Related
I am probably being naive here but with SD card prices so low now ....I cant understand why mobile manufacturers wont provide their devices with a "useable" capacity of memory .....
Or is the RAM memory very differant to SD memory ???
Is their a possibility of maybe in the near future, HTC launching a device with say a full gigabyte of onboard RAM ???
Yep, RAM is more expensive than ROM. By the way, this needs space which you just haven't in the Magician. It would also be too expensive, since a 1 GB card costs around 100 €, which is far too expensive for a manufacturer of these devices. Besides that, the magician is quite cheap in my opinion.
Dandie,
i think if i-mate provides us with the range of devices all would be happy and decide what to buy. e.g.:
-basic configuration - 64mb ram
-advanced conf - 64mb ram +512mb built in sd
-extreme 64mb ram +2gb built in sd
or whatever else breakdown is feasible or optimal. the price would respectively warry e.g. +$50; +$200.
i also don't see a problem to fit SD chip to device - its much smaller without body
it is also related to all device manufacturers. Since few of manufacturers do it i see some reasons for it:
1. low probable but: sd patent owners do not want to go for built in option or ask too much for it (but i know that some of the phone manufacturers already started production of the devices with build in miniSD chip);
2. it is not profitable or worthwhile from the marketing point of view;
3. I heard a lot from, people that SD cards are not very much reliable, sometimes it looses data, sometimes brokes. Thus it used for temporary storage purposes and nobody wants to take a risk with loosing your data…
4. and last but not least: they all are stupid and we here the only Einsteins who invented such simple way to increase memory
Although I have a 1GB SD Card in my JAM, I wouldn't want it to be built in. I'd rather take it out and put it in my card reader (USB 2.0) especially for transferring that 170MB DIVX file!
And what about those situations where you just give your SD card to your friend to copy stuff over and then back in your JAM?
And what about those situations where you just plug in your digi cam's SD card and have a quick view at the pics taken?
KTA,
nobody says "we want to replace external SD with built-in one" we say that we want to have both options: (i) BIG internal storage and (ii) SD/MMC slot for card.
internal storage would be used to keep our garbage on and forget about memory limit problems. And external for exchanging data with others, to move high-capacity data in and out and whatever else you want to use it for...
I never seen a person complaining on big HDD
Let people have an option!!!
Just guessing - but wouldn't there be an increase in power consumption with an increase in volatile memory?
Maybe the reason there is no 1gb RAM option in the PDA world today is that the battery life would be like 1 hour.
Mark One said:
Just guessing - but wouldn't there be an increase in power consumption with an increase in volatile memory?
Maybe the reason there is no 1gb RAM option in the PDA world today is that the battery life would be like 1 hour.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*BINGO* you got the answer right... :wink:
- $
- Battery life...
- OS Stability with bigger memory...
- Speed of OS with Bigger memory will reduce...
The rest is history...
xirc0m, Mark One,
DAMN WRONG !!!!
* Question of money is not discussed since people want to have extra memory and ready to pay reasonably. Again, I assume several options to fit every pocket. Don’t want extra memory – buy basic version.
*Do you have increased consumption with SD card inserted? Then why it should be with built in sd card?
* OS Stability with bigger memory… guys, if I have 100gb harddrive and you have 30gb does it mean that os stability is much lower in my case? I doubt
*Speed of OS with Bigger memory will reduce... SPEED would remain the same! But if you want to access built-in storage then you’ll get the speed of sd card
let me reiterate again. The whole idea is to have one big sd card built-in and have another slot for external card. There is still may be fast RAM as usual devices have
I suspect the main one is battery life; unlike SD card, which uses flash memory, which does not require power to maintain its content, the device's RAM needs constant power to maintain its content; that's why when your battery goes dead, your card content is still there, but not your main memory. You may then ask why not use flash for main memory? That's because Flash has a limited number of writes (although for most people it's virtually limitless now), and is slower.
Did you see pictures of the PCB? There is just no space left for more/bigger chips. The only thing you can do is replace the current chips with ones of the same size but more memory. These are expensive. Adding another slot inside the case wouldn't really help, since you still need space for the socket and there would be another sensitive part with not soldered contacts. I guess devices with up to 512 MB ROM built in exist already but they are bigger than the Magician. Don't forget: The magician was the smallest PPC available when it was released. It even had the phone built in. Trust me: There is no space left. The SD-RAM memory upgrade availble is done by exchanging the current chip and the price of 200 € tells you that 1 GB is just not realistic. Even though Flash-ROM is cheaper, it would increase the price to about double i think (don't forget, the end customer price always is a lot higher than the manufacturing costs - at least double the price I'd say) - not really interesting.
So - wait for fast 2 GB SD cards to be released (I'm still waiting for my Sandisk Ultra 2GB for almost 6 months now) and there you have your 2 GB ...
Why not to solder chip on the circuit board then? No contacts, no connectors, just chip. Sure, there is no space now. But don’t forget that when circuit board was designed all components were distributed proportionally to cover all board. If you add new stuff – you redesign it and tighten components. It only seems that no more room.
I also agree that built-in sd price would be different from external sd. Again, 1gb, 2gb, 8gb – this is just talks; we discuss the idea on having chip flash memory built-in.
Well, there is a flash ROM chip built in, as you know. It has 64 MB and is used for the Storage, the Ext_ROM and the OS. There is an upgrade available that makes it 128 MB ROM - 200 bucks! And also, I don't agree with you saying theres enough space left on the Magician. There is no space left at all! This device is one of the most compact electronic devices on the market. There is not enough space for one single additional chip. You have to wait for either the other or the memory chips to decrease in size and/or increase in features/capacity/speed (what they do). The next device probably will have more RAM, more ROM - but not 1GB. That's for certain.
avyshnya said:
KTA,
I never seen a person complaining on big HDD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using your HDD example, I thought the issue here was not the size of the "HDD" but whether the HDD is internal or external.
Can you imagine HTC with 3 different production lines, each with a different "embedded-SD" size? I don't think so ...
RAM goes against the whole quick standby capability of the device. I can suspend my handset into a minimal amount power consumption mode and then resume it right back to where it was before without any loading delay.
With RAM, I would have to hibernate any volatile information to a persistent store which takes both time and space. Otherwise I need to keep power applied the RAM while in suspend mode which costs me in battery life. Neither of these options are very attractive.
Plus a RAM store is yet another memory store to juggle. The OS would have to be modified to use it and I already have enough stores between main menory and the expansion slot. I shouldn't need to juggle another one. Finally, PCB real estate and battery load is limited so I don't want to add another memory controller or memory that needs constant recharging as RAM does.
Maybe increasing the cache on the processor is the way to go.
Dudes !!
You misunderstand my question !!
Yes I think having a removable SD Card is ESSENTIAL !!
I dont want to replace the external SD card with just an internal one !!
With 2Gb and 4Gb cards on the horizon - I dont think I would require much more storage (for the time being anyway!)
What I mean is .... would there be a possibility in the future of RAM prices dropping and sizes reducing - so that we could have a JAM type device with about 1Gb of RAM instead of the crappy 64Mb ???
What I HATE is having to worry about taking up too much of the measly 64Mb RAM which would then slow down and make the JAM unstable ..... I want to be able to install most/all of my "apps" into Main/Storage and then use my SD card for just Music, Movies, Games etc ....
Hopefully the RAM would be non-volatile so would remain even after a hard reset so no more need for constant Backups and re-installing etc !
1Gb Main/Storage Memory + 4Gb SD Card Memory = Perfect Device !!
It just seems crazy to me that Removable storage is reaching for the sky ..... but most of the time I have to be careful what/where I install programs on my device in case it slows down or becomes unstable ....
64Mb Ram + 2,4,8,16,32Gb SD Card = So Crazy It Makes Me Sick !!!
PS - I hear that JAM version 2 will have 128Mb RAM and built-in WIFI .... so there is room in there after all !!!
1GB RAM would indeed be nice, but that would be too expensive. The SD cards aren't made the same way. They're cheaper but slower. Even the Storage is a lot slower (which I found out by doing simple tests).
PS - I hear that JAM version 2 will have 128Mb RAM and built-in WIFI .... so there is room in there after all !!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet that they will make it even smaller, because most of the parts in any device will get smaller over the time. When they developed the Magician there wasn't any room for anything more though.
Interesting article on the future of Flash Memory .....
http://www.tomshardware.com/business/20041112/index.html
Dandie said:
Well, there is a flash ROM chip built in, as you know. It has 64 MB and is used for the Storage, the Ext_ROM and the OS. There is an upgrade available that makes it 128 MB ROM - 200 bucks! And also, I don't agree with you saying theres enough space left on the Magician. There is no space left at all! This device is one of the most compact electronic devices on the market. There is not enough space for one single additional chip. You have to wait for either the other or the memory chips to decrease in size and/or increase in features/capacity/speed (what they do). The next device probably will have more RAM, more ROM - but not 1GB. That's for certain.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd gladly trade the cheapo toy-grade camera they shoehorned into this thing for a more appropriate amount of memory - anytime. That's for sure!
grrrrrr..
i think, another reason for not putting a 1gb a internal memory is because the phone still cant stand to have that large appilcation running.. it will surely always lockup if a total of 1gb load of applications you put in there. not to say + the another 1gb in external.
avyshnya said:
xirc0m, Mark One,
DAMN WRONG !!!!
* Question of money is not discussed since people want to have extra memory and ready to pay reasonably. Again, I assume several options to fit every pocket. Don’t want extra memory – buy basic version.
*Do you have increased consumption with SD card inserted? Then why it should be with built in sd card?
* OS Stability with bigger memory… guys, if I have 100gb harddrive and you have 30gb does it mean that os stability is much lower in my case? I doubt
*Speed of OS with Bigger memory will reduce... SPEED would remain the same! But if you want to access built-in storage then you’ll get the speed of sd card
let me reiterate again. The whole idea is to have one big sd card built-in and have another slot for external card. There is still may be fast RAM as usual devices have
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yo...avyshnya,
Guess you have never work in a Mobile Phone / a PDA device company before...or have you done any R&D on this...
As I mention above still valids...
-$ , its all about Marketing issue...you are not looking at their point of view.... anything is possible the throw in the big chunk of memory...Technology is there...but they will not excute that so fast...
- Consume more Batt...yes it does with more memory...to your naked eye...you do not see it... if you seriously benchmark it you will realise it does...whether its external or internal memory
- Stablity on OS... still does... you are talkin about your PC...this is no PC...its PocketPC... sorry you are not benchmarking in correct terms...
- Speed... go n do a benchmark...you will see it yourself...
i was just thinking if i could get sd card pinouts and then match them with sata drive pinouts basically data in data out and power is required but like everybody i won't want to burn my lovely handset , someone must be thinking of it right now.
geeze how much storage do you want?
what you going to do with 4 gigs of storage, 2 gig SD card is bad enough for stable partitions
If iPod users can find something to do with all that space, so can PDA users. >_>
(In any case, OP, I think there's nobody here that can answer your question, since tech minded people don't come around here often. Try posting in the Upgrading/Modifying/Unlocking forums. You *MIGHT* get more help there.)
Ultimate Chicken said:
If iPod users can find something to do with all that space, so can PDA users. >_>
(In any case, OP, I think there's nobody here that can answer your question, since tech minded people don't come around here often. Try posting in the Upgrading/Modifying/Unlocking forums. You *MIGHT* get more help there.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well if you own an ipod i guess i was correct about you then.
you fly that flag loud and proud !
I don't own an 'Pod. However, I have replaced a battery on someone else's. Once.
Guy I did it for tells me 20gig isn't enough for his collection. <_<
In any case, I don't have any trouble with 2gig - I can barely fill up half with my stuff as it is (Unless I'm using the PS emulator, but that's another story).
Oh, and keep trollin', soldier.
i have prob with storage, too
2bg are not enough for sure
especially when you have such a games or programs like:
syberia ~200mb
tomtom -''-
and when you do some job which needs to save your important data (such as presentations, ebooks, documents, ...)
and when your life is not just business life but fun and entertainment life also, and you need some free sd space for music (at least 0,5gb).
putting HDD in some future models of htc is not so good move (check Samsung's i300 model fiasco). battery life: 3-4h, noise, weight:more then 150g smart and probably more then 250gr pocketpc), short life, no repairs, no replaements/warranty,...
1. question: what is the maximum sd card size for the Magician.
I have 1gb Apacer card. works well.
2. question: Any realtions sd card size - battery life??
yeah
,
there is 8gb sd card now in market and 16 gb is soon coming or may be out and some guy put two 4gb nano memories together to make it 8 gb (ipod hacking), there could be some logic to put chips together if only i could get some notes on sd card inner's
I'm using a 4Gb SD card which so far is working just fine.
I need to get a bigger SD card for my NIKON baby I just bought. Does anyone have one that uses a class 2 or 4 large SD card above 8gb? How is it for taking pictures, recording in 720p hd, and stuff like that? I'm used to my computer reading cards slow at that's not a problem.
-------------------------------------
Sent from your mom!
There's all kind of directions to follow the exploration of this rabbit hole
First off, what model Nikon do you have?
Second, what interface are you using for PC connectivity (i.e. USB, IEEE 1394, card reader, etc.)
