Transend CF faster than Kingston! at DVinfo.net

Laurence Kingston · February 27th, 2008, 09:19 AM

I bought three CF chips to try with my new Z7: two Kingston Memory and one Transcend. They were all 16GB and rated at 133x speed. The Kingston Memory cards were more expensive and I was pretty sure they would work, but I couldn't resist trying the Transcend 16GB card because it was so cheap and if by chance it did work, it was only $79.

Strangely, I have been having problems with dropped frames on the Kingston CF but not the Transcend (at least not yet). This seemed strange so I downloaded a utility that can test memory card read and write speed and ran the test on both the Kingston and Transcend CF.

To my surprise, the Transcend outperforms the Kingston! I'll post screenshots of the results as soon as I figure out how to post pictures here.

Laurence Kingston · February 27th, 2008, 09:23 AM

The first test is the Transcend. The second is the Kingston.

Chris Hurd · February 27th, 2008, 09:24 AM

Laurence, look for a "Manage Attachments" button in the Additional Options box below the text area input field when making a post. That should allow you to upload images.

John M. Graham · February 27th, 2008, 09:33 AM

Thanks for the info Laurence! I don't use CF cards for video, but I'm definitely going to buy this for my Rebel XTi! What an amazing price!

Laurence Kingston · February 27th, 2008, 09:36 AM

Here is where you can download the test:

http://www.flashmemorytoolkit.com/

You can run the speed test without registering the program.

I would love to see the results for the 32GB Transcend card. Could anyone with this card do it?

Marshall Levy · February 27th, 2008, 02:46 PM

I'm doing a write-up of several cards, including Sandisk, Kingston, Transcend, A-Data, and Lexar. It's quite interesting thus far, but I, too have been surprised by Transcend being faster in many cases than a few others.

I am using a benchmark routine as well as other methods and am hoping to be finished by the weekend - finally.

Laurence Kingston · February 27th, 2008, 04:03 PM

That is awesome Marshall. Please let us know what you find.

David Heath · February 27th, 2008, 05:38 PM

The difficulty I've found with this sort of testing is knowing whether what is being measured is the speed of the card......... or the reader, port, computer, drive being written to or a combination of the lot!! Any ideas how to overcome this? Certainly people seem to be finding widely differing transfer times off SxS cards depending whether they are put directly into a laptop, or used with USB or Firewire readers.

Laurence Kingston · February 27th, 2008, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Heath

The difficulty I've found with this sort of testing is knowing whether what is being measured is the speed of the card......... or the reader, port, computer, drive being written to or a combination of the lot!! Any ideas how to overcome this? Certainly people seem to be finding widely differing transfer times off SxS cards depending whether they are put directly into a laptop, or used with USB or Firewire readers.

Well remember that the Compact Flash unit on the Z7 and 270 is fed via firewire. If the card is any faster than the firewire link to the camera, that exta speed really doesn't matter. Well maybe it would transfer files a little quicker to the hard drive in the right reader, but it would make no difference whatsoever in how well the footage was captured. Also remember, that firewire can actually handle several streams of HDV footage at once, so write speed should only matter if it's below a certain point.

Chad Dyle · February 28th, 2008, 08:42 AM

I just ran the program on my 32GB Transcend card. I ran the test twice to see if there was any kind of variance.

Marshall Levy · February 28th, 2008, 09:04 AM

I'm doing as unbiased of testing as I can, based on the speed of the cards with regards to the actual card itself and not relying on a computer, reader, etc. It tends to be a bit more controlled that way.

There are numerous variants when using computers, readers, and so forth as the speed variations and throughputs are so inconsistent.

I'll report back over the weekend for sure.

mll

Laurence Kingston · February 28th, 2008, 09:27 AM

Thanks Chad. Those numbers are even better than the ones I got with my 16GB card. Now I feel safe enough to buy this card. Especially considering the excellent Tapeworks Texas price, the Transcend 32GB CF is definitely the card to get for this camcorder.

By the way, video files are always large, so the fastest numbers on the chart: the 5 MB ones are the ones that most closely rate to what one would expect in using this card with a Z7 or 270.

Clemens Fischer · March 16th, 2008, 08:50 AM

thank you very much for that comprehensive test!! great to read that not only the expensive stuff is the best.

by the way.. heard last week, that sandisk is going to launch a 16 GB extreme IV compact flash card.

clemens from vienna.

Marshall Levy · March 16th, 2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clemens Fischer

thank you very much for that comprehensive test!! great to read that not only the expensive stuff is the best.

by the way.. heard last week, that sandisk is going to launch a 16 GB extreme IV compact flash card.

clemens from vienna.

Yeah, I tried getting a hold of one, but that was an impossible task. Same with the Sony's at that time, too.

