USB Flash Drive Quality

What works, and doesn't, for you. Be specific, and please include Puppy version.
Message
Author
EdD
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 00:10
Location: Southside Virginia

#21 Post by EdD »

For me, Prime is still a valuable option. Next day shipping for $3.99 beats spending 2 hours on the road and $12 fuel cost, or waiting for the next time a trip to the city is necessary. Pluses and minuses always apply. ;-)
Dell optiplex 780, Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E7500 @ 2.93GHz, 4g RAM, w/ATI RV620 LE Radeon HD 3450. Currently running a full install of Slacko 6.3.0 ( 32 bit version).

r4dic4l
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed 05 Feb 2014, 14:12

#22 Post by r4dic4l »

I use flash drives and SD/MicroSD cards of all sorts, all sizes all the time for installs, transfers, cloning etc.. Been so for years. Only difference I notice is the I/O speeds. Although I/O is faster than CD/DVD; external HDD is quicker by far.
I do not get a lot of drive failure(s). I always use whatever "safe to remove hardware", "un-mounting" or whatever option is offered before I go snatching the drive. If the data is crucial on the FDD/SD; I will shut the machine down before removing the device.
So saying: When these devices came out a few years ago; they were garbage. They have improved by leaps and bounds.
Over....

EdD
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue 10 Dec 2013, 00:10
Location: Southside Virginia

#23 Post by EdD »

R4, agreed. Flash drives do have to be treated correctly to make them last. I'm amazed at the quality of flash drives available these days. They're really a great improvement over the earlier ones.
Dell optiplex 780, Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E7500 @ 2.93GHz, 4g RAM, w/ATI RV620 LE Radeon HD 3450. Currently running a full install of Slacko 6.3.0 ( 32 bit version).

slavvo67
Posts: 1610
Joined: Sat 13 Oct 2012, 02:07
Location: The other Mr. 305

#24 Post by slavvo67 »

I agree to a point but there is still some garbage out there. Funny, I never thought to compare the speeds of my usb drives. I'll have to find a bash script to compare.

Best,

Slavvo67

r4dic4l
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed 05 Feb 2014, 14:12

#25 Post by r4dic4l »

There is garbage out there and one will notice great diffs in read/write between brands; even between two exact devices. I prefer and have found PNY and SanDisk be faster and and more durable: I have accidentally washed mine a couple times > cleaning the drive of unwanted soilage....lol

r4dic4l
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed 05 Feb 2014, 14:12

#26 Post by r4dic4l »

slavvo67 wrote:...I never thought to compare the speeds of my usb drives. I'll have to find a bash script to compare.
Best,
Slavvo67
Post it if you get it up. I currently test devices on Windows (beginning to delve deeper into Linux): I am just starting to love this Puppy and look forward to a long and healthy relationship.
Thanks for the input, ya'll.
One

RJARRRPCGP
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue 09 Dec 2008, 06:10
Location: USA (Springfield, Vermont)

Re: USB Flash Drive Quality

#27 Post by RJARRRPCGP »

slavvo67 wrote:
Sandisk: I used to purchase many of these but I found the quality to be hit or miss. I have personally lost data on at least 2 Sandisk drives that I have not been able to recover.
I agree that SanDisk is hit-and-miss I had an 8 GB SanDisk Cruzer a little while ago that causes the Microsoft USB tool to keep giving error message "could not copy files to the disk" or similar. Even if Windows didn't detect squat when reformatting it...

I have yet to have a PNY fail on me...

Pelo

Transcend would be my choice.

#28 Post by Pelo »

Transcend and Kingston are safe, Cruzer is safe but I dont like because to small to decorate (stickers for meMorize what is inside)
Intenso not bad.
PNY : no ! (used only once but hardly contact on old usb hub).
Attachments
Temple.jpg
Transcend 4GB several Puppies
(37.27 KiB) Downloaded 67 times
Last edited by Pelo on Tue 01 Aug 2017, 16:42, edited 2 times in total.

Pelo

San disk Cruzer contains a protection software

#29 Post by Pelo »

Caractéristiques et avantages
Compacte, portative et avec un couvercle à rabat
Transportez vos données en toute sécurité sur un porte-clé
Le logiciel SanDisk SecureAccess™ protège vos fichiers confidentiels avec un mot de passe personnel et un cryptage AES 128 bits automatique²
Son utilisation ne pourrait pas être plus facile : vous glissez-déposez simplement vos fichiers dans votre répertoire privé ou « coffre » et ils sont en sécurité
Disponible en versions 8 Go, 16 Go, 32 Go et 64 Go
These pendrivess contains a protection software which could bother puppy users. Format it !
Attachments
sandisk-cruzer-blade-switch-4-go-1.jpg
Don't loose it.
(14.37 KiB) Downloaded 198 times

User avatar
torm
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat 07 Mar 2015, 19:56

#30 Post by torm »

Time has moved on, looking at the first posts..
..while still using 512MB Kingston Alimta stick ( silver case ) to test
different half/dead PC-s, laptops to detect errors or for data recovery, etc.
There's literally a number of places this thing has not been stuffed into over the years.. :D
Has TahrPup605 with some extras and some free space..

Later manufactured 8GB Kingston.. did not last a month.
Used it then in DVB-S2 / DVB-T multimedia box for timer recording until it became "read only"..

SanDisk Cruzer Edge 8GB for data is ok (less issues with client Winz, sees it as HDD), maybe not for
booting Puppy from it.

User avatar
rufwoof
Posts: 3690
Joined: Mon 24 Feb 2014, 17:47

#31 Post by rufwoof »

Using a cheap unbranded ?? (Integral) 32GB flash stick as I write this.

Incredibly slow to write. OK read.

Deleted original partitions and repartitioned as a single ext2 ... installed grub4dos bootloader.

I have the main Debian filesystem.squashfs (like puppy.sfs) extracted to the / partition and a empty filesystem.squashfs, with the USB label set as usbpersitence ... so when booted

persistence persistence-read-only persistence-label=usbpersistence

its like a frugal install with no changes preserved, with everything in the save space (parition save 'file') and nothing in the equivalent of puppy.sfs. 1.6GB of used space (uncompressed filesystem, with libre, firefox ... etc. installed) Booted that way runs great, as good as HDD. That set up however also means it can be booted as though a full install i.e. for applying updates (including kernel upgrades) ... but booted that way is slow (as its writing to USB rather than storing all writes in ram). Just about bearable, a bit like the ol-days and comparable to perhaps being internet connected at a 9600 baud rate type pain (ok, usable, but not good). Fortunately updates are a thing you can just kick off and leave via a single command ... and then return later to reboot back into faster read-only mode again (normal usage).

slavvo67
Posts: 1610
Joined: Sat 13 Oct 2012, 02:07
Location: The other Mr. 305

#32 Post by slavvo67 »

Nice to see even the cheap USB's have some usability.

Just a quick note about my favorite, PNY... they seem to be increasing in price. I try to get the 64gb 3.0 at around the $20 U.S. price point. Every once in a while you can catch them near that price... that's when I stock up :lol:

They say there's a newer version than the one I usually buy on the link below but if the newer version means paying $10 to $20 more (50% to 100% increase), I'll just stick with what works good.

https://www.amazon.com/PNY-Turbo-64GB-F ... gb+3.0+usb

User avatar
rufwoof
Posts: 3690
Joined: Mon 24 Feb 2014, 17:47

#33 Post by rufwoof »

£10 (around US$7.50) for that 32GB ... and that's USB2. I don't use USB's that much and haven't even upgraded the PC's ports to having any USB3 yet, so I'm not really up on prices. Just a spontaneous purchase whilst in a shopping queue of a general store, one of those pick up and drop in the basket whilst you're waiting purchases.

Nice idea of stocking up when prices are lower. Similar to my general add-low/reduce-high investment strategy :)

slavvo67
Posts: 1610
Joined: Sat 13 Oct 2012, 02:07
Location: The other Mr. 305

#34 Post by slavvo67 »

Just a quick FYI, USB 3.0 sticks still work faster than regular 2.0 sticks EVEN IN 2.0 USB PORTS!!! Really interesting so while you may not get the full 3.0 speed, it's still faster than the normal 2.0 stick.
Similar to my general add-low/reduce-high investment strategy.
- We call that dollar-cost averaging or averaging down. :wink: [/quote]

User avatar
tallboy
Posts: 1760
Joined: Tue 21 Sep 2010, 21:56
Location: Drøbak, Norway

#35 Post by tallboy »

slavvo67, I agree on PNY quality. I have one of their first 1Gb sticks, it has been with me for many years now, still used for temporary backup, never failed. The same for an old TDK 8Gb, it is the most visible of them, flashing led in a pale blue cover. I have 2 SanDisk Cruzer Edge 32Gb that I have been using for temporary backup for the last 3 years, and they seem stable enough. I also have 2 mini SanDisk 8Gb for music only, they are still OK. The one I most regret buying, is a SanDisk Ultra 16Gb, but not for bad performance. It is just too wide for allowing 2 USB-anything mounted side-by-side in a standard 4 port USB dock, simply stupid design!
My very first 128Mb stick in the photo below, along with the latest SanDisk 8Gb mini. The 128Mb is still used for backup, but I don't remember the make.

tallboy
Attachments
cd-and-flash.jpg
(53.79 KiB) Downloaded 349 times
True freedom is a live Puppy on a multisession CD/DVD.

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#36 Post by Mike Walsh »

Tallboy, I agree with you about the 'nano' design SanDisk drives.....and with slavvo67 about the USB 3.0s working faster, even in a USB 2.0 port.

I have a pair of SanDisk Ultra Fits in 32 GB, another four in 64 GB, and recently purchased a pair of 128 GB models. I use these latter two as 'external storage' in ye ancient Dell lappie (an original Inspiron 1100 from 2002). I upped the original 20 GB Hitachi hard drive to a 32 GB KingSpec IDE/PATA SSD, then to a 64 GB model.....currently triple-booting Slacko 560, Xenialpup 7081, and rg66's X-Slacko 232 (based on 570). The original Celeron was upgraded to a 2.6 GHz P4.

The pair of Ultra Fits occupy the rear two USB 2.0 ports. Don't need 'em for anything else, since everything else I pull across the network from the big Compaq PC in my bedroom. So from an original 18.5 GB (usable), I now have 320 GB on the old girl. The only snag with the Ultra Fits is that they do seem to run pretty hot.....but they haven't given any problems yet.

Not bad for what most folk call an old brick..!

----------------------------------------------------------

BTW, about the Transcend drives that were getting high praise earlier in the thread? Hardly surprising, since Transcend (until fairly recently) produced gear exclusively for the industrial sector.....where high reliability, along with bullet-proof build-quality, are almost a prerequisite if you want your product to sell.

There's some very demanding customers out there in industry...


Mike. :wink:

Pelo

Transcend is cheap and perfect,

#37 Post by Pelo »

Transcend is cheap and perfect, regarding to physical size, to stick labels. Cruzer is small, and expensive enough. But quality is Ok.
But they are many. Only a list of bad trade Marks would be enough.
I don't buy with rétractable system, this one breaks fast.
Attachments
410UXwRDHCL._SX100_.jpg.png
bad bad
(29.39 KiB) Downloaded 304 times
BOX.jpg
Santa-Claus offered me a Brother machine, last Christmas, for easy labels (... and expensive)
(35.19 KiB) Downloaded 312 times

User avatar
BarryK
Puppy Master
Posts: 9392
Joined: Mon 09 May 2005, 09:23
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

#38 Post by BarryK »

Hi guys,
I have just posted a comparison of Emtec and Lexar flash sticks that I purchased from BigW here in Australia.

I bought the Emtec 16GB USB2 drives, a pack of three, for AU$20, yesterday, but when I observed how slow it was, decided to do a simple write test, comparing with a Lexar 8GB USB2 stick also purchased from BigW.

Emtec: 1.6MB/s
Lexar: 5.3MB/s

This is how I tested:
http://barryk.org/news/?viewDetailed=00629

It is a simple technique, that bypasses caching.
[url]https://bkhome.org/news/[/url]

User avatar
Billtoo
Posts: 3720
Joined: Tue 07 Apr 2009, 13:47
Location: Ontario Canada

USB Flash Drive Quality

#39 Post by Billtoo »

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
#

User avatar
Moat
Posts: 955
Joined: Tue 16 Jul 2013, 06:04
Location: Mid-mitten

#40 Post by Moat »

I've no idea about comparative speeds (never had a reason to test, as they subjectively seem just fine in relation to numerous others I've used) - but I love the Sandisk Cruzer Fits! My favorites, by far. So small you can just leave 'em in the port and forget about it - perfect for Puppies. I've a few 8GB's that I've had for years - re-formatted many times and ran numerous Pups on... still performing just as new, AFAICT.

The fact that the newer Ultra USB 3.0 versions exist in a 128GB size is simply mind blowing! :shock: If only I had a 3.0-ported computer...

Bob

Post Reply