7/24 How can it be that writing to a 1GB microdrive is slower than writing
to 1GB of compact flash ram?
\_ why would you think that a spinning platter would be faster than
solid state? -tom
\_ because you had a lot of memory keys that worked at USB speed,
and it wasn't unreasonable to assume that the flash memory
itself was about as fast as the USB 1.1 interface speed. -!op
\_ aren't there slow elements in a microdrive? Like say MOVING PARTS?
\_ maybe spin up, disk seek time? Isn't flash pretty fast?
\_ What's your interface? USB 1.1, 2.0, or FireWire? Even if it's
one of the last two, you have to remember it wasn't too long ago
you had 4 GB full-size hard drives with < 5 MB/s transfer.
I can imagine flash memory can be 5 MB/s or faster. I just
looked it up, and an IBM microdrive has a 5.6 MB/s media transfer
rate.
\_ Perhaps within a camera? My Canon S45 takes both compact flash
& microdrives
\_ I did another search, and one page has a microdrive using
a CompactFlash II interface. The drive has a max sustained
transfer rate of 4.2 MB/s, whereas the interface can go
up to 13.3 MB/s. So sure, you can have flash memory faster
than the microdrive.
\_ Dunno why you'd want microdrive in a camera anyway.
Compact Flash costs less and has no moving parts
\_ because there was a time when microdrives
were much larger than compactflash
\- i use microdrives and 256, 512 CFs. is the
data xfer rate really a big deal? i rarely
am shooting continuous mode ... and suppose
it is epislon faster on playback but that sucks
up a lot of batt power. the only case where i
would for sure prefer one over the other is if
you are going to altitude. then pick cf. --psb
\_ There is no reason to use a microdrive these
days. They are slower, use more power and
are significantly less reliable than CF. -tom
\- dont be an ass tom. if you have one, you
might as well use it. perhaps there isnt
much reason to buy one today but as usual
you overstate things based on your own
limited experience --psb |
http://csua.com/feed/