 | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
What would be faster in terms of write speed - a USB 2.0 flash drive (specifically a 64GB Kingston DataTraveler if that makes any difference) or a USB 3.0 hard drive? I know USB 3.0 is faster than 2.0 but if the drive itself is significantly slower then that might cancel it out. I've read conflicting advice on whether hard drives or flash drives are faster.
Discussion is locked
Mixing it up could be confusing but so far, SSD wins the races.
Bob
I didn't mean SSD, which I know is faster than HDD. I mean a standard USB pen drive/keychain drive/whatever you want to call it. I know these are considerably slower and less reliable than the SSD's which are beginning to take the place of internal HDD's, but was wondering how it would compare to a USB 3.0 external HDD, as backing up my files to a flash drive is becoming a painfully slow process taking several hours. A lot of reviews I've seen suggest that an external HDD would be considerably faster, but I've seen conflicting advice in this area.
So far there is no standard for USB memory stick speed rating. So if I don't compare one of those scorching fast USB 3.0 memory sticks then it's likely your USB HDD will win the race.
HOWEVER there are times that nothing will help. For example one client had 20,000 files in a folder. As we know the file/folder speed hit after a few thousand files is the bottleneck and not the media speed. Faster drives was not going help that one significantly.
Bob
Sounds like the HDD is the answer then. I'm just talking about a USB 2.0 stick which is doing very well indeed if it reaches 4MB/sec.
20000 files in one folder, that's quite something!! I think the most I've got in a single folder is about 600 and most are nothing like that many so that shouldn't be a problem.
OK I'll have a look at those. Although it's starting to look like HDD may be a more cost-effective option as I'm going to need something bigger soon anyway. New development on this issue anyway - the sluggish write speeds were achieved on a 2-year-old desktop PC. Today I used the same stick to transfer the files onto a new laptop, and found that the transfer speed was much faster. Are read speeds generally faster than write speeds? Or is it more likely the difference in performance between the two PC's?
I have this rather nice USB 3.0 tool less case I can pop a normal HDD into or even a SSD.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FCLG65U
So I can pop in almost any HDD/SSD in that, and my only quibble is the cable is not the usual USB to mini/micro/nano USB but a double ended USB 3.0 cable. That's OK but I have to remember to keep that cable with that thing.
Sorry I went off topic but back on target the speeds do vary with the drive setup as well as the PC.
Bob
Your question is so confused and can't understand. I think SSD is very fast.
Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic