A method to get flash part number without root (only for UFS flash):
a) Install Terminal Emulator for Android from Google Play Store
b) Text 'cat /proc/scsi/scsi' to get flash part number (there is a space after 'cat').
-------------------------------
At April 30th, 2017: More than 200 people in Mainland China have tested their Mate 9 or Mate 9 Pro. And the results are amazing! Most of the phones are with UFS2.0 Flash memories from Samsung and Toshiba, a few UFS2.1 flash memories are from SK-Hynix. The percentage of UFS2.1 ( Huawei announced that all their Mate 9/Mate 9 Pro are using UFS2.1) flash is less than 15%!
Similar results (more than 20 people) came from Taiwan that all their flash memories are UFS2.0 from Samsung and Toshiba.
All the part numbers appeared are as follows:
Samsung UFS2.0:
KLUBG4G1CE-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 32GB about 460MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
KLUCG4J1CB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 64GB about 460MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
KLUDG8J1CB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 128GB about 460MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
KLUCG4J1EB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 64GB about 850MB/s
KLUDG8J1EB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 128GB about 850MB/s
KLUEG8U1EM-B0B1 TLC UFS2.0 256GB about 850MB/s
Toshiba US2.0:
THGBF7G8K4LBATR MLC UFS2.0 32GB about 610MB/s
THGBF7G9L4LBATR MLC UFS2.0 64GB about 610MB/s
THGBF7T0L8LBATA MLC UFS2.0 128GB about 610MB/s
SK-Hynix UFS2.1:
H28U62301AMR MLC UFS2.1 32GB about 550MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
H28U74301AMR MLC UFS2.1 64GB about 550MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
H28U88301AMR MLC UFS2.1 128GB about 550MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
Have you ever tested your phone? What is the result then?
More information about UFS2.0 and UFS2.1: https://forum.xda-developers.com/mate-9/help/guide-difference-ufs2-0-ufs2-1-flash-t3598967
Update:
The newest product is regularly faster. But you should notice that it is a comparison between the products by the same design and manufacturing company. Sumsung, Toshiba and SK-Hynix are using different flash cell structures, different controllers and different Technologies.
For Samsung, they annouced that their UFS2.1 is with a maximum speed of 880MB/s, UFS2.0 with 850MB/s (HS-G3 2-Lane) and 460MB/s (HS-G3 1-Lane).
For Toshiba, they annouced that their UFS2.1 is with a maximum speed of 850MB/s, UFS2.0 with 610MB/s.
For SK-Hynix, they annouced that their UFS2.1 is with a maximum speed of 800MB/s, UFS2.0 with 780MB/s. But there is kind of over advertisement (no one with SK-Hynix UFS2.1 ever reached 600MB/s).
Please tell us what is your part number. And this is useful for fighting for our rights!!!
Mate 9 model L09 - 64 GB
Toshiba - THGBF7G9L4LBATR MLC UFS2.0 64GB about 610MB/s
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Thank you for sharing this code with us. What would the code be to look up camera, screen and DDR part names I wonder?
Hi I'm on mate 9 in UK I got THGBF7G9L4LBATRC UFS 2.0 blantent lies by huawei I'll be ringing my carrier in the morning see what's going to be done cheers for the method
Swan Princess said:
Thank you for sharing this code with us. What would the code be to look up camera, screen and DDR part names I wonder?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is better to use APP 'AIDA64' for looking at the other informations. Please notice that not all the info are provided.
xlgssss said:
A method to get flash part number without root (only for UFS flash):
a) Install Terminal Emulator for Android from Google Play Store
b) Text 'cat /proc/scsi/scsi' to get flash part number (there is a space after 'cat').
-------------------------------
At April 30th, 2017: More than 200 people in Mainland China have tested their Mate 9 or Mare 9 Pro. And the results are amazing! Most of the phones are with UFS2.0 Flash memories from Samsung and Toshiba, a few UFS2.1 flash memories are from SK-Hynix. The percentage of UFS2.1 ( Huawei announced that all their Mate 9/Mate 9 Pro are using UFS2.1! ) flash is less than 10%!!! Horrible lies by Huawei!