When you ask, "...how is it for taking pictures," what exactly are you trying to specify? Picture quality, processing speed, transfer speed, reliability, etc.
I am currently operating a Nikon DSLR with an 8GB class-6 SD card as primary. As far as classes go, the only major improvement you're going to notice is transfer rate; the time it takes to transfer data from your camera to your PC. As far as image processing goes, it's really up to the hardware your camera is made up of. If your camera's buffer is already exhausted before reaching the max. write speed of your SD card, a faster SD card will do you no good in this realm.
Anyhow, give a little more info about your equipment, and maybe more concise questions. I'd be glad to continue to help out where ever I can
Happy shooting!
Nicksil said:
There's all kind of directions to follow the exploration of this rabbit hole
First off, what model Nikon do you have?
Second, what interface are you using for PC connectivity (i.e. USB, IEEE 1394, card reader, etc.)
When you ask, "...how is it for taking pictures," what exactly are you trying to specify? Picture quality, processing speed, transfer speed, reliability, etc.
I am currently operating a Nikon DSLR with an 8GB class-6 SD card as primary. As far as classes go, the only major improvement you're going to notice is transfer rate; the time it takes to transfer data from your camera to your PC. As far as image processing goes, it's really up to the hardware your camera is made up of. If your camera's buffer is already exhausted before reaching the max. write speed of your SD card, a faster SD card will do you no good in this realm.
Anyhow, give a little more info about your equipment, and maybe more concise questions. I'd be glad to continue to help out where ever I can
Happy shooting!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply, and right now I've got a L110. I've got a 8gb class 2 right now, which is what came with the package deal I got from Best Buy, and my main question I want to know is if I go to a 16 or 32gb class 2, would i just be shooting myself in the fott when it comes to the write speed of a photo once I have 200 on the card, etc.
What I also mean by "how is it for taking pictures" is what I just mentioned above, if I already have a couple thousand pics on the card and I want to take more pics, will the write time be unbearable or maybe like a second or two, tops?
And for the hd video it can do, would it take forever to write the video to the memory card, too, if I was to go with a 16 or 32gb class2.
From what I understand mainly the class refers to read/write speed, and as I mentioned before I am not too concerned with the speed of transfer to my computer, just concerned of the internal read/write speed.
And I would probably be connecting the card to the computer either via the built in card reader or maybe one of the cords I got with the camera (not sure what, yet)
jerry43812 said:
Thanks for the reply, and right now I've got a L110. I've got a 8gb class 2 right now, which is what came with the package deal I got from Best Buy, and my main question I want to know is if I go to a 16 or 32gb class 2, would i just be shooting myself in the fott when it comes to the write speed of a photo once I have 200 on the card, etc.
What I also mean by "how is it for taking pictures" is what I just mentioned above, if I already have a couple thousand pics on the card and I want to take more pics, will the write time be unbearable or maybe like a second or two, tops?
And for the hd video it can do, would it take forever to write the video to the memory card, too, if I was to go with a 16 or 32gb class2.
From what I understand mainly the class refers to read/write speed, and as I mentioned before I am not too concerned with the speed of transfer to my computer, just concerned of the internal read/write speed.
And I would probably be connecting the card to the computer either via the built in card reader or maybe one of the cords I got with the camera (not sure what, yet)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just read up on your model Nikon for the first time; nice buy!
Anyhow, to sum this up as easily as possible -- if you want to step up your storage, you won't find it to adversely affect the way your camera currently operates. The more images formatted to your card will not affect write-time on any future images you take.
As for the video -- That'll all depend on what quality you shoot in. As I'm sure you're already aware, the better quality video you shoot, the larger file you create. The size and quantity of your files will have no factor on your transfer speeds. Keeping with a class-2 card will yield the same rates you've already been accustomed to.
Just a word of advice to follow up. In my experience with the digital realm of photography, it's not a bad idea to step up to at least a class-4 card. Now, on your camera, I can't be sure just how that might affect performance with respect to actually taking the shots. However, you stand a good chance of seeing a slightly increased write-time while taking burst shots. Not to mention the added advantage of have the faster transfer speeds when uploading images to your PC. 16-32GB of images on a class-2 card can take quite some time to process. Again, not a necessity, but just a heads up
I am going to pick one of these up, but before I did, had a quick question (anyone with a WP7 can answer)
Do you feel that 8gb is enough space? Or do you wish you had more? Should I get an SD Card?
Most definitely. I have loaded most of my music and a few videos and I already used over 6GB. That's pretty much all the stock phone has. Now, I have over 14GB still left. Might put some movies on it.
My only disappointment in the focus is the 8GB stock NAND. For a $199 on contract device, 16GB really should be the minimum, especially considering a few other WP7 phones, to say nothing of Android phones and the iPhone, all start at $199 with 16GB.
That said, adding the SD card isn't that big a deal as long as you do it before you've filled the device up. For some reason there seems to be no ability to do a full backup of the phone by any means I've been able to find.
The problem with the SD Cards is that there's intense confusion/miscommunication about which cards work well. Just because it works with 6GB doesn't mean anything. What seems to happen is once you get to 8GB filled, the phone's performance takes a nose-dive, sometimes leading to losing all data.
"Enough space" depends on you, not us. I have an iPhone, iPad and iPod, all 16GB units, each with some 14GB or so of music & apps on them so it the first thing I did when I brought the Focus home was slap an 8GB card in there, format it and load it up. I have maybe 2GB free and it's worked without a single glitch for the past two weeks. For reference, mine is a Sandisk class 2. People seem to have problems with cards other than Sandisk and other than class 2 and I noticed absolutely no performance problems so if you're going to try it, try that and keep the receipt in case you need to return or swap it should something go sour.
Enough Space?
I agree with Mark, whether there is enough space or not really depends on what your usage requirements are.
I had a 32GB Zune and when I bought my Samsung Focus the Zune had over 20GB of data on it. So for me adding and 32GB SD card to the Focus was not only a desire but a very strong selling point for the Phone.
And yes, I am seeing a few issues with the Sandisk Card that is in it. Currently they are not enough to make me yank the Card because I (again) bought the device to specifically be a convergence device for myself and I am at heart a tester and tinkerer so figuring how exactly how WP7 works.doesn't work with an SD Card and the statement that MS and Samsung are working on a fix is enough for me right now.
Smaller Sized Cards seem to be more reliable than larger cards (not to mention less expensive) but that appears to anecdotal evidence as well. My 32GB Sandisk only causes freezes and resets when on Battery for example and I've not had anyone else confirm if they are seeing the same.
Not great answers but, hey, this is the fun of learning as we go along...
- MEK
FishFaceMcGee said:
The problem with the SD Cards is that there's intense confusion/miscommunication about which cards work well. Just because it works with 6GB doesn't mean anything. What seems to happen is once you get to 8GB filled, the phone's performance takes a nose-dive, sometimes leading to losing all data.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have more than 11GB on my Focus with no issues at all. No slow-downs, no hiccups, no data loss period. I am currently using a PNY 16GB Class 2 card. I previously had a Centon 8GB Class 6 card with the same results.
If you read the thread on MicroSD cards, it seems there are some cards that have been working pretty much flawlessly. Both of the cards I mentioned have worked perfectly for me. I gave the 8GB to a friend and he is using it in his Focus as well.
For me, to really make a portable phone/audio/video device be best for me it would need at least 150GB of storage... and a few TB if i wanted to listen to music lossless and a few movies.
MKohlman said:
I agree with Mark, whether there is enough space or not really depends on what your usage requirements are.
I had a 32GB Zune and when I bought my Samsung Focus the Zune had over 20GB of data on it. So for me adding and 32GB SD card to the Focus was not only a desire but a very strong selling point for the Phone.
And yes, I am seeing a few issues with the Sandisk Card that is in it. Currently they are not enough to make me yank the Card because I (again) bought the device to specifically be a convergence device for myself and I am at heart a tester and tinkerer so figuring how exactly how WP7 works.doesn't work with an SD Card and the statement that MS and Samsung are working on a fix is enough for me right now.
Smaller Sized Cards seem to be more reliable than larger cards (not to mention less expensive) but that appears to anecdotal evidence as well. My 32GB Sandisk only causes freezes and resets when on Battery for example and I've not had anyone else confirm if they are seeing the same.
Not great answers but, hey, this is the fun of learning as we go along...
- MEK
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know, I was thinking about this the other day...the phone has 8GB of internal memory and if you put in an SD card it stripes data across it and the internal memory. If the card is 8GB or smaller that's fine but what happens if the SD card is larger than internal memory? It doesn't stripe the first 8GB and set the rest up as another partition and it does appear to use but it can't be striped. Now you've mentioned that smaller sized cards work better and my 8GB card works perfectly. I wonder if the file system's attempt to work with a larger card is inherently unstable? I know that if you put two different sized drives in a Windows box and stripe across them you will only end up with double the size of the smallest drive, not the actual sum of the two. Might be an interesting poll...indicate the size of your SD card and if the phone has been 100% stable since inserting it.
markgamber said:
You know, I was thinking about this the other day...the phone has 8GB of internal memory and if you put in an SD card it stripes data across it and the internal memory. If the card is 8GB or smaller that's fine but what happens if the SD card is larger than internal memory? It doesn't stripe the first 8GB and set the rest up as another partition and it does appear to use but it can't be striped. Now you've mentioned that smaller sized cards work better and my 8GB card works perfectly. I wonder if the file system's attempt to work with a larger card is inherently unstable? I know that if you put two different sized drives in a Windows box and stripe across them you will only end up with double the size of the smallest drive, not the actual sum of the two. Might be an interesting poll...indicate the size of your SD card and if the phone has been 100% stable since inserting it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not totally convinced based on comments in blogs that the disks are "striped". I think a lot of people are saying this and maybe using the term out of context and everyone just keeps using it. Has Microsoft actually come out to say "WP7 performs RAID 0 configuration"? For a phone OS which was never intended to see anything other than a single drive, don't you think throwing a RAID controller in there just for kicks is a little absurd?
The other term is "span" and if I had money, I'd bet that the two disks were spanned as a single partition, as opposed to striping like RAID 0 does.
Despite all of that, I have tried a 16gb class 4 with more issues than I cared for and currently have an 8gb class 4 with negligible issues. Any card you get, I'd run on Vista/Windows 7 and test for ReadyBoost. That at least tests the card for random access speed, which is important. My 16gb failed readyboost and had lots of issues in my Focus, whereas the 8gb passed and the only issues I've seen with that one are issues that other people might have experienced on their own phones sans sd card.
hyperzulu said:
I'm not totally convinced based on comments in blogs that the disks are "striped". I think a lot of people are saying this and maybe using the term out of context and everyone just keeps using it. Has Microsoft actually come out to say "WP7 performs RAID 0 configuration"? For a phone OS which was never intended to see anything other than a single drive, don't you think throwing a RAID controller in there just for kicks is a little absurd?
The other term is "span" and if I had money, I'd bet that the two disks were spanned as a single partition, as opposed to striping like RAID 0 does.
Despite all of that, I have tried a 16gb class 4 with more issues than I cared for and currently have an 8gb class 4 with negligible issues. Any card you get, I'd run on Vista/Windows 7 and test for ReadyBoost. That at least tests the card for random access speed, which is important. My 16gb failed readyboost and had lots of issues in my Focus, whereas the 8gb passed and the only issues I've seen with that one are issues that other people might have experienced on their own phones sans sd card.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've read both, striped and spanned...who knows. Considering how slow SD memory always was in old WinMo devices, I didn't think it absurd to stripe data to provide the same kind of speed boost you get when striping hard drives. Hard as it might be to believe, it may have just been that WinMo was slow. I hadn't thought of the readyboost test, that's a good idea. Readyboost is pretty picky.
To All,
I did a bit of testing on Micro SD cards All claimed they were class 10 in other words they should (as claimed by the manufacturers) to read and write 10 mb per sec
The Reality is the only one that really hit that mark was the Wintec which also was cheap)
I used two of the sd card testers from the app store. One called sd card tester the other was ssd card tester (one was free one cost a buck)
I did the tests using various buffer size (2, 4 and 8 mb) did it 3 times and averaged. This is not scientific but it did show that there is alot of misrepresentation going on...........
The findings are as follows
Wintec averaged 9.3 write and 12.5 down
Patriot 7.8 write and 10 read
king max 7mb write and 8.2 read
Kingston 6 write and 8 read (what a dog)
None could really reach the 10 write threshold consistently. So, basically what I would recommend is read up and do your research and watch out for false review claims from the manufacturers.
I am now using the Wintec 16 gig and it does improve the response of the phone when writing or reading from the sd card. But this nothing compared to the awesome custom roms found in our dev forum. There is where the speed resides
It was fun doing this hope this helps some .........
That is weird because I have the Kingston 16gb Class 10 microsd card and I transferred my avatar movie at 11-12mb/s.
I found out that if you format the card through the phone, the speeds are slow. But if you format the card through windows, that card is fast.
mdkxtreme said:
That is weird because I have the Kingston 16gb Class 10 microsd card and I transferred my avatar movie at 11-12mb/s.
I found out that if you format the card through the phone, the speeds are slow. But if you format the card through windows, that card is fast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
probably a file system difference. formatting in windows will make it ntfs, formatting on the phone will format it to...? rfs? fat32?
No I didn't format it in NTFS. I formatted to FAT32.
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat, anyways, so I dunno what he means by that.
Its cause the cards are low qual. Kingstons inclided. There was a huge article by someone on the internet about them (not directly the speeds, though).
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
N8ter said:
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat, anyways, so I dunno what he means by that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that was my point, that if you formatted it ntfs in windows it would perform better than the phone's formatting (which is probably fat32). but looking into it, i don't think android supports ntfs.
Like I said guys, I formatted in FAT32 and it outperformed the phone's formatting scheme. I didn't know I could format it in NTFS because I didn't know if it would work or not so I formatted in FAT32
yea NTFS wont work on android
Formatting on the phone is standard fat is all it recognizes it is possible if you are on 4ext instead of 2e (stock like my phone) then you could get better speeds. The problem as one of you stated is the low quality control, all these cards rarely get the stated speeds.
Yea, I made my initial statement knowing it didn't support NTFS.
But the other person gave me the idea that he thought NTFS would give lower performance than FAT32.
And yes, even Kingston's expensive cards are in many cases low quality cards, Sandisk as well.
That is why most knowledgeable users prefer a hefty amount of NAND storage in the phone as well as an SD slot just in case we need a bit more storage (and that's part of the reason the Galaxy S is so popular as well... No other Android phone has this much in-built storage).
N8ter said:
Yea, I made my initial statement knowing it didn't support NTFS.
But the other person gave me the idea that he thought NTFS would give lower performance than FAT32.
And yes, even Kingston's expensive cards are in many cases low quality cards, Sandisk as well.
That is why most knowledgeable users prefer a hefty amount of NAND storage in the phone as well as an SD slot just in case we need a bit more storage (and that's part of the reason the Galaxy S is so popular as well... No other Android phone has this much in-built storage).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well put that is one of the reasons why I like this phone so many things are well thought out and yes san disk is real junk I never use them on my nikon they write way slow......
N8ter said:
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat, anyways, so I dunno what he means by that.
Its cause the cards are low qual. Kingstons inclided. There was a huge article by someone on the internet about them (not directly the speeds, though).
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/information/usb-flash-drive-comparison-part-2-fat32-vs-ntfs-vs-exfat/
I terms of speed NTFS came in last.
Hey OP, thanks for the test though. Because of this I am returning my Kingston for the Wintec since it's 50 dollars cheaper. Not countering or complaining about this thread, it's just I think most people get different results when it comes to SD cards. I actually thought about it and don't even need that high of a speed for external microsd because my nand is fast enough. Thus the reason why I want the lower pricing. Thanks again for the results.
t1n0m3n said:
http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/information/usb-flash-drive-comparison-part-2-fat32-vs-ntfs-vs-exfat/
I terms of speed NTFS came in last.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's almost a 2 year old article, and it's hardly scientific.
It fails to mention a bunch of factors that affect the performance of NTFS, and doesn't really optimize the other filesystems for the media.
FAT32 is a simple file system with no security, encryption, and recoverability. FAT scaled up for larger volume sizes, basically. (using Fat32 is the reason why Android cannot encrypt SD cards).
NTFS performace scales up (i.e. gets better) the larger the volume gets. FAT32 performance scales down (i.e. gets worse) the larger the volume gets. Typically above 8GB it's better to use NTFS, if you can. The largest size in that article is 8GB and the disks weren't used in a way to really show how the filesystems perform in common scenarios (i.e. searching for files on a disk with lots of files that's 75% full, where NTFS would best FAT easily).
Testing NTFS vs. FAT32 on a bunch of 4GB and 8GB memory sticks proves nothing.
It's not January 2009 anymore. Lots of people have 32 GB+ memory cards/thumb drives and FAT32 performance simply does not scale up at all to those volume levels (not to mention it doesn't support volumes over 32GB without a modified version) compared to NTFS, which gain in performance as the volume size grows larger.
In addition to that, formatting as FAT32 wastes lots of space compared to NTFS. It has HUGE cluster sizes on large volumes (i.e. 16-32GB microSD cards).
exFAT is a pretty good middle road between the two, but NTFS will probably outperform it on large volumes. Its performance is more consistent than FAT32, though.
SD and Thumb drive filesystems corrupt more when formatted as FAT, compared to NTFS, as well.
That article you linked is useless.
