Herunterzuleiern Specifications for the umpteenth time is somewhat superfluous. The Amazon has further refined down just a lot nicer in the product description.
My measurement results under USB 3.0 (stand me unfortunately only a short time, a test system with the appropriate card reader available) coincide almost exactly with the results here already in a review (I think of Garfield adjusted) were called. Slight variations up and down a few MB / s I will go through as a measurement tolerance.
But probably many users simply skim etc. the full power in devices such as cameras and often include the memory card only on USB 2.0 card reader or USB hub / sticks to the photos or videos herunterzukopieren, I once additionally, a benchmark in the USB made 2.0 mode.
Perhaps of all: In fact application, so my camera, the card makes a splendid figure. The performance is right, shooting in RAW run ragged by.
As I have often witnessed the effect especially in USB 3.0 sticks that these indeed are natively very quickly but are "grotto slowly" under USB 2.0, I was curious according to the results of the test. But even here, the SDXC 64GB card beats pretty good.
Test System is a Xeon 1230 with 16GB of RAM, Windows 8.1 64bit and the SD card in a card reader Transcend USB-Stick.
The first test was made filesystem in pre-delivered Ext Fat.
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
* MB / s = 1,000,000 bytes / sec [SATA / 300 = 300,000,000 bytes / s]
Sequential Read: 19,366 MB / s
Sequential Write: 19 068 MB / s
Random Read 512KB: 19,106 MB / s
512KB Random Write: 17,634 MB / s
4KB Random Read (QD = 1): 3,778 MB / s [922.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD = 1): 0.904 MB / s [220.8 IOPS]
4KB Random Read (QD = 32): 4,687 MB / s [1144.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD = 32): 1,154 MB / s [281.7 IOPS]
Test: 100 MB [D: 0.0% (0.0 / 59.8 GB)] (x5)
Date: 11/03/2014 18:17:53
OS: Windows 8.1 Pro [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
Then I have the map on NTFS reformatted in order to have comparable figures:
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
* MB / s = 1,000,000 bytes / sec [SATA / 300 = 300,000,000 bytes / s]
Sequential Read: 19 449 MB / s
Sequential Write: 18 497 MB / s
Random Read 512KB: 18 862 MB / s
512KB Random Write: 15,243 MB / s
4KB Random Read (QD = 1): 3,698 MB / s [902.8 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD = 1): 0.872 MB / s [212.8 IOPS]
4KB Random Read (QD = 32): 4,555 MB / s [1112.1 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD = 32): 1,144 MB / s [279.4 IOPS]
Test: 100 MB [D: 0.1% (0.1 / 59.9 GB)] (x5)
Date: 11/03/2014 18:30:07
OS: Windows 8.1 Pro [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)
Both results are very close.
Differences in some smaller test blocks (50MB) or larger segments (500MB) I could not find.
However, if you often want to cut out the entire contents of its SD card and keep only on the PC, you should look for a fast card reader. Let's make no mistake about it, even if only half of the memory card is full. With 20MB / s (as in my case) the copying takes almost half an hour.
Note: I will test other card reader on occasion, possibly also slows down here my card reader, the USB 2.0 interface, which would have to actually have reserves. If I notice something, I add this here accordingly.