Same results (more than 20 people) came from Taiwan that all their flash memories are UFS2.0 from Samsung and Toshiba.
All the appeared part numbers are as follows:
Samsung UFS2.0:
KLUBG4G1CE-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 32GB about 460MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
KLUCG4J1CB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 64GB about 460MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
KLUDG8J1CB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 128GB about 460MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
KLUCG4J1EB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 64GB about 850MB/s
KLUDG8J1EB-B0B1 MLC UFS2.0 128GB about 850MB/s
KLUEG8U1EM-B0B1 TLC UFS2.0 256GB about 850MB/s
Toshiba US2.0:
THGBF7G8K4LBATR MLC UFS2.0 32GB about 610MB/s
THGBF7G9L4LBATR MLC UFS2.0 64GB about 610MB/s
THGBF7T0L8LBATA MLC UFS2.0 128GB about 610MB/s
SK-Hynix UFS2.1:
H28U62301AMR MLC UFS2.1 32GB about 550MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
H28U74301AMR MLC UFS2.1 64GB about 550MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
H28U88301AMR MLC UFS2.1 128GB about 550MB/s (seems only in Mainland China)
Have you ever tested your phone? What is the result then?
More information about UFS2.0 and UFS2.1: https://forum.xda-developers.com/mate-9/help/guide-difference-ufs2-0-ufs2-1-flash-t3598967
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry but I don't buy your point from the first post where you said there is no speed improvement but went on to state in point C - iv Command priority: improves system performance, allowing the software to assign higher priority to more urgent tasks.
So the auxiliary functions are the differences between UFS2.0 and UFS2.1.
So my question stands if that is the case of no improvements at the beginning but later said there is improvement in system performance, what does it mean? How can you improve system performance? Writing faster, reduce more heat, reduce power consumption add pleasing font?
Cos I want to know which performance is improved. But in your other post, you replied that operating speed of urgent tasks), if that's the case, doesn't it translate to a faster system than UFS2.0 which doesn't have this feature?
Now to anyone that knows about the ubiquitous nature of memory, the benchmark has always been speed cos the capacity or durability is easier to negotiate. With this in mind, we know that the entire tech world uses speed as a selling point for upgrade from MicroSD to eMMC 4.5,5.0 & 5.1 to UFS2.0 and now UFS2.1.
First question is, Are you trying to tell us that the entire tech world has been wrong or deceiving us??? Cos everywhere states that among improvements from UFS2.0 to UFS2.1 is speed by over 30%
Second question is that In an ever-growing and improving technology and life where speed is the benchmark for anything we do in computing, that UFS2.1 was designed to improve over UFS2.0 by also increasing speeds - which is a well known fact. Are you sure that speed is not a discrimination between UFS2.0 and UFS2.1???
Lastly, you said UFS2.1 flash memories are regularly faster only because they are newest product and with better integrated controllers and flash cell technologies.
So if I understand the above statement, UFS2.1 are faster naturally due to controllers and whatnot but you contradict yourself cos all the UFS2.1 you have up here are have reduced write speeds from 850MBps in UFS2.0 to 550MBps??? Over 35% performance loss at a time when octa-core SoCs and 6GB RAM are deemed insufficient??? Is that improvement or regression???
On a final note, please note that the information might be right, just that there are a few loopholes + don't know the veracity of the information - not sure where you got it from TBH.
But please do not feel my questions as an attack, far from that. I'm actually a very inquisitive person, I always want to know how things work and see myself as a semi-technophile.
zayidhs said:
I'm sorry but I don't buy your point from the first post where you said there is no speed improvement but went on to state in point C - iv Command priority: improves system performance, allowing the software to assign higher priority to more urgent tasks.
So the auxiliary functions are the differences between UFS2.0 and UFS2.1.
So my question stands if that is the case of no improvements at the beginning but later said there is improvement in system performance, what does it mean? How can you improve system performance? Writing faster, reduce more heat, reduce power consumption air pleasing font?
Cos I want to know which performance is improved.
Now to anyone that knows about the ubiquitous nature of memory, the benchmark has always been speed cos the capacity or durability is easier to negotiate. With this in mind, we know that the entire tech world uses speed as a selling point for upgrade from MicroSD to eMMC 4.5,5.0 & 5.1 to UFS2.0 and now UFS2.1.
First question is, Are you trying to tell us that the entire tech world has been wrong or deceiving us??? Cos everywhere states that among improvements from UFS2.0 to UFS2.1 is speed by over 30%
Second question is that In an ever-growing and improving technology and life where speed is the benchmark of anything we do in computing, that UFS2.1 was designed to improve over UFS2.0 by also increasing speeds - which is a well known fact. Are you sure that speed is not a discrimination between UFS2.0 and UFS2.1???
Lastly, you said UFS2.1 flash memories are regularly faster only because they are newest product and with better integrated controllers and flash cell technologies.
So if I understand the above statement, UFS2.1 are faster naturally due to controllers and whatnot but you contradict yourself cos all the UFS2.1 you have up here are have reduced write speeds from 850MBps to 550MBps??? Over 35% performance loss at a time when octa-core SoCs and 6GB RAM are deemed insufficient??? Is that improvement or regression???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your reply.
"First question is, Are you trying to tell us that the entire tech world has been wrong or deceiving us??? Cos everywhere states that among improvements from UFS2.0 to UFS2.1 is speed by over 30% "
What I was trying to say is that the higher speed is not what the UFS2.0/2.1 Standard regulated. Theoretically, an HS-G2 1-lane product can also meet the requirement of UFS2.1 Standard, although it is with a maximum speed about 350MB/s. But for the real flash memory product, the newer is always better in order to attract the customers. That is not because of the standard.
"Second question is that In an ever-growing and improving technology and life where speed is the benchmark of anything we do in computing, that UFS2.1 was designed to improve over UFS2.0 by also increasing speeds - which is a well known fact. Are you sure that speed is not a discrimination between UFS2.0 and UFS2.1???"
The well known fact as you said that "UFS2.1 is faster than UFS2.0" is not correct. UFS2.1 Standard is a small improvement from UFS2.0 (minor version change), i.e. some accessory functions. They are small but not means they are not important. The huge speed improvement will happen when the major version changes, i.e. UFS3.0 will support HS-G4 and will be at least two times faster than HS-G3 (used in UFS2.x).
Some statements are true here:
a) UFS2.1 standard is not faster than UFS2.0 standard.
b) For the mobile flash memory products from the same company, the UFS2.1 flash memory product is usually better/faster than the UFS2.0 flash memory product.
"Lastly, you said UFS2.1 flash memories are regularly faster only because they are newest product and with better integrated controllers and flash cell technologies.
So if I understand the above statement, UFS2.1 are faster naturally due to controllers and whatnot but you contradict yourself cos all the UFS2.1 you have up here are have reduced write speeds from 850MBps to 550MBps??? Over 35% performance loss at a time when octa-core SoCs and 6GB RAM are deemed insufficient??? Is that improvement or regression???"
The newest product is regularly faster. Yes, it is ture. But you should notice that it is a comparison between the products by the same design and manufacturing company. Sumsung, Toshiba and SK-Hynix are using different flash cell structures, different controllers and different Technologies.
For Samsung, they annouced that their UFS2.1 is with a maximum speed of 880MB/s, UFS2.0 with 850MB/s (HS-G3 2-Lane) and 460MB/s (HS-G3 1-Lane).
For Toshiba, they annouced that their UFS2.1 is with a maximum speed of 850MB/s, UFS2.0 with 610MB/s.
For SK-Hynix, they annouced that their UFS2.1 is with a maximum speed of 800MB/s, UFS2.0 with 780MB/s. But there is kind of over advertisement (no one with SK-Hynix UFS2.1 ever reached 600MB/s).
Does it make any sense?
zayidhs said:
On a final note, please note that the information might be right, just that there are a few loopholes + don't know the veracity of the information - not sure where you got it from TBH.
But please do not feel my questions as an attack, far from that. I'm actually a very inquisitive person, I always want to know how things work and see myself as a semi-technophile.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm fine. We are discussing about technical things together.
I can confirm that all the information and numbers are from the official websites or advertisements. You can do some Google yourself. Sorry I cannot paste any out-of-XDA links right now becuase I was new here.
cnutt1 said:
Hi I'm on mate 9 in UK I got THGBF7G9L4LBATRC UFS 2.0 blantent lies by huawei I'll be ringing my carrier in the morning see what's going to be done cheers for the method
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good luck! Please let us know your update at your convenience.
Course will do I've also tweeted huawei mobile UK telling them of the findings,telling them their being fraudulent there's a couple of people already getting involved in that lol
For the three screenshots you provided:
a) The upper figure is wrong. Someone who misunderstood the standards changed the upper right corner 'UFS2.0' to 'UFS2.1'. No matter the flash is UFS2.0 or UFS2.1, they must support HS-G2 (1-Lane up to 2.9Gbps and 2-lane up to 5.8Gbps). HS-G3 is optional (1-Lane up to 5.8Gbps and 2-lane up to 11.6Gbps).
b) The red line you highlighted is "JESD220-1A", but this is the Standard of UFS1.1, kind of end-of-life.
c) This figure shows the UFS2.0 product at the year of 2014. As I said before, the UFS2.0 product with HS-G2 1-Lane was with maximum interface speed of 2.9Gbps (i.e. about 350MB/s). This was not an attractive speed compared with eMMC products. All HS-G2 1-Lane UFS2.0 product was End-of-Life. We are using HS-G2 2-Lane (up to 5.8Gbps), HS-G3 1-Lane (up to 5.8Gbps) and HS-G3 2-Lane (upto 11.6Gbps) now.
cnutt1 said:
Course will do I've also tweeted huawei mobile UK telling them of the findings,telling them their being fraudulent there's a couple of people already getting involved in that lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good news! Thank you!
cnutt1 said:
Hi I'm on mate 9 in UK I got THGBF7G9L4LBATRC UFS 2.0 blantent lies by huawei I'll be ringing my carrier in the morning see what's going to be done cheers for the method
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have same one on my Mate 9
Samsung s8 got same UFS flash
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Samsung+Galaxy+S8+Teardown/87136
How do i know what is mine ?
Sent from my LON-L29 using XDA-Developers Legacy app
Akhayev said:
View attachment 4133590
How do i know what is mine ?
Sent from my LON-L29 using XDA-Developers Legacy app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please check any part number after the word "Model:", and find it from the original post. Yours: THGBF7T0L8LBATA MLC UFS2.0 128GB about 610MB/s
Sasa_Jevric said:
I have same one on my Mate 9
Samsung s8 got same UFS flash
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Samsung+Galaxy+S8+Teardown/87136
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, according to incomplete statistics by now, Samsung S8 is using Toshia UFS2.0 memory. And Samsung S8+ is using Toshiba UFS2.1 memory...
This is some bs I know it's not a big deal but they advertised 2.1. Got Toshiba 2.0 Gonna try and switch to the s8+ or the new iPhone 8 when it comes out. Never buying from shady ass Huawei again.
Just tested mine.
Im on an AL00 (128 GB, 6GB RAM) from mainland China, imported to UK and converted to AL29 (B172).
According to terminal I have the following:
Samsung KLUDG8J1EB-B0B1 Rev 0501 Scsi Rev 06
Here with terminal specs
Dear forum,
I want to know if XZP is able to support UHS-II speeds for the SD card. I'm thinking in acquire this one Samsung 64Gb but it's just UHS-I. This will be OK to save 4k video without problems?
I don't want to buy a UHS-II card (which are notabily more expensive) if the phone only supports UHS-I speeds...
Thank you! Regards!
