 2 device go any faster. My point exactly. In the context of the earlier comment, being USB3 cannot account for Kingston being faster than Toshiba unless the port is USB3, which it isn't. Context that you never before stipulated. How do you know it is only a USB 2 port and not a USB 3 port? Just because it is "flash memory" doesn't mean there is only one way to construct that memory, just like "car tire" doesn't stipulate the compound, tread pattern, or other characteristics. Without the model numbers, there is no information regarding what the manufacturer claims for read and write speeds. Besides their own proprietary designs, there is also the basic constuction. We don't know if your flash drives are SLC, MLC, or TLC. SLC is fastest with least density per die but the most costly versus MLC with highest density but slowest and cheapest. Consumers going only by price and capacity don't bother looking at whether they are getting SLC or not because SLC is outside their price range. They want high capacity at cheapest cost without regard to speed. The problem with most retailers (online or physical store) is that they do not divulge the cell layout of the flash memory - because they don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_...s_of_operation SlC is lower density, faster, and more expensive. MLC and QLC are more dense, slower, and cheaper. Without knowing about cell design differences, consumers see a 16 GB USB drive for $10 or another for $35. Which do they buy? The cheaper one, of course. The cheapy uses MLC and is USB 2. The pricier one uses SLC and is USB 3. Consumers are ignorant of the specs. They don't look. Research takes time. They think all flash memory is constructed the same and that's why they end up getting cheap and slow flash drives. Thanks. I will look out for all of this next time round. Could it be that slower devices are more reliable? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
Scott wrote:
Thanks. I will look out for all of this next time round. Could it be that slower devices are more reliable? A slower device could be SLC or MLC. But it would also need to have a lower capacity. A 32GB stick should be the TLC type, which you don't really want (but don't have much choice). If you could find a stick at 8GB or smaller, it might be made from an older standard of flash. But of course on a place like Ebay, all "rules" could go out the window, in the "rush to fraud". With a few minutes work, you could probably dial down a 32GB TLC chip so that it reads out as an 8GB product. I don't know if it's been mentioned, but don't buy any of the USB3 sticks with the *plastic* barrel. The plastic part bends too much, and you can snap off a USB3 pin inside the thing, due to the connector mis-alignment (failure to capture properly). http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41o2n-8r3GL.jpg Paul |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:39:57 +0100, Scott
wrote: On Sun, 27 May 2018 18:22:27 -0500, VanguardLH wrote: Scott wrote: On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:20:51 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Scott wrote: If it helps, the faster one is a Kingston Data Traveler 16GB. The slower one is a Toshiba TransMemory 16GB. Any analysis appreciated. Kingston stick is USB 3.0. Theoretical speed of up to 5Gbits/second. Toshiba stick is USB 2.0 Theoretical speed of 480mbits/ second. Search is your friend (not necessarily Google). Okay, thanks. Except I don't think the port is USB3. usb 3 ports cant make a usb 2 device go any faster. My point exactly. In the context of the earlier comment, being USB3 cannot account for Kingston being faster than Toshiba unless the port is USB3, which it isn't. Context that you never before stipulated. How do you know it is only a USB 2 port and not a USB 3 port? Just because it is "flash memory" doesn't mean there is only one way to construct that memory, just like "car tire" doesn't stipulate the compound, tread pattern, or other characteristics. Without the model numbers, there is no information regarding what the manufacturer claims for read and write speeds. Besides their own proprietary designs, there is also the basic constuction. We don't know if your flash drives are SLC, MLC, or TLC. SLC is fastest with least density per die but the most costly versus MLC with highest density but slowest and cheapest. Consumers going only by price and capacity don't bother looking at whether they are getting SLC or not because SLC is outside their price range. They want high capacity at cheapest cost without regard to speed. The problem with most retailers (online or physical store) is that they do not divulge the cell layout of the flash memory - because they don't know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_...s_of_operation SlC is lower density, faster, and more expensive. MLC and QLC are more dense, slower, and cheaper. Without knowing about cell design differences, consumers see a 16 GB USB drive for $10 or another for $35. Which do they buy? The cheaper one, of course. The cheapy uses MLC and is USB 2. The pricier one uses SLC and is USB 3. Consumers are ignorant of the specs. They don't look. Research takes time. They think all flash memory is constructed the same and that's why they end up getting cheap and slow flash drives. Thanks. I will look out for all of this next time round. Could it be that slower devices are more reliable? No. Certain brands are more reliable than others but speed itself is not a factor. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
Scott wrote:
Two different USB sticks, both 16GB and both formatted NTFS. One writes about three or four times as fast as the other, using the same files. Any ideas? Could this mean the very slow one is on its way out, and is there a way of testing it? Thanks Many aspects, including USB 2.0 versus 3.0 have already been discussed by others. Basically, you only 'get' the read/write speed specifications of the USB stick at the time you buy the device. That is, *if* this information is listed on/in the packaging. *After* the fact, it's nearly impossible to get these specs, unless you happen to know the exact product *number* (not the product 'name'). I.e. a 'name' such as "Kingston DataTraveler G2" tells you next to nothing about the read/write speed specs of the device which *you* happen to have. For example, a device with that 'name' might be USB 2.0 or USB 3.0. So if you want to have this information, get it when you buy a USB stick and save it somewhere. -- Frank Slootweg, "Specs? SPECS!? We don't need no stinkeen specs!" |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of USB sticks
On 05/29/2018 10:02 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Scott wrote: Two different USB sticks, both 16GB and both formatted NTFS. One writes about three or four times as fast as the other, using the same files. Any ideas? Could this mean the very slow one is on its way out, and is there a way of testing it? Thanks Many aspects, including USB 2.0 versus 3.0 have already been discussed by others. Basically, you only 'get' the read/write speed specifications of the USB stick at the time you buy the device. That is, *if* this information is listed on/in the packaging. *After* the fact, it's nearly impossible to get these specs, unless you happen to know the exact product *number* (not the product 'name'). I.e. a 'name' such as "Kingston DataTraveler G2" tells you next to nothing about the read/write speed specs of the device which *you* happen to have. For example, a device with that 'name' might be USB 2.0 or USB 3.0. So if you want to have this information, get it when you buy a USB stick and save it somewhere. A few days ago I was inquiring about various Disk benchmarking programs, I finally chose Crystal Diskmark 6.0, seems Fairly consistent so I will use it for USB drives. Rene |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|