Imagine if you were in a real-life role similar to Daniel Zavitz in the film Enemy of the State. You’re locked in your apartment when you realize you have to transfer a huge video file quickly before leaving. Bad guys will be busting your door down any second. If your options were based on modern USB 3.0 solutions, which drive would you grab?
By now, everyone who follows technology knows the performance advantages of USB 3.0. Early USB 3.0 devices have already reached five times the performance level of the fastest previous-generation parts, and the newer standard leaves room for that performance gain to double. Yet, fitting the extra technology into ultra-portable form factors has been a huge challenge for drive manufacturers, and our roundup requests received mixed responses from the many companies that announced products last winter.
It turns out that most of those announcements were purely paper launches, as many of the devices still haven't seen the light of day. That’s a shame, because we were hoping our first large roundup would include at least a half-dozen thumb drives. Expanding today’s article to include pocket-sized 2.5”-based drives would have allowed many more companies to participate, though most of those solutions use far more fragile mechanical hard drives than the flash we have on the bench.
We finally decided that the only fair way to compare the performance of different-sized drives would be to limit this review to flash-based devices and then pick a capacity that everyone could match.
The upper capacity limit for key-sized drives appears to be 128 GB, while the performance of larger units typically falls off below that capacity level. The 128 GB capacity thus appeared to be the perfect size at which to compare today’s pocketable flash-based storage solutions, and three out of four manufacturers in today’s roundup agreed to send the appropriate drive model. The fourth manufacturer informed us that its 128 GB unit was out of stock and, knowing that this would be a portability-versus-performance article, still offered its larger-format 160 GB unit as its closest-matching product. We agreed to test it.
Two of the companies that had originally agreed to send 128 GB models instead sent 64 GB and 32 GB parts; that's why you won't find matched capacities across the products we compare today. We still include these parts to complete the roundup, and it’s obvious that those two companies feel their smaller parts are fast enough to run with the big boys. Putting aside our best-laid plans, we forged ahead to determine which of these drive best fits the portability needs of on-the-move users.
Chaintech Apogee Astro A101
The world of portable storage applauded when Walton Chaintech announced the “world’s smallest USB 3.0 flash drive” last winter, but finding one hasn’t been so easy. Unlike the “paper launch” products of last winter, Chaintech has actually produced a few of these, has maintained its product page, and is continuing its efforts to ramp up full-scale production. As we await retail availability, today’s test can be viewed as a preview of the final product.
Our request for a 128 GB model was met with a 64 GB part that facilitates a more rudimentary performance evaluation. We know that some competing models perform better at higher capacities due to increased parallelism in design, but the compact size of this particular model lends itself to the use of higher density—rather than a larger quantity—in the selection of appropriate ICs. Planned capacities include 128 GB, 64 GB, and 32 GB.
OCZ Enyo 128 GB
A company that advertises higher transfer speeds for its two highest-capacity models, in fitting with the idea of increased parallelism mentioned above, OCZ was more than happy to send its Enyo with a 128 GB capacity, as we requested.
Available in capacities up to 256 GB, the Enyo’s 4.7” length is approximately twice that of traditional thumb drives, while its 2.2” width approximates that of a credit card.
Pocketability is emphasized by the design’s scant 0.4” thickness, though the added cable might require a second pocket. The USB 3.0 “Micro-B” connector is also compatible with the narrower “Micro-B” connector of the previous generation, easing access to data if the correct cable is lost.
The Enyo package includes the drive, cable, information pamphlet, and decorative sticker.
Super Talent’s most-compact USB 3.0 flash drive isn’t available at capacities larger than the 32 GB sample we received, and it might have otherwise gone overlooked if it weren't for the fact that several of its competitors were also unable to provide samples at the requested 128 GB capacity.
The USB 3.0 Express Drive has a couple advantages over its higher-capacity competitors in pocketability, having the smallest format and fitting a system without the need for a cable.
