Jump to content
Corsair Community

16GB GT speeds (again)


git

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

I just received my brand spanking new 16GB GT Voyager.

 

After getting it out of the packet (eventually - lot of packaging for such a little drive), went straight to the USB slot to test.

On following system - Abit NF8 mobo (Nforce 3)/1.5GB 3200DDR/Athlon64 3400+ XP SP2

 

On HD Bench:

100 and 200MB files give roughly the same - 25MB/s Read - 8.5MB/s Write

1 and 2MB files give the disappointing - 8MB/s Read - 1.5MB/s Write.

 

On HD Tune:

Min 15MB/s - Max 21MB/s - Average 20.5MB/s - Access time=1.0ms - Burst rate 21MB/s - CPU usage 10.6%

 

Roadkil's Disk speed:

25MB/s read - 12MB/s write - access time=0.6ms

 

 

This stick was tested using the case-mobo direct USB socket and also using a hub/pci USB slot. Surprisingly the results were all very similar (within 5%).

 

Well Ramguy, do you consider this to be within spec?

In real life, I am getting 10MB/s write whilst writing gigs of little files to the drive. That is a lot faster than I am used to but not as fast as I was expecting to get according to a lot of your posts quoting 16MB/s.

 

For speed/capacity/padding on the drive, this is a great little drive, but Corsair's figures of 31r/16w are probably not very realistic - I haven't seen anyone on the forum say they achieved those speeds. So, have I got a 'dud'? Or is everyone getting a 'dud'?

I say 'dud' cos they are nice drives, but if the genuine spec is really what I am getting, then say so.

If the genuine spec is 31/16, then I have a dud.

 

Out of interest, to anyone who has had a replacement drive, did you get any speed increase?

I presume your offer of a replacement is open to people in the UK also?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get about 15MB/s write with FAT32 in HDBench, but when I copy a large file I only get about 8MB/s and when I copy mp3 I can be happy, if I get about 3-4MB/s so I am a bit disappointed for a 80 Euro stick. I like the cool rubber stick, the band with "Corsair FlashVoyager GT" and the USB extension, but the performance is really poor.

 

P.S.: This was testet on XP SP2, so you cant blame Vista because then it would be clear:D:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been doing some speed testing on my Survivior gt 8gb recently and was just wondering if the results fall into the proper range for the drive. I used the command line to format the drive like RG has suggested and there is currently no data on the drive. Computer I am testing it on is running Vista SP1, Core 2 Duo, 4gb Ram etc..

 

I attached a snapshot of the resuts using HD Bench. Any input is greatly appreciated.

127183761_FlashStats.JPG.f37efba9f7582ffc269a01a0c8b4af83.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On HD Bench:

100 and 200MB files give roughly the same - 25MB/s Read - 8.5MB/s Write

1 and 2MB files give the disappointing - 8MB/s Read - 1.5MB/s Write.

 

On HD Tune:

Min 15MB/s - Max 21MB/s - Average 20.5MB/s - Access time=1.0ms - Burst rate 21MB/s - CPU usage 10.6%

 

Roadkil's Disk speed:

25MB/s read - 12MB/s write - access time=0.6ms

 

 

The above were the original speeds on a brand new Voyager 16GB GT formatted in the factory - I think NTFS.

 

Now for the updated FAT32 speeds.

HDBench:

for 100MB and 200MB file:

Read=25MB/s Write=8.5MB/s

 

for 1MB:

Read=22.5MB/s Write=1.5MB/s

 

for 2MB:

Read=24MB/s Write=3.5MB/s

 

 

HDTune:

Min-15.5 Max-21.2 Average-20.2 Access Time-1.0ms Burst Rate-20.9 CPU-34.1% *this isn't too important as the utility can't figure out what is being processed by the cpu

 

Roadkil's Disk speed:

24.5MB/s read - 11.5MB/s write - Access time=0.68ms

 

In real life - i got 8.5MB/s transferring a 350MB file transferring to the Voyager and transferring many 1MB files got approx 8.5MB/s write to the Voyager.

 

I didn't format the drive before doing the first round of testing so it was on factory default - the only thing that was done was truecrypt was deleted.

 

Waddyathink?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please use the software I posted the link for.

 

Hi Ramguy,

 

That was the first set of results - HDBench.

I also tried 2 other yoots to compare - before and after formatting in FAT32.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ramguy,

 

Is my 16GB GT Voyager running at spec, or below spec?

All the results are posted above.

 

Please let me know one way or the other, as, if it is under spec, then I would like a replacement.

 

All the best.

 

Git

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Corsair Employees

Please try to format the drive from a command prompt with this syntax:

Format (X:) /FS:FAT32 /U (X=the drive letter assigned to the Flash Voyager)

Then please try the HDBENCH v3.40 Beta 6to test the performance and let me know the results and on what O.S. you used. I would suggest WinXP SP2 or WinVista SP1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I just received my brand spanking new 16GB GT Voyager.