The phone supports only UHS-I speeds, and it will never support UHS-II. You can still buy an UHS-II card if you want, since they are backwards compatible, but you will be capped at the UHS-I speeds. No phone and phone chipset have implemented UHS-II support yet.
Where did you learn about the UHS-I?
Artyomska said:
The phone supports only UHS-I speeds, and it will never support UHS-II. You can still buy an UHS-II card if you want, since they are backwards compatible, but you will be capped at the UHS-I speeds. No phone and phone chipset have implemented UHS-II support yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you learn that it only supports UHS-I? I can't find any information other than "SDXC supported". So, in theory it can hold up to 2TB, but where did you learn about the UHS-1?
I've found this thread a little bit late, but for all followed user: The Generation 2 need a second raw of contacts. If the phone has only one raw, it could not support Gen. 2
Not sure, but I have one wich writes up to 90MB/s and reads up to 100MBs (Samsung EVO Plus U3 SDXC I 256GB) (tested in PC) and from SD to internal (reading) I've seen 80MB/s and from internal to SD (writing) most times is about 50MB/s but sometimes it gets higher, not sure if its a limitation or just the pone was busy and the reading speed from internal was slower than it can be
Anyway I doubt it gets much faster with better SD, and that one is actually cheap comparing with others
work with v30 for 4k
UHS Speed Class 1 designates the performance option designed to support real-time video recording with a UHS-enabled host device. UHS Speed Class 3 designates the performance option designed to support real-time video recording with a UHS-enabled host device.
go here https://www.sandisk.com/about/legal/hd
@prodigalgypsy https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon-835-mobile-platform
As you can see in the spec sheet, the 835 mobile platform supports .
UFS: UFS2.1 Gear3 2L
SD: SD 3.0 (UHS-I)
So UHS-I speeds are the highest you can get.
So I know with solid state drives, larger capacities in general are faster and longer lasting than lower capacities. Obviously, we can't test this yet on the Note 20 Ultra but would the 512 GB have any noticable benefit over the 128 GB?
16 GB RAM would have sweetened the deal but I guess we can't have it all.
Not sure, I only ordered 1 phone so I have no way to test it side by side. But I know a 1TB MicroSDXC card is going in it
Guyinlaca said:
So I know with solid state drives, larger capacities in general are faster and longer lasting than lower capacities. Obviously, we can't test this yet on the Note 20 Ultra but would the 512 GB have any noticable benefit over the 128 GB?
16 GB RAM would have sweetened the deal but I guess we can't have it all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt there is going to be a performance difference considering they are the same UFS 3.1 tech just different capacity, however the OS is taking up the same space and running same speed.
As for 12gb of ram vs 16gb. I really doubt you could tell the difference
Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk
GSMarena has updated the storage specification from UFS 3.1 to UFS 3.0, does anyone have any benchmarks on the storage ?
_bottle_ said:
GSMarena has updated the storage specification from UFS 3.1 to UFS 3.0, does anyone have any benchmarks on the storage ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow so basically it's an S20 ultra with a pen, overclocked 865 and 4GB less RAM.
512GB should "theoretically" be faster than 128GB version just based on how flash memory is arranged. But that is storage only and shouldn't really matter to everyday use I suppose. It's all speculative at this point until we have the devices in our hands though.
I remember how much better the S10 5G was than the S10+ just based on the bigger size. I hope the Note 20 Ultra is the same. I much prefer the squared off shape though.
Guyinlaca said:
So I know with solid state drives, larger capacities in general are faster and longer lasting than lower capacities. Obviously, we can't test this yet on the Note 20 Ultra but would the 512 GB have any noticable benefit over the 128 GB?
16 GB RAM would have sweetened the deal but I guess we can't have it all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same SSD rules will apply here. 512GB will be faster (not noticeable in normal use tho) and will have longer endurance for write cycles. See this snapshot someone uploaded on reddit that clearly states the differences in speed
Not sure if this applies here but has anyone bought Samsung UFS card for external storage and or if it's compatible