Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23
  1. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #1  
    I recently purchased two Lexar 1GB SD cards for use in my Treo600 smartphone. (See post #12 for Treo650 results) One standard card and one "32X" card.

    Per an e-mail to jposin from Lexar Sales posted over here:
    > SD1GB-231 is our 4X card.
    > SD1GB-32-231 is our 32X card.

    Those are what arrived in the mail.

    Using what I know as the standard PalmOS SD card speed benchmarking programs VFSMark 1.1 and CardSpeed 1.2 ... the results were quite surprising!
    Code:
             Standard/4X    HighSpeed/32X
             ===========    =============
    VFSMark        226             220     spec
    CardSpeed       75              61     byte/s (Wrt32bit)
                 98047           81561     byte/s (Wrt8KB)
                567857          565836     byte/s (Read8KB)
    All those numbers are averages of at least six runs on blank cards, ignoring the very first run on a virgin formatted card which always yields much higher numbers.

    My results seem consistent with Mike's great database of SD card benchmark results.

    There appears to be no appreciable difference between Lexar's 4X and 32X cards and certainly no 8X improvement in write speed.

    Having worked in the semiconductor manufacturing industry I know that (when supply permits) sometimes manufacturers will "downbin" faster product to fill demand at a lower speed. So perhaps what I have is really two 32X cards (one downbinned), but I'm awfully suspicious.

    Can anyone else corroborate my data?

    I'm sending a version of this post to Lexar's customer support folks to see what they have to say.

    Thanks,
    ERic


    P.S. Here's the detailed information about the cards:

    Standard/4X
    ===========
    Card Info App -> Device ID: SMI_000052F50000D4
    Sticker on card: Lexar Media 1GB SD
    Engraved on the card:
    LEXAR MEDIA
    SD1GB - 110M
    1204384
    A040507B
    MADE IN U.S.A.

    HighSpeed/32X
    =============
    Card Info App -> Device ID: SMI_1600D5560000D4
    Sticker on card: 32x Lexar Media 1GB SD High Speed
    Engraved on the card:
    LEXAR MEDIA
    SD1GB - 100M
    1204285
    A040507B
    MADE IN U.S.A.
    Last edited by ERicJ; 02/11/2005 at 02:42 PM. Reason: Emphasize this post is Treo600 data
  2. #2  
    I did a couple of Google search on SD1GB-231 and they are saying "Minimum sustained write speed of 4.8 Mbps". It is strange that Lexar's web site doesn't mention anything about the standard (ie: non 32X) 1GB card.

    Very misleading.....even Amazon is showing a non 32X 1GB card but the product description is referring to highspeed. Could it be that Lexar's 1GB standard is rebranded from Panasonic which is already highspeed? I heard they rebrand both Panasonic (if made in Japan) and Sandisk (if made in USA).

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t....bosnation0e-20

    Other sites stating 4.8 Mbps write speed.

    http://www.rokestuf.de/us-shop/Lexar-Media-1-GB-Secure-Digital-Memory-Card-(SD1GB-231)/detail_pID-B0002XZQHM,qmode-6.html

    http://www.biweekly-info.com/shop/-...-locale-us.html

    http://www.navyadvancement.com/cgi-...arch=B0002XZQHM


    The difference in price be/w the 32X and standard wasn't much (if you don't include the rebate). Since Sandisk came out with their Ultra highspeed, Lexar had to come out with a highspeed of their version. Could it be that Lexar's standard speed was already highspeed (since they rebrand some Panasonic cards) and just added the label 32X?

    I bought the standard Lexar 1GB from Tigerdirect and indirectly compared it with my Panasonic 256MB (10MB/sec). My daily backups time seem to be the same. Since Lexar rebrands both Panasonic and Sandisk, could mine be a Panasonic rebrand?
  3. #3  
    I've been told getting something like a USB 2 memory card reader hugely increases the speed of reading the card.

    That would be something to test. Maybe the 32X is 9 times faster using a good USB 2 memory card reader, but on the treo its the same???

    That would be VERY cool if thats true! Single slot USB 2 multicard readers (that look like memory sticks) only cost around $20
  4. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #4  
    Response recieved today via e-mail:
    Quote Originally Posted by Lexar Support
    Hello Eric

    Sorry about the delay in getting back to you, our speed rated cards are tested to guarantee a minimum sustained write speed of 32X, we do not make any claims on unrated cards.