 

After getting it out of the packet (eventually - lot of packaging for such a little drive), went straight to the USB slot to test.

On following system - Abit NF8 mobo (Nforce 3)/1.5GB 3200DDR/Athlon64 3400+ XP SP2

 

On HD Bench:

100 and 200MB files give roughly the same - 25MB/s Read - 8.5MB/s Write

1 and 2MB files give the disappointing - 8MB/s Read - 1.5MB/s Write.

 

That was the original post.

 

It was HDbench 3.4 beta 6.

After a few runs, and using the stick, I run HDBench again.

It is formatted FAT32 as I have posted before.

Here are the results from todays test:

1MB file:

Read=22.5MB/s Write=3.5MB/s RNDRead=22.5MB/s RNDwrite=0.5MB/s

 

2MB file:

Read=23.5MB/s Write=3.5MB/s RNDRead=23MB/s RNDwrite=1MB/s

 

10MB file:

Read=24.5MB/s Write=6.5MB/s RNDRead=24MB/s RNDwrite=2MB/s

 

50MB file:

Read=25.5MB/s Write=10.5MB/s RNDRead=20.5MB/s RNDwrite=3MB/s

 

100MB file:

Read=25MB/s Write=13MB/s RNDRead=22.5MB/s RNDwrite=3.5MB/s

 

200MB file:

Read=25MB/s Write=13.5MB/s RNDRead=23MB/s RNDwrite=3.5MB/s

 

500MB file:

Read=25MB/s Write=9MB/s RNDRead=24MB/s RNDwrite=2.5MB/s

 

 

It does seem to have 'warmed up' a little in terms of speed. I can't see how it will get any faster, and in real time usage now, am getting about 10MB/s write speeds.

Its got great access speed - as soon as it is plugged in it is ready to go.

All in all a great little drive, as I have said before, but, now we need a little honesty here - has anyone ever got speeds of 31r/16w MB/s?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Corsair Employees

According to what you posted:

100MB file:

Read=25MB/s Write=13MB/s RNDRead=22.5MB/s RNDwrite=3.5MB/s

It is a bit slow ut with in spec and might be the system I would check in on another system and you will need to format it on that system before you run the test and you only need to run the 100 MB test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah,

This stick is probably not the fastest on the market.

Good - maybe in the top 5 for speed,

top 3 for robustness,

top 3 for value,

but not, definitely not, the fastest which it seems to be marketed at.

 

Could this be a reason why the 8GB GT has stopped production?

So that the 16GB GT could be Corsair's speediest thumbdrive?

 

I just transferred 5.5GB of files of all sizes (on average 0.5-1MB). Took almost exactly 2 hours.

Works out at less than 1MB/s Write.

I think the Voyager sort of gets bored after a couple of minutes, then just plods.

 

Then again, a single transfer of a 112MB file took 15 seconds which is about 7.5MB/s Write.

 

 

Hmmmmm

Not really all that besotted with Corsair after all this.

But, then again, if the published specs (yeah, I know Corsair don't publish specs, but Ramguy does) for the 16GB GT Voyager were were, say, 28read/14Write, I don't think I'd have been pissed off at all.

 

Has anyone got specs for the 32GB Voyager yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah,

This stick is probably not the fastest on the market.

Good - maybe in the top 5 for speed,

top 3 for robustness,

top 3 for value,

but not, definitely not, the fastest which it seems to be marketed at.

 

What are the 4 faster 16GB thumb drives?

 

I don't care that there are 4 or 8gb thumb drives that are faster because those have different sizes. The statement would then be like saying a truck is slow because sports cars are faster.

 

What are the fastest 16GB thumb drives? If you cannot or will not answer that then your statements are meaningless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't much like the cut of your gib young man.

40 lashes

 

Possibly this one, if they haven't slightly exaggerated their numbers, (as well).

 

Transcend Jetflash 2A USB Pen Drive

16GB (53x speed)

30 MByte/s. read rate (maximum).

25 MByte/s. write rate (maximum).

 

Pretec have also introduced a 16GB drive that use the Samsung MLC chips (from what I understand) and offer 25MB/s (Probably read).

 

Buslink also have a 16GB - 20r/15w according to manufacturer.

 

Also, if you read what I said, I didn't specify what sizes!

And if i could be arsed to do another 20 minutes research, there are probably another 1,2 or 3 16GB drives that are comparable, or faster.

Ok, scratch what I said.

Corsair 16GB GT drive is almost definitely in the top 5 for speed for 16GB. But that doesn't take away the fact that Corsair claim to have the fastest drives on the market at the moment in the GT range.

 

 

According to manufacturers' specs, the Transcend is a lot faster than Corsair's specs.

What you want to believe is up to you, but I don't believe that they are going to be any less bull-sh*tty with their figures than any others manufacturers.

 

Oh, and by the way, trucks are slow.

Sports cars are faster.

Trucks are faster than pedestrians.

Clever fella

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Corsair Employees

I don't know where you are getting your information but this is from Their web site for the Transcend Jetflash 2A Flash Drive

Read up to 25 MByte/sec, Write up to 20 MByte/sec (8GB~16GB))

 

And our drive should be a higher read with a bit slower write but I suspect they will be close to the same performance in a real test. Strangly I could not find any reviews of that product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No,

I couldn't find any reviews of the Transcend either.

 

But then it again, it wasn't till about 2 weeks ago that I found any reviews of the 16GB GT Voyager.

 

Let me get this straight. While saying that you think manufacturers inflate their numbers, you are comparing your actual IK to the CLAIMED numbers for other drives when in fact, you never actually performed the comparisons. Forgive me if I am mistaken but it appears that you are making comparisons without actually comparing.

 

You are demanding precision and, it appears to me, that you are not providing it.

 

WHAT HAVE YOU TESTED OTHER THAN CORASIR? Not, what have you read, but what have you tested? Did you run the same experiment on each of the 4 drives you compare to? What was the experiment? Are all the drives of the same size? When you make statements of inferiority, are you comparing like to like?

 

I don't think you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me get this straight. While saying that you think manufacturers inflate their numbers, you are comparing your actual IK to the CLAIMED numbers for other drives when in fact, you never actually performed the comparisons. Forgive me if I am mistaken but it appears that you are making comparisons without actually comparing.

 

You are demanding precision and, it appears to me, that you are not providing it.

 

WHAT HAVE YOU TESTED OTHER THAN CORASIR? Not, what have you read, but what have you tested? Did you run the same experiment on each of the 4 drives you compare to? What was the experiment? Are all the drives of the same size? When you make statements of inferiority, are you comparing like to like?

 

I don't think you are.

 

I am comparing my speeds, with Ramguy's speeds and Transcend's speeds.

Of which, I might add, my speeds are nothing like the other two.

 

Geoffrey, you are doing well. Keep up the good work.

Stop sweating.

Do you work for Corsair by any chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am comparing my speeds, with Ramguy's speeds and Transcend's speeds.

Of which, I might add, my speeds are nothing like the other two.

 

Geoffrey, you are doing well. Keep up the good work.

Stop sweating.

Do you work for Corsair by any chance?

 

I do not work for Corsair, own stock in them or work for a company that sells their products. I do not profit in any way whatever from Corsairs success nor do I stand anything to lose from their failure. I simply think you are being a jerk. It's interesting that you feel free to challenge everyone else but when someone calls you on your nonsense, you accuse them of working for Corsair.

 

You are mixing up your speeds from a variety of experiments, some of which are misbegotten, claims made by other manufacturers which you have not verified at all and your confabulating of things Ramguy has said. You are then making very harsh statements which none of your confabulations justify.

 

I took a look at Transcends claims and they are "Max" speeds. Transcends statements could be considered true in a legalistic sense if just one section of their drive performs as claimed but the rest is far less. I think that what they are saying is therefore misleading because they don't post average, nominal or low end speeds at all. They also don't have a nice forum for you to sling your pseudo studies on. I wonder why they are less open?

 

So, please consider carefully your statements about the performance of the 16GBGT in relation to other 16gb drives. I don't think you can back up your claims in fair comparisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not work for Corsair, own stock in them or work for a company that sells their products. I do not profit in any way whatever from Corsairs success nor do I stand anything to lose from their failure. I simply think you are being a jerk. It's interesting that you feel free to challenge everyone else but when someone calls you on your nonsense, you accuse them of working for Corsair.

 

You are mixing up your speeds from a variety of experiments, some of which are misbegotten, claims made by other manufacturers which you have not verified at all and your confabulating of things Ramguy has said. You are then making very harsh statements which none of your confabulations justify.

 

I took a look at Transcends claims and they are "Max" speeds. Transcends statements could be considered true in a legalistic sense if just one section of their drive performs as claimed but the rest is far less. I think that what they are saying is therefore misleading because they don't post average, nominal or low end speeds at all. They also don't have a nice forum for you to sling your pseudo studies on. I wonder why they are less open?

 

So, please consider carefully your statements about the performance of the 16GBGT in relation to other 16gb drives. I don't think you can back up your claims in fair comparisions.

 

 

Just going by what I have seen.

What about you?

What speeds do you get with your 16gb GT?

And anyway, why would I 'accuse' someone of working for Corsair?

Just asking - for information. That is what this forum is for. For some reason, I get the idea that you don't like me. Boohoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...