However, an extension cable might have been handy, since this 1”-wide drive exceeds the port spacing of most motherboard connectors. That is to say, connecting it to a motherboard often requires unplugging the cables in adjacent connectors.
The USB 3.0 Express Drive is loaded with FNet TurboHDD software on a separate 6 MB partition that’s been configured to appear as a USB CD-ROM. Inserting the drive causes TurboHDD to run automatically in Windows, unless the OS is configured not to do so. We tested the USB 3.0 Express Drive in both normal mode and turbo mode.
SuperCrypt Pro
Available at capacities of up to 256 GB, Super Talent sent the 32 GB Pro version of its enormous SuperCrypt USB 3.0 device.
Based on the design of its famous RAIDDrive, additional controller hardware surely accounts for some of the drive’s bulk.
Criticism of the drive’s 3.8” x 1.4” x 0.6” dimensions might sound unfair given that it competes against larger pocket drives, but those parts are not supposed to be thumb drives. Super Talent puts its Type A plug on the body of this one and doesn’t include a short extension cable to move it out of the way of a PC’s nearby connectors.
The Pro version of Super Talent’s SuperCrypt provides 256-bit AES encryption, while the "non-pro" version is limited to 128-bit encryption. The user interface launches from a separate, protected 32 MB partition that reduces the drive's total capacity by the same amount. Super Talent also includes a link to its download page where one can find an enhanced driver to boost the drive’s transfer performance. Knowing that many buyers will use the drive across multiple systems, we tested the SuperCrypt USB 3.0 using both the default Windows driver and Super Talent’s enhanced driver.
Test System Configuration
CPU Intel Core i7-980X (3.33 GHz, 12 MB Shared L3 Cache)
Motherboard Gigabyte X58A-UD9 BIOS F3 (05/28/2010)
Intel X58 Express, LGA 1366
RAM Kingston KHX16000D3ULT1K3/6GX (6 GB)
DDR3-2000 at DDR3-1333 CAS 7-7-7-20
Graphics Diamond Radeon HD 5870 1 GB
850 MHz GPU, GDDR5-4800
OS Hard Drive Western Digital Velociraptor WD3000HLFS, 300 GB
10,000 RPM, SATA 3 Gb/s, 16 MB cache
USB 3.0 Adapter Integrated NEC D720200F1 PCIe 2.0
Two ports, onboard 5 Gb/s PCIe interface
Sound Integrated HD Audio
Network Integrated Gigabit Networking
Power Corsair CMPSU-850HX 850 W Modular
ATX12V v2.2, EPS12V, 80-Plus Gold
Software
OS Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Graphics AMD Catalyst 10.6
Chipset Intel INF 9.1.1.1020
Benchmarks
h2benchw 3.13 Sequential and Sustained Reads, Writes (KB/s)
Interface Bandwidth (MB/s), Access Times (ms)
IOMeter 2006.07.27 Database, File Server, Web Server, Workstation Patterns (IOPS)
The heavy-duty gaming hardware used for today’s test is coincidental, as it was already set up on the bench for an upcoming graphics test. It includes Gigabyte’s high-flying X58A-UD9 motherboard.
While the added graphics card slots of Gigabyte’s top motherboard weren’t important for today’s articles, the X58 chipset’s four leftover PCI Express (PCIe) 2.0 lanes were. One of these allows a direct 5 Gb/s pathway from the NEC D720200F1 USB 3.0 controller to the chipset, completely avoiding any of the bandwidth workarounds required by lesser chipsets.
PQI leans heavily on its internal X25-M SSD to produce the highest read rates of today’s drives. A constant data steam of around 180 MB/s is boosted by around 30 MB/s when the included TurboHDD software is installed.
Second-place in read rates, Super Talent’s SuperCrypt USB 3.0 drops to third place in writes. Its enhanced driver pushes this drive a little farther down the charts, so we’d probably leave it out.
It would be foolish to ignore write rates, since portable drive users typically write data on a regular basis. OCZ’s Enyo leads in writes by an even larger margin than its competitor does in reads, putting it slightly ahead.