    Best regards
    Lexar Support
    Typical, worthless customer service reply...

    I think I must follow-up.
  5. sledgie's Avatar
    Posts
    497 Posts
    Global Posts
    501 Global Posts
    #5  
    Lexar does not make a NON 32x 1GB speed card. The Lexar 1gb is 32x
  6. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by sledgie
    Lexar does not make a NON 32x 1GB speed card. The Lexar 1gb is 32x
    Although that's what their website implies... there are in fact two different product marketing numbers, packagings and labelings for their 1GB cards. And this e-mail from Lexar sales confirms two versions.
  7. #7  
    I have had less that professional e-mail exchanges with the Lexar sales folks, who will not admit that their web site specifically obscures the fact that they DO make a 'slow' 1 GB SD card (their item number SD1GB-231). They push their 32x card (item number SD1GB-32-231). There are many on-line vendors (like buy.com) who seem to jumble these 2 cards (product descriptions the same, but item numbers and product photos different). Be very sure what card you want and order.
  8. #8  
    if you are using treo you won't notice any difference since there's a bottle neck in treo's transfter speed... you would however see a difference in speed using a usb 2.0 card reader.
  9. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by ultima16888
    if you are using treo you won't notice any difference since there's a bottle neck in treo's transfter speed...
    Do you have any empirical data or references to specifications that back up that statement?
  10. #10  
    Just bought one for about US$72 here in Singapore.

    Thought I'd share the VFSMark results ... this is after a sync, so it isn't freshly formatted.

    Lexar 1G SD (ref # SD1G-100M)
    File Create: 218%
    File Delete: 206%
    File Write: 53%
    File Read: 158%
    File Seek: 406%
    DB Export: 120%
    DB Import: 377%
    Record Access: 312%
    Resource Access: 300%

    VFSMark: 238

    With Card Speed, Wrt32bit=79b/sec, Wrt 8kb=94979b/sec, Read 8kb= 595781b/sec

    The data is close to yours, so I guess mine is also a 4X Lexar.... there's no 32X shown on the sticker.
    Last edited by TreojanHorse; 11/10/2004 at 02:22 AM.
  11. #11  
    I'm getting the exact same results from my PQI 1GB... maybe these are the Treo 600 limits.
  12. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #12  
    I now have results for my two Lexar 1G cards on my Treo650:
    Code:
             Standard/4X    HighSpeed/32X
             ===========    =============
    VFSMark        479             471     spec
    CardSpeed       78              67     byte/s (Wrt32bit)
                127950          101185     byte/s (Wrt8KB)
               2669985         2767076     byte/s (Read8KB)
    For reference these are my results for the same cards on my Treo600:
    Code:
             Standard/4X    HighSpeed/32X
             ===========    =============
    VFSMark        226             220     spec
    CardSpeed       75              61     byte/s (Wrt32bit)
                 98047           81561     byte/s (Wrt8KB)
                567857          565836     byte/s (Read8KB)
    So even on the improved 650, the "slower", standard speed card beats out the 32X "high" speed card.

    The Treo600 numbers are averages of at least six runs on blank cards, ignoring the very first run on a virgin formatted card which always yields much higher numbers.

    The Treo650 numbers are also averages of at least six runs, but the cards are not blank anymore since I've loaded stuff onto them now.

    Also, in my testing I've learned that in addition to virgin cards yielding higher results I can get significantly higher results from both VFSMark and CardSpeed if I run them immediately after inserting the SD card. For example my 32X card will read ~670 for VFSMark and >1000 for CardSpeed Wrt32bit everytime after a fresh insert, but nowhere near that on any subsequent runs. Unfortunately I think this is polluting the data over at the SD Card Benchmark Site.
    Last edited by ERicJ; 02/11/2005 at 03:29 PM. Reason: Emphasize Treo600 vs. Treo650 data
  13. #13  
    humm not sure if I did this right or not, but I seem to be getting this from my 1GB scandisk card (using the treo 600 though)

    test1
    VFSMark
    279
    Cardspeed
    163
    74898
    609637

    test2
    VFSMark
    278
    Cardspeed
    74
    96023
    595781

    test3
    VFSMark
    285
    Cardspeed
    161
    68266
    595781

    test4
    VFSMark
    283
    Cardspeed
    163
    86516
    595781

    test5
    VFSMark
    281
    Cardspeed
    163
    81664
    582542

    test6
    VFSMark
    277
    Cardspeed
    165
    104439
    595781

    not too sure what this means. but it would seem that my 32bit write is 2 times what every one is seeing with the lexar? I have also used the card for a USB2 thumb drive in a reader... Is it formatted for the thumb drive? and do I need to reformat it for the palm... and on that thought... Is it wise to use a SD card for 400MB files to transfer via USB2 and also for the primary Treo 600/650 SD card? are there formatting differences?

    I am wanting to use it for storage files for installs. But done like to have to carry excess anything.
  14. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #14  
    I've always formatted my SD cards with the PalmOS "Card Info" application.
  15. #15  
    The bottleneck is probably the Treo bus speed, not the card. My Zodiac gets SD scores over 600 yet on Treo they are around 400 for the same card.
    Sprint Pre, Mugen 2800mah battery
  16. #16  
    Treo 650 GSM, this was with an ATP brand "60x" card. Ran it 4 times and results were fairly consistent:


    VFSMark Results

    File Create: 280%
    File Delete: 254%
    File Write: 57%
    File Read: 703%
    File Seek: 694%
    DB Export: 225%
    DB Import: 389%
    Record Access: 905%
    Resource Access: 853%

    VFSMark: 484


    Cardspeed results:

    CardSpeed
    67 byte/s (Wrt32bit)
    115481 byte/s (Wrt8KB)
    2912711 byte/s (Read8KB)
    Last edited by MisterEd; 02/11/2005 at 09:39 AM.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterEd
    Treo 650 GSM, this was with an ATP brand "60x" card. Ran it 4 times and results were fairly consistent:

    VFSMark: 484

    CardSpeed
    67 byte/s (Wrt32bit)
    115481 byte/s (Wrt8KB)
    2912711 byte/s (Read8KB)
    This is very interesting. I am looking (like most should be I assume) to spend the least money on the most storage with the fastest transfer speed allowed by my Sprint Treo 650.

    Would there be any reason to suspect that the excellent VFSMark and Read results you got would not be the same on the Sprint/CDMA 650?

    I also wonder if above the Lexar 32x was rebranded 4x media, and not the other way around...man I hate the memory industry's price-fixing and shady marketing.

    More test results /advice appreciated. I want to buy the cheapest 1GB SD card that will run at the maximum throughput possible of my 650. I've considered PQI (whose DDR I use in my PC), Sandisk "Ultra II," and the ATP you have. Thoughts appreciated.

    Thanks,
    Adam
  18. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Ad-Rok
    Would there be any reason to suspect that the excellent VFSMark and Read results you got would not be the same on the Sprint/CDMA 650?
    Huh? Ed & I got pretty much the same results (~470-480 VFSMark) on our 650s; his GSM and mine CDMA. This is just further data supporting that the Treo is the bottleneck not the SD card if now 4X, 32X, and 60X cards all generate similar results.

    ERic
    Last edited by ERicJ; 07/08/2006 at 01:45 AM.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by ERicJ
    Huh? Ed & got got pretty much the same results (~470-480 VFSMark) on our 650s; his GSM and mine CDMA. This is just further data supporting that the Treo is the bottleneck not the SD card if now 4X, 32X, and 60X cards all generate similar results.

    ERic
    Sorry, I meant that to be a minor part of my post, I'm just trying to eliminate the variables here to get to figuring out the max throughput (Read and Write) on our Treos' internals for SD card-to-RAM-and-back movement of data. In other words, I'm trying to cut through the "32X" hype to get to usable benchmarks.

    However, 2.9 million bytes/second read speed vs. 567,000 bytes/second read speed is a good bit faster in my book. Is not a VFSmark of 484 better than one of 226? Am I confused?

    Thanks,
    Adam
  20. ERicJ's Avatar
    Posts
    758 Posts
    Global Posts
    779 Global Posts
       #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Ad-Rok
    However, 2.9 million bytes/second read speed vs. 567,000 bytes/second read speed is a good bit faster in my book. Is not a VFSmark of 484 better than one of 226? Am I confused?
    Post #1 is Treo600 only data (before the 650 was released).

    Post #12 compares the same cards in both Treo600 and Treo650.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions