Nextbase want £63. Other makes are much cheaper. The most expensive I've found is Sandisk Extreme Pro 128GB microSDXC Memory Card at £27. Which shall I buy? Anyone with concrete evidence that the cheaper one works OK?
Bill
Depends what you want to use them for, but the XC is ideal for storing pictures directly from cameras and playing videos from as it a high speed card. I have several at 240GB and 128GB.
Never had any problems with Sandisk. There are reasons for price differences and it all depends on what your needs are.
This may help a bit:
The Sandisk Extreme stuff is usually OK. Their stuff with Ultra branding is "meh".
The device is probably TLC, and since your application is continuous write, I wouldn't expect to be "burning a hole" in it, with a dash cam. Even if it doesn't have wear leveling, the write pattern takes care of that.
If you want to benchmark it on arrival, on a computer, you'd need a USB3 to SDXC adapter, and a decent USB3 port on the computer. And "don't do stupid stuff" to test either. Copying a folder with 10,000 4KB files to the USB3 adapter with the SDXC plugged into it, is a poor test. The intended application (dashcam), does not have that characteristic, and a higher consistent rate should happen with the dashcam. The time to transfer a single large file would be more representative of the application.
I'd point you at a benchmark result, if I could find a competent one. I could only find one comment from someone, that the product did not measure up, but there was no evidence of what he did wrong. Sandisk has one other product, a UHS-II version, that manages around 100MB/sec on write, but that doesn't really tell us anything about the UHS-I version. Anandtech has a graph for the UHS-II version.
You would think benchmarking is easy, but as it happens, it's not. The first mistake people make with TLC, is immediately doing a read benchmark. TLC is "mushy" when you take it out of the package, and every sector needs error correction. This slows down the stick and makes it look bad. To bench on read, you need to *write* the device first. Then the sectors are fresh as a daisy, and ready for a read bench. Consequently, your first task then is the write bench, and the read bench comes second. I gave a Corsair Neutron poor marks, out of the box, until it occurred to me it was the "mushy TLC" problem. And writing a section of the device, and comparing uninitialized to initialized sections, made a world of difference. We can thank the geniuses who decided TLC was ready for consumers, for this nonsense. MLC flash based devices, no special precautions are needed. But nobody uses MLC for stuff like this. We're stuck with TLC (3 bits per cell) or QLC (4 bits per cell).
Paul
Like the ramsticks, some are faster than others I guess so if its high speed video the older design might not be very usable. Probably OK fo audio though.
Brian
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.