USB Flash Drive Quality
I've a number of mixed brands but the best i've found are my TDK 64Gig Blue's, Toshiba Black's (19mbps read/4mbps write) for the largest files (without the need for rewriting multiple blocks as they all can, and do seem to loose their way transfering data) and the old Sandisk Cruser Edge series. My workhorses are Lexar 16gig dark grey Slides (most without case as it makes them capable of being used anywhere) which have been going since 2014.
Latest aquisition are a couple of sandisk usb adapters for microSD cards, great idea by sandisk adding them to their microDS to SD adapter range.
My oldest are some Sony 512Meg usb2.0 and even though they are 'chunky' they've not let me down and worked even in old usb 1.0 ports that have been classed as unuseable. It usually just meant the port hardware is the origonal 1.0 specification which the latest usb2/3 devices are too fast in their i/o buffering to handle.
I do have some Emtec, and if you read the specs you will see that they are for photo storage in cameras and smartphones/tablets and not 'constant data movement'. Also Emtec have a number of sub-types which are usually defined by their body color as far as write speed is concerned and gold is not the best write speed, some are ok and some not for what we use them for.
You also need to look at what Class they are.
for example with usb3 ...
Class 4 is:
Read speed Up to 30MB/s
Write speed Up to 6MB/s
Class is:
Read speed Up to 45 MB/s
Write speed Up to 14 MB/s
all the way up too..
Class 10 is:
Read speed Up to 95 MB/s
Write speed Up to 90 MB/s
I do note that most of the sites now state something like (and I quote from transMemory's) :
* The terms ‘Super Speed USB 3.0’ and 'Hi-Speed USB 2.0' used herein are the name of a specification upon which this product is based, it does not guarantee the speed of its operation.
** e.g. Read and write speeds may vary depending on the read and write conditions, such as devices you use and file sizes you read and/or write.
Oh, and for those with dead usb units you can try recharging the internal capacitor/solid-state battery by leaving them plugged in to a powered up not just turned on (I don't have to say why do I) old workstation (not a notebook or too modern a pc) that's doing nothing for a day or two and see what happens. They will usually come up enough to get your data off if they don't come up to be usefull again. The old 1.0 specification did say they should be plugged in at least once every 90 days for an hour to 're-stabalise their internals'.
Oh and just something for your minds:
There are usb3.1 256gig models with up to class 12 speeds (140/140) due out there for public release this year. Will we need SSD's soon?
anyway have fun
Latest aquisition are a couple of sandisk usb adapters for microSD cards, great idea by sandisk adding them to their microDS to SD adapter range.
My oldest are some Sony 512Meg usb2.0 and even though they are 'chunky' they've not let me down and worked even in old usb 1.0 ports that have been classed as unuseable. It usually just meant the port hardware is the origonal 1.0 specification which the latest usb2/3 devices are too fast in their i/o buffering to handle.
I do have some Emtec, and if you read the specs you will see that they are for photo storage in cameras and smartphones/tablets and not 'constant data movement'. Also Emtec have a number of sub-types which are usually defined by their body color as far as write speed is concerned and gold is not the best write speed, some are ok and some not for what we use them for.
You also need to look at what Class they are.
for example with usb3 ...
Class 4 is:
Read speed Up to 30MB/s
Write speed Up to 6MB/s
Class is:
Read speed Up to 45 MB/s
Write speed Up to 14 MB/s
all the way up too..
Class 10 is:
Read speed Up to 95 MB/s
Write speed Up to 90 MB/s
I do note that most of the sites now state something like (and I quote from transMemory's) :
* The terms ‘Super Speed USB 3.0’ and 'Hi-Speed USB 2.0' used herein are the name of a specification upon which this product is based, it does not guarantee the speed of its operation.
** e.g. Read and write speeds may vary depending on the read and write conditions, such as devices you use and file sizes you read and/or write.
Oh, and for those with dead usb units you can try recharging the internal capacitor/solid-state battery by leaving them plugged in to a powered up not just turned on (I don't have to say why do I) old workstation (not a notebook or too modern a pc) that's doing nothing for a day or two and see what happens. They will usually come up enough to get your data off if they don't come up to be usefull again. The old 1.0 specification did say they should be plugged in at least once every 90 days for an hour to 're-stabalise their internals'.
Oh and just something for your minds:
There are usb3.1 256gig models with up to class 12 speeds (140/140) due out there for public release this year. Will we need SSD's soon?
anyway have fun
- BarryK
- Puppy Master
- Posts: 9392
- Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
- Contact:
Re: USB Flash Drive Quality
Don't forget to put the path to where the partition is mounted, for example of drive sdb and partition sdb2 mounted at /mnt/sdb2:Billtoo wrote:I ran the test with a 32gb usb-3.0 Kingston Data Traveler 3.0 flash drive which
is plugged into a usb-2.0 port.
# sync
# #echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB, 1.0 GiB) copied, 54.245 s, 19.8 MB/s
#
Code: Select all
# sync
# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]
Re: USB Flash Drive Quality
There was a 1gb dummyfile on the drive after the test that I did which I have deleted.BarryK wrote:Don't forget to put the path to where the partition is mounted, for example of drive sdb and partition sdb2 mounted at /mnt/sdb2:Billtoo wrote:I ran the test with a 32gb usb-3.0 Kingston Data Traveler 3.0 flash drive which
is plugged into a usb-2.0 port.
# sync
# #echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB, 1.0 GiB) copied, 54.245 s, 19.8 MB/s
#
Oh, and don't forget to delete 'dummyfile' afterward, if you don't want a 1GB file left on the usb stick!Code: Select all
# sync # echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches # dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
I can't get the following to work:
Code: Select all
# sync
# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
# sync
# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
dd: failed to open '/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile': No such file or directory
#
Barry, will the FS on the drive have any influence on the result? You have played around with these flash drives for some years now, do you prefer to format the drives to another FS, like ext-something, and in that case, which?
tallboy
Oh, and /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, should it be set back to 0?
tallboy
Oh, and /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, should it be set back to 0?
True freedom is a live Puppy on a multisession CD/DVD.
Hmmm...
The stick is the SanDisk Ultra 16Gb that I dislike because it is too wide to mount side-by-side with anything.
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 117.339 s, 9.2 MB/s
CPU is a 2.6GHz P4, USB2.0, not very impressive....
I take that back, my results are extremely good compared to these!:
tallboy
The stick is the SanDisk Ultra 16Gb that I dislike because it is too wide to mount side-by-side with anything.
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 117.339 s, 9.2 MB/s
CPU is a 2.6GHz P4, USB2.0, not very impressive....
I take that back, my results are extremely good compared to these!:
Barry wrote:Emtec: 1.6MB/s
Lexar: 5.3MB/s
tallboy
True freedom is a live Puppy on a multisession CD/DVD.
Interesting, because I don't know why it is so slow! The SanDisk Ultra 16Gb in the former test had never been used. Can the FS mean anything, or is it defragmentation?
SanDisk Cruzer Edge 32 Gb with 15 Gb free space, format ext2:
Ok. let's do a clean-up:
And try again:
It actually slowed down??
tallboy
SanDisk Cruzer Edge 32 Gb with 15 Gb free space, format ext2:
Code: Select all
# cat /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
3
# sync
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 327.375 s, 3.3 MB/s
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# rm /mnt/sdb1/dummyfile
Code: Select all
# fsck.ext2 /dev/sdb1
e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010)
/dev/sdb1 has gone 196 days without being checked, check forced.
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
Pass 3A: Optimizing directories
Pass 4: Checking reference counts
Pass 5: Checking group summary information
/dev/sdb1: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
/dev/sdb1: 56233/1908736 files (0.3% non-contiguous), 3432721/7631616 blocks
Code: Select all
# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# sync
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 331.832 s, 3.2 MB/s
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# rm /mnt/sdb1/dummyfile
tallboy
True freedom is a live Puppy on a multisession CD/DVD.
I thought I would try a few tests as well. Below are my results.
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 4GB USB2 in USB2 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct 1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 279.549 s, 3.8 MB/s
Verbatim 4GB USB2 in a USB2 port ext4
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 112.667 s, 9.5 MB/s
Verbatim 4GB USB2 in a USB2 port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 113.166 s, 9.5 MB/s
Lexar 8GB USB2 in USB2 Port vfat
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 171.287 s, 6.3 MB/s
Lexar 8GB USB2 in USB3 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 164.466 s, 6.5 MB/s
SanDisk 16 GB Ultra USB3 in a USB2 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 90.3283 s, 11.9 MB/s
SanDisk 16 GB Ultra USB3 in a USB3 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 83.074 s, 12.9 MB/s
SanDisk 16 GB Ultra USB3 in a USB3 Port f2fs
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 68.8602 s, 15.6 MB/s
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 4GB USB2 in USB2 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct 1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 279.549 s, 3.8 MB/s
Verbatim 4GB USB2 in a USB2 port ext4
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 112.667 s, 9.5 MB/s
Verbatim 4GB USB2 in a USB2 port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 113.166 s, 9.5 MB/s
Lexar 8GB USB2 in USB2 Port vfat
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 171.287 s, 6.3 MB/s
Lexar 8GB USB2 in USB3 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 164.466 s, 6.5 MB/s
SanDisk 16 GB Ultra USB3 in a USB2 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 90.3283 s, 11.9 MB/s
SanDisk 16 GB Ultra USB3 in a USB3 Port vfat
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 83.074 s, 12.9 MB/s
SanDisk 16 GB Ultra USB3 in a USB3 Port f2fs
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 68.8602 s, 15.6 MB/s
- BarryK
- Puppy Master
- Posts: 9392
- Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
- Contact:
Re: USB Flash Drive Quality
Click on the flash drive partition and it will be mounted. "/mnt/sdb2" was just an example, you have to put the path to where your partition is mounted.Billtoo wrote:There was a 1gb dummyfile on the drive after the test that I did which I have deleted.BarryK wrote:Don't forget to put the path to where the partition is mounted, for example of drive sdb and partition sdb2 mounted at /mnt/sdb2:Billtoo wrote:I ran the test with a 32gb usb-3.0 Kingston Data Traveler 3.0 flash drive which
is plugged into a usb-2.0 port.
# sync
# #echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB, 1.0 GiB) copied, 54.245 s, 19.8 MB/s
#
Oh, and don't forget to delete 'dummyfile' afterward, if you don't want a 1GB file left on the usb stick!Code: Select all
# sync # echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches # dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
I can't get the following to work:
Gets an error and quits.Code: Select all
# sync # echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches # dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
# sync
# echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
dd: failed to open '/mnt/sdb2/dummyfile': No such file or directory
#
Ah, it has just occurred to me, I have misunderstood. If you booted up on the Kingston flash drive, full install of Quirky, then, yes, "of=/dummyfile" is correct.
My comment about mount path is if you plug in a flash stick while already running Linux.
Sorry, your original test is ok.
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]
- BarryK
- Puppy Master
- Posts: 9392
- Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
- Contact:
My testing is with ext4 no-journal.tallboy wrote:Barry, will the FS on the drive have any influence on the result? You have played around with these flash drives for some years now, do you prefer to format the drives to another FS, like ext-something, and in that case, which?
tallboy
Oh, and /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, should it be set back to 0?
I don't know about other filesystems, but I would expect fuse-based driver such as ntfs-3g to be slower.
That last question, I don't know. It was something that I read about, but there was no advice to change it back afterward.
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]
Re: USB Flash Drive Quality
I ran the speed test in my Quirky 8.3 with a Kingston Datatraveler 3.0 plugged into a usb-3.0 port:BarryK wrote:
Ah, it has just occurred to me, I have misunderstood. If you booted up on the Kingston flash drive, full install of Quirky, then, yes, "of=/dummyfile" is correct.
My comment about mount path is if you plug in a flash stick while already running Linux.
Sorry, your original test is ok.
# sync
# #echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB, 1.0 GiB) copied, 13.504 s, 79.5 MB/s
#
That's about 4 times faster than when plugged into a usb-2.0 port.
- Mike Walsh
- Posts: 6351
- Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
- Location: King's Lynn, UK.
^^^Moat wrote:The fact that the newer Ultra USB 3.0 versions exist in a 128GB size is simply mind blowing! If only I had a 3.0-ported computer...
@Bob:-
I believe they're due out in a 256 GB capacity later this year. In the same form factor size, no less. And although mine run in USB2.0 ports, the read/write access times are plenty fast enough for me; half the time, I reckon the buffers are idling while the P4 catches up..!!
A pair of those would up me to 576 GB total. On an elderly, 15-yr old Inspiron, natch.
Do I really need that much capacity? I doubt it. (Nice to dream, through! )
Back on track, although I have a USB 3.0 adapter card in the PCIex16 slot of my 'big' Compaq, I can't boot the Ultra Fits on there. The controller chip on the card doesn't have the appropriate protocols 'burnt' into its ROM to permit that, apparently...
Such is life.
Mike.
dd is not best measure
For writing a jpg to a camera memory dd is an appropriate test,,
but for an OS, something like
iozone -e -I -a -s 100M -r 4k -r 16k -r 512k -r 1024k -r 16384k -i 0 -i 1 -i 2
is much more appropriate. You will find 90+% of flash mem is shit for small file writes.
(anything over 2M/s for 4K writes is good)
For many more grisley tales see the armbian board (&tkaiser), but these are uSD
with the 25M/s port restriction
Maybe puppy doesn't have iozone?
some concrete examples
Samsung EVO+, uSD,, 64GB, all usb3
and Sandisk extreme usb3 (32GB stick),, usb3
Sorry, too narrow, last 2 are random read and write
BTW,,These 2 are about the fastest you will find, notice the speed of 4K and 16K (speed is kB/s)
but for an OS, something like
iozone -e -I -a -s 100M -r 4k -r 16k -r 512k -r 1024k -r 16384k -i 0 -i 1 -i 2
is much more appropriate. You will find 90+% of flash mem is shit for small file writes.
(anything over 2M/s for 4K writes is good)
For many more grisley tales see the armbian board (&tkaiser), but these are uSD
with the 25M/s port restriction
Maybe puppy doesn't have iozone?
some concrete examples
Samsung EVO+, uSD,, 64GB, all usb3
Code: Select all
random random bkwd record stride
kB reclen write rewrite read reread read write read rewrite read fwrite frewrite fread freread
102400 4 66325 67839 167321 156568 25222 4822
102400 16 66187 70289 495456 490783 93722 20577
102400 512 70355 70930 912412 1113308 858670 66369
102400 1024 70784 71019 1092766 888511 931722 68786
102400 16384 70100 70713 1095174 1015284 959223 71150
Code: Select all
kB reclen write rewrite read reread read write read rewrite read fwrite frewrite fread freread
102400 4 25307 26383 26410 25825 10499 8750
102400 16 76227 89201 80656 81546 33139 19260
102400 512 105397 110260 200216 196873 131325 19683
102400 1024 76372 110908 199469 201110 162778 29011
102400 16384 50357 109699 206370 210531 199944 100871
BTW,,These 2 are about the fastest you will find, notice the speed of 4K and 16K (speed is kB/s)
Re: USB Flash Drive Quality
Wow, 79.5 MB/s. I thought that was pretty fast so I did a test on another USB flash drive I have. SanDisk Extreme 3.0 64 GB vfat.Billtoo wrote:I ran the speed test in my Quirky 8.3 with a Kingston Datatraveler 3.0 plugged into a usb-3.0 port:BarryK wrote:
Ah, it has just occurred to me, I have misunderstood. If you booted up on the Kingston flash drive, full install of Quirky, then, yes, "of=/dummyfile" is correct.
My comment about mount path is if you plug in a flash stick while already running Linux.
Sorry, your original test is ok.
# sync
# #echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB, 1.0 GiB) copied, 13.504 s, 79.5 MB/s
#
That's about 4 times faster than when plugged into a usb-2.0 port.
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 11.2764 s, 95.2 MB/s
#
It is suppose to be fast and I guess it is at 95.2 MB/s.
I thought the SanDisk Ultra was fast, not so much.
I wrote:Oh, and /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, should it be set back to 0?
I looked in the drop_caches file (in Lucid 5.2.8.7) before setting it to 3, and it was default set to 0.BarryK wrote:That last question, I don't know. It was something that I read about, but there was no advice to change it back afterward.
From http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man5/proc.5.html.
I see from my code that I incorrectly modified the drop_cashes setting before I ran sync, but a re-test showed no change in speed. I believe drop_caches should be set to 0 (zero) again after testing flash memory./proc/sys/vm/drop_caches (since Linux 2.6.16)
Writing to this file causes the kernel to drop clean
caches, dentries, and inodes from memory, causing that
memory to become free. This can be useful for memory
management testing and performing reproducible
filesystem benchmarks. Because writing to this file
causes the benefits of caching to be lost, it can
degrade overall system performance.
To free pagecache, use:
echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
To free dentries and inodes, use:
echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
To free pagecache, dentries and inodes, use:
echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
Because writing to this file is a nondestructive
operation and dirty objects are not freeable, the user
should run sync(1) first.
tallboy
True freedom is a live Puppy on a multisession CD/DVD.
This got me thinking how flash drives compare to SSD and HDD.
ATA WDC WDS240G1G0A-
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdc1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 3.81126 s, 282 MB/s
ATA WDC WD3001FAEX-0
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb3/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 9.65869 s, 111 MB/s
ATA TOSHIBA DT01ACA3
dd if=/dev/zero of=/aufs/devsave/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 5.81195 s, 185 MB/s
I guess there was no surprise to see the SSD out perform the two HDD. What was surprising how much slower the WD was to the Toshiba. Both are 3 TB.
ATA WDC WDS240G1G0A-
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdc1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 3.81126 s, 282 MB/s
ATA WDC WD3001FAEX-0
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdb3/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 9.65869 s, 111 MB/s
ATA TOSHIBA DT01ACA3
dd if=/dev/zero of=/aufs/devsave/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 5.81195 s, 185 MB/s
I guess there was no surprise to see the SSD out perform the two HDD. What was surprising how much slower the WD was to the Toshiba. Both are 3 TB.
Ya' know, I'm just gonna have to cave in and go ahead and hunt one of these down, and see (enjoy?) any of the potential speed advantages some of you guys are mentioning (i.e. - running a 3.0 stick from a 2.0 port/board)... and currently Best Buy is advertising 128 GB Ultra Fits for ~$33!! Almost silly not to grab one (or more... ?! ) at that price. Really seems a fantastic deal for that amount of storage capacity - let alone it's tiny size advantage. Cheaper per byte than CD-R's!Mike Walsh wrote: And although mine run in USB2.0 ports, the read/write access times are plenty fast enough for me...
Bob
Last edited by Moat on Sun 30 Jul 2017, 10:18, edited 1 time in total.
- BarryK
- Puppy Master
- Posts: 9392
- Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
- Contact:
Thanks for the info!tallboy wrote: I believe drop_caches should be set to 0 (zero) again after testing flash memory.
Here are more tests:
http://barryk.org/news/?viewDetailed=00631
The question that was asked whether type of filesystem makes a difference, it does!
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]
- BarryK
- Puppy Master
- Posts: 9392
- Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
- Location: Perth, Western Australia
- Contact:
Ultra-fits, those are the Sandisk tiny things, aren't they? I know some people like them, but be careful. They run very hot, and reports are they damage the usb socket.Moat wrote:Ya' know, I'm just gonna have to cave in and go ahead and hunt one of these down, and see (enjoy?) any of the potential speed advantages some of you guys are mentioning (i.e. - running a 3.0 stick from a 2.0 port/board)... and currently Best Buy is advertising 128 GB Ultra Fits for ~$33!! Almost silly not to grab one (or more... ?! ) at that price. Really seems a fantastic deal for that amount of storage capacity - let alone it's tiny size advantage.
Bob
I have one, 32GB, purchased several months ago. But, I was alarmed how hot it got, also had trouble with plugging it in, the pins didn't align right or something -- had to plug it in more than once to get Linux to recognise it.
I put it into my "old flash drives" jar and haven't used it since. And won't, will probably bin it.
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]
Aah, interesting - and yes, the tiny ones. I think earlier Mike Walsh also mentioned their running hot... my guess is they'd likely be OK running at the limited read/write USB 2.0 buss speeds of my older laptops. Their tiny predecessor USB 2.0 Cruzer Fit versions I've been running Puppies on for years, and have experienced no particular heat or fit (ha!) issues with those, as of yet (knock on wood...).BarryK wrote:Ultra-fits, those are the Sandisk tiny things, aren't they? I know some people like them, but be careful. They run very hot, and reports are they damage the usb socket.
Thanks for that heads-up, Barry!
Bob
Those little fella's do get a bit warm. Not as quick as some but not bad.
SanDisk SDCZ43 USB3 64GB vfat. I think they call them Nano.
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct 1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 21.116 s, 50.8 MB/s
SanDisk SDCZ43 USB3 64GB vfat. I think they call them Nano.
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/sdd1/dummyfile bs=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync oflag=direct 1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 21.116 s, 50.8 MB/s