Hi guys!! i'm here to know if it possible to increase recording time in super slow motion with some trick/mod apk
If not, it will be possible in future or it's too dangerous for the phone?
It's difficult to create this trick with, for example, an apk camera modified?
ex3meex said:
Hi guys!! i'm here to know if it possible to increase recording time in super slow motion with some trick/mod apk
If not, it will be possible in future or it's too dangerous for the phone?
It's difficult to create this trick with, for example, an apk camera modified?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm interested to
I don't think it would be possible.
As far as I know, the current limitation is not heat or software but space.
The XZp has dedicated RAM for the camera that allows it to buffer the 960fps. the UFS storage is simply not fast enough to write all the frames being captured as they are being captured. That's why you have to wait a bit after each 960fps burst.
Xifar said:
I don't think it would be possible.
As far as I know, the current limitation is not heat or software but space.
The XZp has dedicated RAM for the camera that allows it to buffer the 960fps. the UFS storage is simply not fast enough to write all the frames being captured as they are being captured. That's why you have to wait a bit after each 960fps burst.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe a mod instead of UFS using OTG with a fast portable ssd or something like that? Wouldn't that be a better solution if possible? I do not know the limitations of OTG, UFS, RAM. But our XZP Does support OTG and how big is the dedicated ram and speed of it? Or would my idea not work at all? The Samsung T1 SSD looks like it can do the job imo.
i know RAM is always the best. But i just want to throw ideas never know who will figure this out.
Someone will figure out how to do this soon or later lol. Cannot wait for that day.
No, nobody will figure out. Nobody, ever.
Just for your understand, the internal memory of the XZP has roughly ~500 MB/sec, the internal burst RAM of the camera module 15.000 MB/sec, OTG memory can get up to 350 MB/sec.
So no. Nobody will ever ever ever figure out. It's a physical issue.
Illux said:
No, nobody will figure out. Nobody, ever.
Just for your understand, the internal memory of the XZP has roughly ~500 MB/sec, the internal burst RAM of the camera module 15.000 MB/sec, OTG memory can get up to 350 MB/sec.
So no. Nobody will ever ever ever figure out. It's a physical issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ohh ok well rip. Just an thought tho because OTG you can get portable ssd i was thinking it would work. Never thought the internal RAM was that quick neither that OTG was that slow. i just learned of OTG is why i was throwing it out there. Thanks.
Hope in the future Sony can at least give us 30 sec videos would be awesome.
Everything's possible
I would be happy if Sony would give 1080p 120fps and 240fps.
But I think it will take few generations to get 960fps more than 1sec.
for XZ Premium and other that have this same sensor i think its not possible because a hardware limitation but in future it may be possible if the total RAM of the sensor increases.
XZ Premium in 2023, sure champion
Regarding your question, it depends on how the data transport method works.
Let's imagine a scenario. The camera stores everything in the external memory (SD?).
We have 2 possible answers:
No: When the camera buffer moves everything to the internal storage and then to the external storage (Buffer > internal > Micro SD).
Possibly yes: When the camera buffer moves everything directly to the SD memory (Buffer > Micro SD).
Illux said:
Just for your understand, the internal memory of the XZP has roughly ~500 MB/sec, the internal burst RAM of the camera module 15.000 MB/sec, OTG memory can get up to 350 MB/sec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of flawed information
1. The XZP has a UFS 2.1 memory which has a R/W speed of 860/255 MB/s. (far from that W 500 MB/s).
2. The LPDDR4x ram of the device goes at 4,266 Mbps. Far from those 15,000 MB/S (Mbps?).
3. The USB C port on the device is 3.1 gen 1, which goes to 5,000 Mbps (if it were usb 3.1 gen 2 this number doubles, but let's keep the numbers low so as not to raise hopes).
This means that the usb OTG port easily reaches the speeds of the ram (even theoretically exceeds it). Of course, you would need a 3.1 usb enclosure along with an externally powered 3.1 ssd (a dock maybe).
If the native camera app could save directly to external storage (Via OTG) and use the second method (Buffer > OTG), or even send everything to otg 3.1 without using buffer. I could maybe have a 1 hour video at 960fps (as long as the phone doesn't melt / use a cooler and the storage is appropriate / Max 2tb ssd nvme. And of course, it remains to be seen if android 9 has support for nvme devices).
Not to mention it would need external power.