Arnaud Keil · March 26th, 2008, 06:40 PM

All the transfer rates that I read on that thread are much too slow.
I use two Sandisk 16Go 133X with my Z7, and it take 17 minutes to transfer the full card on my computer, aproximatively 1Go/mn, 16Mo/s... simply using a Sandisk Extreme USB 2.0 reader.

February 27th, 2008, 09:19 AM	#1
Laurence Kingston Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Clermont, FL. Posts: 941	Transend CF faster than Kingston! I bought three CF chips to try with my new Z7: two Kingston Memory and one Transcend. They were all 16GB and rated at 133x speed. The Kingston Memory cards were more expensive and I was pretty sure they would work, but I couldn't resist trying the Transcend 16GB card because it was so cheap and if by chance it did work, it was only $79. Strangely, I have been having problems with dropped frames on the Kingston CF but not the Transcend (at least not yet). This seemed strange so I downloaded a utility that can test memory card read and write speed and ran the test on both the Kingston and Transcend CF. To my surprise, the Transcend outperforms the Kingston! I'll post screenshots of the results as soon as I figure out how to post pictures here.

February 27th, 2008, 09:23 AM	#2
Laurence Kingston Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Clermont, FL. Posts: 941	The first test is the Transcend. The second is the Kingston. Attached Thumbnails

February 27th, 2008, 09:24 AM	#3
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Laurence, look for a "Manage Attachments" button in the Additional Options box below the text area input field when making a post. That should allow you to upload images. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

February 28th, 2008, 08:42 AM	#10
Chad Dyle Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 410	I just ran the program on my 32GB Transcend card. I ran the test twice to see if there was any kind of variance. Attached Thumbnails __________________ www.chaddyle.com www.chaddyleproductions.com

February 27th, 2008, 09:33 AM	#4
John M. Graham Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 83	Thanks for the info Laurence! I don't use CF cards for video, but I'm definitely going to buy this for my Rebel XTi! What an amazing price!

February 27th, 2008, 09:36 AM	#5
Laurence Kingston Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Clermont, FL. Posts: 941	Here is where you can download the test: http://www.flashmemorytoolkit.com/ You can run the speed test without registering the program. I would love to see the results for the 32GB Transcend card. Could anyone with this card do it?

February 27th, 2008, 02:46 PM	#6
Marshall Levy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Maryland Posts: 304	I'm doing a write-up of several cards, including Sandisk, Kingston, Transcend, A-Data, and Lexar. It's quite interesting thus far, but I, too have been surprised by Transcend being faster in many cases than a few others. I am using a benchmark routine as well as other methods and am hoping to be finished by the weekend - finally.

February 27th, 2008, 04:03 PM	#7
Laurence Kingston Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Clermont, FL. Posts: 941	That is awesome Marshall. Please let us know what you find.

February 27th, 2008, 05:38 PM	#8
David Heath Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,699	The difficulty I've found with this sort of testing is knowing whether what is being measured is the speed of the card......... or the reader, port, computer, drive being written to or a combination of the lot!! Any ideas how to overcome this? Certainly people seem to be finding widely differing transfer times off SxS cards depending whether they are put directly into a laptop, or used with USB or Firewire readers.

February 28th, 2008, 09:04 AM	#11
Marshall Levy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Maryland Posts: 304	I'm doing as unbiased of testing as I can, based on the speed of the cards with regards to the actual card itself and not relying on a computer, reader, etc. It tends to be a bit more controlled that way. There are numerous variants when using computers, readers, and so forth as the speed variations and throughputs are so inconsistent. I'll report back over the weekend for sure. mll

February 28th, 2008, 09:27 AM	#12
Laurence Kingston Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Clermont, FL. Posts: 941	Thanks Chad. Those numbers are even better than the ones I got with my 16GB card. Now I feel safe enough to buy this card. Especially considering the excellent Tapeworks Texas price, the Transcend 32GB CF is definitely the card to get for this camcorder. By the way, video files are always large, so the fastest numbers on the chart: the 5 MB ones are the ones that most closely rate to what one would expect in using this card with a Z7 or 270.

March 16th, 2008, 08:50 AM	#13
Clemens Fischer New Boot Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Vienna Posts: 24	thank you very much for that comprehensive test!! great to read that not only the expensive stuff is the best. by the way.. heard last week, that sandisk is going to launch a 16 GB extreme IV compact flash card. clemens from vienna.

March 26th, 2008, 06:40 PM	#15
Arnaud Keil New Boot Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Paris, France Posts: 23	All the transfer rates that I read on that thread are much too slow. I use two Sandisk 16Go 133X with my Z7, and it take 17 minutes to transfer the full card on my computer, aproximatively 1Go/mn, 16Mo/s... simply using a Sandisk Extreme USB 2.0 reader.