Most builders wouldn’t think of using a USB drive to run programs, yet a few believe it’s a great way to enable the quick removal of data. That type of use puts emphasis on good sequential transfer rates and access times.
While hard drives typically use cache to boost repetitive transfers, the performance drop for these particular drives indicates that the data is most likely going directly to flash storage. Walton Chaintech edges out OCZ for the first time, while PQI’s S533-E finds its TurboHDD software to be a hindrance for the first time. Super Talent’s SuperCrypt drive continues to operate best using the Windows 7 mass-storage driver.
Slow write access times for the USB 3.0 Express Drive make the rest of our chart unreadable. Here’s what it would look like if we allowed the longer bars to run past the edge of the chart:
PQI was wise to use Intel’s X25-M in its S533-E, as its access times are far better than those of competitors. TurboHDD slows its access times slightly.
PCMark’s hard drive score is widely used to determine the performance nature of a drive, though individual tests are more revealing than its overall score. We include the overall score to allow comparison with other articles.
Super Talent probably wished we’d put a little more emphasis on this particular benchmark, as it shows the drives’ enhanced driver pushing it far into the lead.
Windows Startup performance favors the OCZ Enyo, with Super Talent trailing slightly.
OCZ drops to third place in Windows Defender, with Super Talent leading PQI.
For video editing, Super Talent’s SuperCrypt USB 3.0 also leads, with OCZ’s Enyo taking second place.
Setting up today’s portable flash drive comparison was no small task, with previously-announced products vanishing as quickly as we could request them. Expanding the article to include larger pocket-sized drives should have been an easy solution, but our attempt to use 128 GB as the crossover point to include both key- and pocket-sized drives was met by product shortages. Setting aside any comprehensive analysis of size versus performance, we still generated a lot of useful data.
OCZ’s Enyo took the overall performance lead by producing far-better write rates than the read rate-winning PQI S533-E. With a width of a credit card, the Enyo is also a little more portable, though the extra cable required by both the Enyo or the S533-E hinders portability.
Taking size down another notch is Super Talent’s third-place performing SuperCrypt USB 3.0. Available at capacities up to 256 GB, we have a hard time imaging anyone choosing a drive this big for a relatively-tiny 32 GB capacity. Plugging directly into a system’s ports, the question of whether or not it will require the cables of surrounding connectors to be removed is left to system owners to figure out, and that’s a question Super Talent could have answered by including a short extension cable. It’s still the only drive in today’s comparison to include hardware encryption, and this Pro version provides it at 256-bit AES. Thus, the SuperCrypt Pro USB 3.0 might be useful for anyone who needs to match good portability with excellent security.
Walton Chaintech’s Apogee Astro A101 took third place in overall performance after a few surprising wins, coming in at a size that we wish the hardware of its larger competitors matched. Chaintech also seems to understand that this business card-sized drive is far too wide to be placed on a port panel and fortunately includes a data cable for installing it away from a PC’s other connections. Yet, while this drive is easier to carry around than most of its competitors, it can no longer claim to be the world’s smallest USB 3.0 storage device.
The smallest drive of today’s comparison was a modest performer, with about two-thirds of the read performance of the larger units. However, Super Talent’s USB 3.0 Express Drive still significantly outpaces the limits of USB 2.0 and some users might even find it to be an acceptable replacement for their older keychain drives. Though the possibility of impinging on connectors to each side of the drive might be the biggest issue for most users, the imaginary Daniel Zavitz character mentioned in our introduction would probably never make it out of the apartment if he had to wait for his file to write at a lowly 39.5 MB/s.
Who wins? We’d probably select OCZ’s combination of performance and slim portability, though it’s still too large to replace our keychain drives. Until we do find a key-sized drive with a viable size and performance level, it looks like we might be pocketing the 128 GB Enyo, while finding a second pocket for its cable.
No comments:
Post a Comment