In short, theoretically it is possible, but I would need to invest in a cooler, a ssd nvme usb 3.1 and an otg adapter that supplies enough power for both devices to work properly (keep the ssd alive and prevent the XZP from dying by drainage).
mauxxrtg said:
XZ Premium in 2023, sure champion
Regarding your question, it depends on how the data transport method works.
Let's imagine a scenario. The camera stores everything in the external memory (SD?).
We have 2 possible answers:
No: When the camera buffer moves everything to the internal storage and then to the external storage (Buffer > internal > Micro SD).
Possibly yes: When the camera buffer moves everything directly to the SD memory (Buffer > Micro SD).
A lot of flawed information
1. The XZP has a UFS 2.1 memory which has a R/W speed of 860/255 MB/s. (far from that W 500 MB/s).
2. The LPDDR4x ram of the device goes at 4,266 Mbps. Far from those 15,000 MB/S (Mbps?).
3. The USB C port on the device is 3.1 gen 1, which goes to 5,000 Mbps (if it were usb 3.1 gen 2 this number doubles, but let's keep the numbers low so as not to raise hopes).
This means that the usb OTG port easily reaches the speeds of the ram (even theoretically exceeds it). Of course, you would need a 3.1 usb enclosure along with an externally powered 3.1 ssd (a dock maybe).
If the native camera app could save directly to external storage (Via OTG) and use the second method (Buffer > OTG), or even send everything to otg 3.1 without using buffer. I could maybe have a 1 hour video at 960fps (as long as the phone doesn't melt / use a cooler and the storage is appropriate / Max 2tb ssd nvme. And of course, it remains to be seen if android 9 has support for nvme devices).
Not to mention it would need external power.
In short, theoretically it is possible, but I would need to invest in a cooler, a ssd nvme usb 3.1 and an otg adapter that supplies enough power for both devices to work properly (keep the ssd alive and prevent the XZP from dying by drainage).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You completely mixed up your units of data transfer.
MB/s and Mb/s are two different units.
MB/s is short for Megabytes per second
Mb/s is short for Megabits per second
According to samsung's semiconductor website ufs 2.1 has 6Gbps speed it translates to around 750 MB/s
LPDDR4X ram has a 64 bit bus and has speed of upto 2133MHz. since 1 byte is 8 bits that means 64 bits is 8 bytes. Using these numbers we can calculate that LPDDR4X has a speed of about (2133 * 8) = 17064 MB/s
USB 3.1 has a transfer speed of upto 5Gb/s. That is 5000 Mb/s = 5000/8 = 625 MB/s
from these calculations
1. UFS 2.1 = 750 MB/s
2. LPDDR4X = 17064 MB/s
3. USB 3.1 = 625 MB/s
So the OTG port is much slower than the internal storage and around 28 times slower than LPDDR4X
Also as far as I know the reason 960 fps video isn't possible for more than a second is not dependent on the ram but the internal buffer of the camera sensor is too small.
So for existing phones, no we cannot get more than a second of 960 fps video.
But if a camera sensor with a much higher buffer memory is released by a company (which I don't think will happen, because it would be ridiculously expensive) we are stuck with 1 second of 960 fps video.
Related
Both USB 3.0 both 2.5" both 3 year warranty
I want extra storage but don't know which one to get ?
Sent from my GT540RR using XDA App
Go with the 500GB drive. The ports on the Transformer are USB 2.0, so you won't see any speed benefit from having a SSD connected.
However, if you want something that you don't have to plug into a USB port, the SD card slot will support SDXC cards. You can add an additional 64GB or 128GB SDXC card for around the same price as a comparable SSD.
So there would be no benefit to the SSD?
Plus 500GB does sounds nice
Its a go flex they any good ?
Sent from my GT540RR using XDA App
Danzano said:
So there would be no benefit to the SSD?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are.
The whole "no moving parts" thing is a really good benefit.
I take my tf+dock to work everyday, i dont turn it off. I would be forced to turn it of if it had a standard drive in there.
And are you going to have 500gb of data?
Close to it I have allot of music movies and then there's the data for my university papers etc
I may not fill up 500 but I know I will probably fill up 320 so its wether I condense things down and get the SSD benefits or deal with the battery drain inherent with the HDD and the possible failure of the HDD later on
Also the HDD i'm looking at is a sea gate go flex 2.5" portable would this be the best brand or can someone recommend anything better HDD wise?