N8ter said:
That article you linked is useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since the file systems are older than the article, I don't see how that article doesn't apply.
You are are welcome to link your own test. Give more proof than your word. (Because I, for one, do not believe you.) In terms of raw speed, in our phone, on an SD card (with it's size limitations) ... Give more proof. The other factors are irrelevant to this discussion IMO, due to the discussion being about performance (I infer "performance" to mean "speed" due to the discussion about SD card speed.) Although they are admittedly important, I think you are just trying to use them as a point of obfuscation to try to worm your way out the erroneous statement:
N8ter said:
Ntfs has better perdormance than fat...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A link to a test performed would do nicely.
I picked up Patriot 8gb class 10 from frys yesterday. I haven't done any tests but the card is significantly faster than stock 2gb card. When i started transferring my files to new card, i thought i copied them to wrong location cause it was going so fast.
I'll run few tests and post results.
mrxela said:
I picked up Patriot 8gb class 10 from frys yesterday. I haven't done any tests but the card is significantly faster than stock 2gb card. When i started transferring my files to new card, i thought i copied them to wrong location cause it was going so fast.
I'll run few tests and post results.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would be very interested in seeing these results, I have yet to see a card faster than a SanDisk Class 6 8GB. However, I would like to start seeing some Class 10 16GB cards that step up to compete with the SanDisk in terms of raw speed.
t1n0m3n said:
Since the file systems are older than the article, I don't see how that article doesn't apply.
You are are welcome to link your own test. Give more proof than your word. (Because I, for one, do not believe you.) In terms of raw speed, in our phone, on an SD card (with it's size limitations) ... Give more proof. The other factors are irrelevant to this discussion IMO, due to the discussion being about performance (I infer "performance" to mean "speed" due to the discussion about SD card speed.) Although they are admittedly important, I think you are just trying to use them as a point of obfuscation to try to worm your way out the erroneous statement:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anyone with any knowledge about filesystems knows that FAT32 performance degrades when the size of the volume increases. That is why FAT32 has a maximum volume size of 32GB (without workarounds) and even a low maximum file threshold on the volume. It can also hold a low maximum number of files on the volume, because a FAT32 volume with as much files as NTFS supports would probably crash and burn.
When you a volume with a lot of files on it, NTFS will outperform FAT.
If that wasn't the case, Microsoft would have simply added the security and fault tolerate features (among other things) on top of FAT instead of developing NTFS for Windows NT.
FAT lived long because:
1. It's simple to implement, which makes it a great system for inter-OS compatibility.
2. Consumer disk sizes did not grow at a rate proportional to server storage sizes during the reign of pre-NT consumer Winodws OS.
3. Reliability and Security on consumer OSes (including Macs and PCs) simply wasn't taken all that seriously back in the day.
4. Hardly anyone with a PC had a volumes with a ridiculous amount of files on them.
Performance is more than just raw speed. NTFS is faster at searching for files on large volumes than FAT32 - why do you think Media scanner takes forever when you have tons of files on the SD card? It stores small files in the MFT if they can fit there, which makes accessing them monumentally faster than FAT, etc.
The robustness of a filesystem is a component of its performance.
Look at any HD2 thread and one thing you always see is "make sure to format your SD card before installing Android to it, to avoid constant FC's."
The only three advantages over NTFS that FAT32 has is that it is very fast on small volumes (and by volume I mean Capacity as well as the amount of data on the disk), it's relatively cross platform, and it doesn't fragment as much, due to larger cluster sizes (but fragmentation is not much of an issue on flash disks, unless they have very bad random I/O performance).
No links to back you up... Most of what you are talking about doesn't apply in context of this thread. Were this a thread about a pc you would have some valid points.
I am done.
Eat at Joe's
I'm not talking about a PC. I'm talking about storage cards. Load up a 32 GB card with 20GB of music and Albulm Art/Meta Data, Documents, etc. and then compare the FS performance.
I'm sorry you have no idea what you're talking about, that you want me to scour the internet to "back up" something any decent developer/IT professional can agree with.
LOL @ Troll. Were you not the one who responded with a one liner of inconsequential info in an article from almost 2 years ago (Microsoft improved NTFS. NTFS in Win7 isn't the same as NTFS in Windows XP, 2000, or NT 3.1).
At least you got fed.
Like I said, that article you linked is not a "test" in any serious use of the word. I'm not going buy SD cards/thumbdrives to do any sort of test, and I'm certainly not Googling for you. If you want to verify, you can do that yourself. Ad hominems, do not help your point.
Ciao!