Related
We've been playing quite a bit with new ROMs here for the past few days, and we've been noticing dramatic speed differences between different brands of SD-cards. For instance, we have a 'Dane-Elec' 128 MB card which writes at 25-30 kB/s and a 'Sandisk' which writes at 150 kB/s. 'Sandisk' is currently advertising it's 'Ultra' line of cards for high-end cameras, and the SD variety of these (at 512 MB) supposedly gets up up 2.5 MB/s. These are almost factor 100 differences !
We're suprised how little consumer-education is happening on the net regarding this issue. But we already have both day-jobs and time-consuming hobbies... So could one of you please make a nice automated flash-card speed comparison site which allow people to post results from a standardized tool? If you do it well, you could probably make a living off links to sites that sell the cards, and you'd be providing a damn useful service.
Even the "SanDisk" is the slow one....
There are some testing result about the SD Card, it seems that "Panasonc/Toshiba/HAGIWARA" work at almost twice fast as "SanDisk" can...
Please refer to the page http://www.digital.idv.tw/Cardtest/SD/SD-P1.htm
Hello
as far as i know simpletech one of the best if it's not the best, and pretty fast on reading and writing 10 MB/sec.
please check their technical details on this site
http://www.simpletech.com/upgrade_n...ber=STI-SD/256&std=1&showFrame=&ProfileID=330
thanks with best regards.
Othman
I bought a PNY 256Mb SD card. Found the reviews of it positive, and its speed was good. Price of 68 pounds inc VAT at savastore.com was a bargain.
review at:
http://www.envynews.com/review.php?ID=196
Because of the variation in SD card performance, it would be useful to consolidate information regarding Sd card performance somewhere. SPB have a benchmarking product that's free to use for personal users, so if anybody wants to post stats about their particular brand of SD card, this product may prove useful.
http://www.spbsoftwarehouse.com/products/benchmark/
I don't know if it translates to SD cards, but I found Lexar CF cards were several times faster than many others, and about 10x faster than a crap Mr. Flash card. Also, the power consumption was MUCH lower!
Also, the technology in 256MB and up card sizes is such that they are intrinsically around 4 times faster than a 128 or below. Now, the fastest 128 might be better than the slowest 256, but in general a 256 is going to be faster.
And forget MMC cards...SLOW!
It seems there is a big difference especially between cards by Panasonic and Sandisk.
The difference is so big you'd better watch out buying a card, there's only 3 manufacturer's and a lot of repacker's. If you don't inform yourself good, you might end up with a costy card that turns out to be a lousy SanDisk...
I found a thread about a test program and various results on Palm's.
check it out at:
http://www.palminfocenter.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12919
Is there such a program on the XDA that works really well?
maybe people could start a topic where all results can be posted?
The SPB benchmark tool says it will take 47 minutes to run and "may" destroy data. I'll have to leave it for another time then.
Ok, first run with the SPB tool on the Lexar 128MB card:
<sc-largefilewrite>13370.900000
<sc-largefileread>2272.100000
<sc-largefilecopyto>3129.100000
<sc-largefilecopyfrom>3096.500000
<sc-manyfileswrite>21207.100000
<sc-manyfilesread>1846.900000
<sc-manyfilescopyto>12893.000000
<sc-manyfilescopyfrom>13356.800000
<sc-dirlisting>139.100000
Here is a thread that seems to be making the rounds throughout the forums...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1010807
Following the guidelines in the thread, here are my results with CM7 using a Kingston 8GB Class 6 card...
Before:
Write - 6.6 MB/s
Read - 15.2 MB/s
After:
Write - 5.8 MB/s
Read - 94.4 MB/s
I would recommend playing with the values to see what works best for your particular SD card... Not quite sure
if it is a placebo type effect, but apps like the Gallery and games that use the SD card are noticeably faster...
Have fun...
I did extensive testing on a patriot class 10 8gb card today.
I had lowest standard deviation on results using 1024 buffer. I also had the highest reads at that buffer with a higher write speed.
I had the highest write speed at 4096, but the read speeds were slower than 1024.
I rebooted several times to make sure that wasn't playing into it, and reran many test. All results were relatively consistent.
~11.6 write
~86 read
@1024
~11.9 write
~79.4 read
@4096
~10.8 write
~71.9 read
@128
The change wasn't huge for me. Most have reported 2048 as the best setting.
Also, I updated my cm7_mod to include this. Working on making it installable w/ the scripting...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1008612
It's only meant to be used with cm7_tablet_tweaks as a base now.
Couldn't such a buffer size setting be usefull for emmc (internal memory) too ?
I'm using dalingrin's OC kernel with the IO issue, and it feels slower than my SD card...
I've commited this tweak already today. I would be interested to find the optimal value for mmcblk0.
Jaostar said:
Couldn't such a buffer size setting be usefull for emmc (internal memory) too ?
I'm using dalingrin's OC kernel with the IO issue, and it feels slower than my SD card...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My current kernel should not have any IO issues.
dalingrin said:
I've commited this tweak already today. I would be interested to find the optimal value for mmcblk0.
My current kernel should not have any IO issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Instructions for tweaking the emmc are in that thread. I wouldn't mind taking the time to test and crunch the numbers but sd tools only wants to test my SD card.
EDIT:
App called J Disk Benchmark 2.0 can test internal memory. Working on testing now.
Uhm... my SD card tests faster...
I hope people don't go over board and incorporate this type of permformance increases in their roms by default based on bench mark tools. there is value in increasing readahead for some access patterns, mainly when doing lots of sequencial reads. the trade off of course is at the expense of memory usage. nook even with its 500mb of memory is still not considered high in memory. setting the readahead to 2mb is quite aggressive and will work well in some work loads like galary when reading lots of files around 2mb in size while in other work loads it may actually have negative affects. I am not saying that this specific tweak is bad because I haven't done any tests myself, but don't always believe the numbers u see from benchmark tools.
I'm only setting it to 1024k. I feel like that is plenty high.
dalingrin said:
I'm only setting it to 1024k. I feel like that is plenty high.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes 1024 is what I'm running really gave the best all around performance.
I think I found the internal memory and it's set to 128 by default
can't find any real difference between 64 and 4096. That looks like the only other mmc device though, so it must be it.
chisleu said:
App called J Disk Benchmark 2.0 can test internal memory. Working on testing now.
Uhm... my SD card tests faster...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, it's the same for me, my Class 6 SD card achieves 6,3/11,6 and the internal memory only 4,86/7,52...
BTW :
J Disk Benchmark 2.0 doesn't use the cache, so this tweak wont affect the results...
Jaostar said:
Yep, it's the same for me, my Class 6 SD card achieves 6,3/11,6 and the internal memory only 4,86/7,52...
BTW :
J Disk Benchmark 2.0 doesn't use the cache, so this tweak wont affect the results...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Balls.
I'm going to jack it to 1024 and hope that works then.
OK, I can't get any meaningful numbers anymore. I think yesterday's test was a fluke. I can't get any real changes from 128 to 4096 (or in between) with fast or slow SD cards, big or small, black or dark black.
The write speed on slower cards is lower (5-6mb/s) and the faster cards are higher (10-12MB/s) and read speed for all is 80-90mb/s.
Maybe this is a performance mod not for us?
Here are some Bonnie++ disk benchmark results:
Code:
Version 1.96 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random-
Concurrency 1 -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP
localhost 2G 80 99 12496 14 8106 9 676 92 22882 15 327.6 29
Latency 220ms 6356ms 3549ms 43282us 736ms 1672ms
Version 1.96 ------Sequential Create------ --------Random Create--------
localhost -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete--
files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP
16 692 75 +++++ +++ 7478 29 774 82 +++++ +++ 2843 78
Latency 2418ms 16588us 11687us 792ms 53us 1538us
1.96,1.96,localhost,1,1327374309,2G,,80,99,12496,14,8106,9,676,92,22882,15,327.6,29,16,,,,,692,75,+++++,+++,7478,29,774,82,+++++,+++,2843,78,220ms,6356ms,3549ms,43282us,736ms,1672ms,2418ms,16588us,11687us,792ms,53us,1538us
not the fastest disk speed in the world :-/
Btw, this bad performance is the source of 90% of all "hangs" on the Prime :-( The CPU is nice and fast, but the disk sucks.
What do other tablets look like in this test?? sucks vs a laptop or desktop would be expected.
fenturi said:
What do other tablets look like in this test?? sucks vs a laptop or desktop would be expected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here are some results from other phones/tablets:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1169910
It would be useful if you could put this all into perspective for the rest of us. Are you able to say something like XX% slower than the Galaxy Tab 10.1/Motorola Xoom/etc.?
NeoteriX said:
It would be useful if you could put this all into perspective for the rest of us. Are you able to say something like XX% slower than the Galaxy Tab 10.1/Motorola Xoom/etc.?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not own any other android tablet. So, if you know somebody, let him run the benchmark from http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1169910
fenturi said:
What do other tablets look like in this test?? sucks vs a laptop or desktop would be expected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My USB stick is faster on my Laptop (but not on the ATP)
I ran some bench on mine, Stock ICS, and here's the result
With side by side comparaisons, that's how awefull the storage is....
That's pretty bad. How does this effect the usage of the tab? Is it noticeable?
Sent from my DROID2 using xda premium
It's hard to know what's causing it but there is definitely a lot of freezes in the otherwise butters smooth animations. If I'm downloading torrent in the background, the device become unusable and applications (mainly the launcher) stop responding.
Every media take much to long to load,
I also suspect big movie files to suffer from that.
Transferring files on and from a computer is a pain and often the tablet simply stop responding.
In my opinion the storage speed is the bottleneck of the Prime performance wise. It s like using a computer with a slow ass HDD versus a one with a super fast SSD.
Of course i wish someone could re-run the bench on their tablet to confirm this.
kokusho said:
It's hard to know what's causing it but there is definitely a lot of freezes in the otherwise butters smooth animations. If I'm downloading torrent in the background, the device become unusable and applications (mainly the launcher) stop responding.
Every media take much to long to load,
I also suspect big movie files to suffer from that.
Transferring files on and from a computer is a pain and often the tablet simply stop responding.
In my opinion the storage speed is the bottleneck of the Prime performance wise. It s like using a computer with a slow ass HDD versus a one with a super fast SSD.
Of course i wish someone could re-run the bench on their tablet to confirm this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wonder if it's just that the internal SD card is slow, or if it's poorly optimized in software? I guess we'll find out once the bootloader tool is released.
My fingers are crossed for poor software optimization!
That write speed is just too low, I'll try the benchmark on my TP tonight.
When custom roms/mods etc. arrive we will have the chance to test it under ext4,JFS and other filesystems so i believe we'll see better performance
I remember seeing early reviews on the TF201 that the internal memory is unusually slow.
Why would Asus put such a high build quality on everything but the storage speed?
I have a feeling this is not hardware related but rather software related. There is no logical explanation why the flash memory inside our devices is so much slower than the common average.
What I want to know is how much bandwidth is available for the internal storage?
For example: I purchase a 64GB SSD drive that is meant for internal 2.5" storage drives. I hook it up externally and plug it into a powered ESATA port. The max read/write speeds of the SSD are around 300mb/s but the port's max read/write speeds are only around 200mb/s.
Did Asus make some unnecessary sacrifices to make the price of the Prime reasonable? I really hope not.
On a different note:
Copying files from Windows 7 to the Prime is immensely slow.
On Mac OS X 10.7.2 (Hackintosh) copying the same file is MUCH faster.
Using AndroBench -
Seq Read 19.59 MB/s
Seq Write 4.01 MB/s
Random Read - 2.71 MB/s
Random Write - 0.25 MB/s
SQLite Insert - 14.17 TPS
SQLite Update - 16.68 TPS
SQLite Delete - 17.79 TPS
Really bad in the ranking compared to the other devices.
And anyone thry this benchmark tool and post the results? http://db.tt/6WHshUYt
Its J Disk Benchmark
Using androbench:
17.3 Sequential Read
6.46 Sequential Write
2.88 mb/s 739.12iops 4k random read
.28 mb/s 71.91iops 4k random write
15.01 TPS 19.98sec SQlite Insert
15.57 TPS 19.26sec SQlite Update
16.44 TPS 18.24 SQlite Delete
2510.25 msec Browser
4176.5 msec Market
5403.0 msec Camera
5284.0 msec Camcorder
Just noticed there is no /system/etc/init.d folder for any speed enhancements/tweaks
Well, I wanted to test Bonnie++ also on a USB stick on the ATP, but somehow it took insanely long, so I canceled that. I also suspect it to be a S/W problem, which gives hope for it to be fixed in an update.
I've not got my Prime with me to perform the tests, but having seen the results posted in here, I have to say that my SGS2 absolutely *smokes* the Prime in terms of I/O throughput. Very disappointing, I think that this thread needs to be brought to the attention of Asus.
chrisfu said:
I've not got my Prime with me to perform the tests, but having seen the results posted in here, I have to say that my SGS2 absolutely *smokes* the Prime in terms of I/O throughput. Very disappointing, I think that this thread needs to be brought to the attention of Asus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get the feeling they knew about this before launch.
I ordered a Shield K1 Tablet for my son and the one apprehension I have is that it only includes 16GB of internal memory. Nvidia has already pushed out a 6.0 update for the device so adopting an SD card for internal storage seems like a logical option. My question is around the performance hit for doing so. I'm considering buying a 64GB Class 10/U3 SD card with write R/W speeds of up to 95/90 MB/s. I've googled around a bit and found some articles discussing the theoretical performance of adopted storage, but no actual testing.
Does anybody have experience with adoptable storage in Marshmallow and/or links to benchmarks? Any help is appreciated.
I have an oldish phone and I used a 64GiB class 10 /UHS card.
The performance is very bad. When formatted to be adopted storage, the card is encrypted, and all encryption/descryption happens in software, at least for ARMv7 CPUs (I'm still not sure what happens with 64bit ARMv8, different sources seem to post different things on that).
The app "Disk speed test" reports 18MB/s write and 3.8 MB/s read for this card. The phone is galaxy s4 mini. Apps placed on that storage are unusably slow.
I want to have a new micro SD card ready to go when I pick up my V30+ next week. There are some decent deals for 128GB cards at BestBuy and Amazon. I have tried searching for the info but haven't had any luck finding the maximum read and write speeds the LG V30's micro SD slot is capable of.
Samsung EVO Plus 128GB - BestBuy
Samsung EVO Select 128GB - Amazon
They are essentially the exact same card, just different branding due to when they were manufactured. Same specs and all but the EVO Select seems to be the newer of the two where the EVO Plus has been around since 2015. If the V30's micro SD card slot isn't capable of 100MB's read and 90MB's write, then I may as well go for something cheaper and slightly slower and save $7.
SanDisk Ultra Plus 128GB - BestBuy
Is anyone aware of what the maximum capabilities of the V30's micro SD slot is capable of? Is there a way to test this that someone wouldn't mind testing and posting their results?
jcsww said:
Is anyone aware of what the maximum capabilities of the V30's micro SD slot is capable of? Is there a way to test this that someone wouldn't mind testing and posting their results?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Somebody did that a few weeks ago, I'll see if I can find the post.
EDIT
I was mistaken. It was the internal storage read/write speeds they tested.
V30 Internal storage speed?
https://forum.xda-developers.com/lg-v30/help/v30-internal-storage-speed-t3687990
They were trying to determine whether the LG V30/V30+ had UFS 2.0 or 2.1. It has UFS 2.1. (Earlier this year, Samsung shipped some S8 phones with both standards -- the Snapdragon S8 got 2.0 while the Exynos S8 got 2.1, while all chipset versions of the S8+ got 2.1.)
But several websites have done thorough reviews and have stated what's inside the V30/V30+, including exact components...
ChazzMatt said:
Both the LG V30 and V30+ have Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage
LG's press release:
http://www.lgnewsroom.com/2017/08/l...ier-with-premium-cinematography-capabilities/
Memory:
V30: 4GB LPDDR4x RAM / 64GB UFS 2.1 ROM / MicroSD (up to 2TB)
V30+: 4GB LPDDR4x RAM / 128GB UFS 2.1 ROM / MicroSD (up to 2TB)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Other sites even give the manufacturer and component number:
https://www.androidheadlines.com/2017/10/lg-v30-review-ultimate-creativity-tool.html
Inside is a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 chipset with Adreno 540 GPU, 4GB of LPDDR4X ram and either 64GB or 128GB of Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage, all with microSD card support for expandable storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This 6-inch display features a Quad-HD+ (1440 x 2880, 538 PPI) resolution 18:9 panel with nearly zero bezels all around, and is covered in Gorilla Glass 5. It’s also both Dolby Vision and HDR10 compliant. Inside is a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 chipset with Adreno 540 GPU, 4GB of LPDDR4X ram and either 64GB or 128GB of Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage, all with microSD card support for expandable storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As it’s pushing the same resolution screen as the G6 with a processor and GPU boost, it’s pretty obvious why the phone feels so blazing fast all the time. Combine this with Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) storage and you’ll quickly understand that LG has outfitted the V30 with the highest end components available right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even the Toshiba UFS 2.1 storage inside is a perfect match for Samsung’s best UFS 2.1 storage, which is used in most flagships now, and averages out just as fast as those chips. See the results of the benchmark suite we run for each phone, including 3DMark Slingshot, GeekBench 4, AnTuTu V6 and Futuremark’s PCMark internal storage test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11789/hands-on-with-the-lg-v30
Under the hood, the V30 is powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon 835, with LG using a heatpipe to assist in cooling. This is paired with 4 GB of LPDDR4X, and either 64GB or 128GB of UFS 2.1 storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just used the A1 SD card speed test app. LG V30 - Samsung 128GB Evo Select formatted as a 'removable' storage device - did the standard 4GB size write / read test twice without closing apps etc (so bit of a real life test) and once did reboot (waited 5 minutes before launching), ran the accurate test (does write, then reboot again with another 5 minute wait, then does read):
Test 1
Read - 64.01 MB/s
Write - 35.38 MB/s
Test 2
Read - 65.25 MB/s
Write - 33.13 MB/s
Test 3 (accurate test)
Read - 60.56 MB/s
Write - 37.63 MB/s
Based on other benchmarks I have seen for this SD card (~95 MB.s read and ~70 MB/s write), it does appear the V30 is not able to get full speed out of it.
And just for 'fun' here is what the internal memory was capable of in this app (only ran the 4GB test once):
Read - 524.87 MB/s
Write - 199.30 MB/s
I am wondering if even if it were stuck at the slower speeds, would this have any impact on the camera, video, music, etc? I am planning on using a 128G SD card also if I get this phone.
pjcforpres said:
Just used the A1 SD card speed test app. LG V30 - Samsung 128GB Evo Select formatted as a 'removable' storage device - did the standard 4GB size write / read test twice without closing apps etc (so bit of a real life test) and once did reboot (waited 5 minutes before launching), ran the accurate test (does write, then reboot again with another 5 minute wait, then does read):
Test 1
Read - 64.01 MB/s
Write - 35.38 MB/s
Test 2
Read - 65.25 MB/s
Write - 33.13 MB/s
Test 3 (accurate test)
Read - 60.56 MB/s
Write - 37.63 MB/s
Based on other benchmarks I have seen for this SD card (~95 MB.s read and ~70 MB/s write), it does appear the V30 is not able to get full speed out of it.
And just for 'fun' here is what the internal memory was capable of in this app (only ran the 4GB test once):
Read - 524.87 MB/s
Write - 199.30 MB/s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent! Thank you!
banshee28 said:
I am wondering if even if it were stuck at the slower speeds, would this have any impact on the camera, video, music, etc? I am planning on using a 128G SD card also if I get this phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That should be enough to handle 4k and pictures being directly written to the micro SD card. You will want a card that is better than those speeds but there isn't any need to go for anything super expensive that are rated for super fast performance.
Found Out Too late..
While the measurement numbers are great info - I didn't need to run a test, I noticed as soon as I tried to play some PSone and PSP games. Any game with heavy disc access while trying to play (sports games especially, due to commentary) stuttered like I was running them off of an external USB hard drive. Move the game to internal storage and (obviously, from the benchmarks, above) no trouble at all.
This is disappointing, as I picked up this phone expressly due to its specs for playing games (It was on sale, and replaced my cheapie Blu phone). Not the end of the world; I can move games to internal that are particularly problematic, but rather annoying and ironic, as the games most affected are the ones taking up the most space, requiring the extra MicroSD storage...
Vinc3Has3 said:
While the measurement numbers are great info - I didn't need to run a test, I noticed as soon as I tried to play some PSone and PSP games. Any game with heavy disc access while trying to play (sports games especially, due to commentary) stuttered like I was running them off of an external USB hard drive. Move the game to internal storage and (obviously, from the benchmarks, above) no trouble at all.
This is disappointing, as I picked up this phone expressly due to its specs for playing games (It was on sale, and replaced my cheapie Blu phone). Not the end of the world; I can move games to internal that are particularly problematic, but rather annoying and ironic, as the games most affected are the ones taking up the most space, requiring the extra MicroSD storage...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go AOSP/non-Stock, format microSD to ext4, flash custom kernel and see how it changes things,
write speed will be improved by 100% (so twice as fast), read speed approx. around 10-20% (or more) compared to exfat.
Also custom kernel got general speed improvements so that might make a difference - haven't tried running anything particularly heavy off the microSD though.
That particular thing is probably the reason why Android/Google doesn't recommend using microSDs - it can really degradate and mess with experience/fun at times
zacharias.maladroit said:
Go AOSP/non-Stock, format microSD to ext4, flash custom kernel and see how it changes things,
write speed will be improved by 100% (so twice as fast), read speed approx. around 10-20% (or more) compared to exfat.
Also custom kernel got general speed improvements so that might make a difference - haven't tried running anything particularly heavy off the microSD though.
That particular thing is probably the reason why Android/Google doesn't recommend using microSDs - it can really degradate and mess with experience/fun at times
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for this info! I will definitely look into it - Although I just ran a few tests of my OLD phone, (A Blu Vivo 2(?) XL(?) - I forget), and it's read time from the micro Sd is atrocious, like 32 read and 24 write, and yet it plays PSone games just fine from the Micro SD - the SAME Micro SD that the LG V30 is stuttering on (and I've tried a drawer-full, now) - which leads me to believe it's some other type of bottleneck. After all, an actual PSone cd only reads form 150 to 300 KB (not MB) of data per second. Even with a single emulator emulating individual autonomous chips, there should be headroom, I would think, to keep things going.
... Aannnnd this moves me off-topic from this thread - So I'll stop right there.