Sent from my GT540RR using XDA App
An SSD's performance lies in being able to read multiple files at the sames time at high speeds.
Personally i feel SSD's real speed is only put to use as an internal disk on your laptop/desktop to boot/operate faster.
For an external multimedia storage drive I recommend going with a 500gb 7200 rpm drive.
Obviously you can disconnect it after you are done using it. Power consumption difference will be around 0.5-2W average for SSD and 0.7-2.5W for an external drive.
But to save battery and money go with the 500gb drive, briefly connect it and transfer data you wish to access onto your internal memory and use it
You will actually get the best battery life possible by storing your files to a SDXC card (0.06W to 0.3W), but of course like the SSD you're limited by meager storage space compared to a regular hard drive.
All good points I think I will go for the 500 just hope it doesn't screw up also do any of the portable hard drives have spin down or are they constantly spun up ?
Sent from my GT540RR using XDA App
I might be late but if you haven't bought yet, I'd vote for a both.
Buy a smaller SSD/SDXC/SDHC with a reasonable amount of space for files you will carry around all the times.
Get a HDD for storing really large files like movies which you'd need once in a while.
When not powered up, HDDs can take a lot of shock with no damage . Get the 500gb.
i would also go with the 500gb
Ha ha Nibras good to see you however I probably can't afford both
I think the 500GB is the right choice now for a on off switch between the port and cable
Sent from my GT540 RSpec using XDA App
If you can afford a 64gb SSD disk and external chassis, you can probably afford an external 2.5" 500gb disk and a 32gb SD-card.
You should get the SSD and not the HDD. Lower power consumption, no moving parts, all around solid performing. I have a OCZ Vertex 3 120gb SSD and you couldn't pay me to use a HDD for my external enclosure. Swapping between my desktop, laptop and TF is easy squeezy. No heat generated because of no moving parts. SSD is definitely your best bet. If your still in doubt, there are a ton of reviews on the Vertex 3 all over the internet and that it outperforms better than any other drive on the market today.
Cheers...
I love the idea of ssd but hate the price for a decent size and I will fill up most of the five hundred gigabit maybe in future a small ssd inside the dock but too start with price wise and what people are saying hdd is the winner
Sent from my GT540 RSpec using XDA App
Danzano said:
Ha ha Nibras good to see you however I probably can't afford both
I think the 500GB is the right choice now for a on off switch between the port and cable
Sent from my GT540 RSpec using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wasn't suggesting 64GB SSD and 500GB HDD. Like the below quote suggests, I was suggesting a somewhat smaller HDD and SDD. A 500GB or so HDD and a 32GB or so SSD.
droidjens said:
If you can afford a 64gb SSD disk and external chassis, you can probably afford an external 2.5" 500gb disk and a 32gb SD-card.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Danzano said:
I love the idea of ssd but hate the price for a decent size and I will fill up most of the five hundred gigabit maybe in future a small ssd inside the dock but too start with price wise and what people are saying hdd is the winner
Sent from my GT540 RSpec using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's true. I hate how expensive they are.
If Internet is cheap where you live, you can move the large files to cloud as well. Or, store then in a network drive at home.
I think you answered your own question if you have enough files to fill up a 500GB drive that you can actually put to practical use most of the time. You'd just be disapointed having something smaller no matter how fast or trendy if you had to spend lot of time moving stuff around all the time.
I'm with an earlier poster that thinks a SSD is better used as a boot drive for a device to get everything up and running fast and to put your page file on for quicker memory management access also.
Thankyou to everyone who helped me with this im now the proud owner of a transformer and a seagate 500gb 2.5" hdd and hdmi cable and 16gb class 10 sd card all for under 1000nzd yay
Hello, it turns out that 128GB is out of stock in my city. Now, I have to choose a SanDisk 64GB. Is the Ultra microSDXC UHS-1 Card with Adapter (Class 10, speed up to 30MB/s 200x) the best for this device? I think I read a posting saying that the PRO 12.2 cannot take advantage of the Extreme, Extreme Plus and Extreme Pro. Is that true? If not, please let me know the model number of the recommended one. Thank you.
http://www.sandisk.com/products/memory-cards/microsd/
I just got this one
Sandisk
Class 10 (64GB) microSD, full size SD adaptor and mobile mate USB Reader
Not true. Extreme plus does run faster. I have one on order and will post a comparison to an ultra when I get it. I know it is faster because i had one in my first note pro and it performed as quickly as internal memory whereas now with the ultra that I am using in my new note pro file transfer to external microsd is slower than to internal memory.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
Is this very noticeable? Given that there is a write problem with KK, is it worth to get the Extreme Plus?
Value is subjective man; you're asking someone who basically spent $1500 US on a note pro having lost his first rig in an act of stupidity. Worth it? Definitely for me. I don't like waiting for long file transfers. I'd rather have a 64 gb card that's twice as fast than a 128 gb card.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
Thanks. Which one do you recommend?
SanDisk Extreme PLUS microSDHC/microSDXC UHS-I Card SanDisk Extreme PLUS microSDHC/microSDXC UHS-I Card
SanDisk Extreme microSDHC/microSDXC UHS-I Card SanDisk Extreme microSDHC/microSDXC UHS-I Card
For me write speed is critical. Both of those top out at around 50MB/s so you probably can't go wrong with either.
The one that I've ordered (and had before) is the Extreme Plus 64GB.
Ok I have to take back this statement: "it performed as quickly as internal memory"
Here's my test results utilizing two types of tests, one for approximately 125 files totalling 1.4GB (digital camera pics from a D7000) and another for a 1.9GB video file again from a D7000 camera. The files were placed on a Sandisk Extreme USB 3.0 64GB flash drive which was inserted into a USB 3.0 port. This served as the source for all test copies to the tablet/microSD cards and the source USB flash drive stayed in the same USB 3.0 slot throughout.
All times are presented in minutes and seconds.
Note Pro Internal Storage
1.9GB video file over USB 3.0: 0:40
1.9GB video file over USB 2.0: 1:24
1.4GB of photos over USB 3.0: 0:40
1.4GB of photos over USB 2.0: 1:07
Clearly, USB 3.0 transfer speed to internal memory is faster than USB 2.0.
MicroSD - Sandisk Ultra 64GB
1.9GB video file over USB 3.0: 4:42
1.9GB video file over USB 2.0: 4:48
1.4GB of photos over USB 3.0: 4:17
1.4GB of photos over USB 2.0: 4:18
1.9GB video file using USB 3.0 card reader: 4:45 **
1.4GB of photos using USB 3.0 card reader: 4:19 **
Clearly the write speed to this card is the limiting factor. It made little difference between USB 3.0 and USB 2.0. These measurements are not scientific, I'm merely using a stopwatch here and watching the progress bar on my Windows 7 machine.
MicroSD - Sandisk Extreme Plus 64GB
1.9GB video file over USB 3.0: 2:19
1.9GB video file over USB 2.0: 2:20
1.4GB of photos over USB 3.0: 1:47
1.4GB of photos over USB 2.0: 1:47
1.9GB video file using USB 3.0 card reader: 1:35 **
1.4GB of photos using USB 3.0 card reader: 1:18 **This is where I eat my words. It's not as fast as the internal storage in the tablet, but in my defense it definitely is faster than the Sandisk Ultra which is a Class 10 card. Also note that using a USB 3.0 card reader did give me faster results. I'm not quite sure what's going on there.
So . . . is it worth it to go to an Extreme Plus ? It's subjective once again but for me, spending $75 vs $40 isn't a big deal to get double the speed. If i'm rushing out the door to a meeting and I need to copy a few gigs of data to my device I know what card I'd want in it .. . .
If all you're doing is loading storage up with video files for use during downtime, say movies and TV shows then either card would be fine. If you're pushing data on and off of the card more often though then perhaps the speed will make a difference for you.
** Note: USB 3.0 Card reader was plugged into the PC. This test was to confirm transfer speed to the two different types of MicroSD card themselves without interaction with the tablet at all.
Thank you very much for the tests. The results could be very useful to all of us. Good job! Why you used a usb 3.0 reader instead of inserting the card directly to the internal sdcard slot? I think the PRO 12.2 only has a usb 3.0 port. Where are the data related to usb 2.0 coming from? It would be very useful to have the data when you use the card inserted into the memory slot.
The SD Card Reader results are to show transfer to the MicroSD card when it's inserted into an SD Card Reader that's plugged into the PC not the tablet.
Sorry I didn't make that clear. I'll edit my post to mention that.
The USB 2.0 speeds are data transfer when the tablet is plugged into the PC using a USB 2.0 cable. I'm not sure if you're aware but the only difference between a microUSB 3.0 and 2.0 cable is the addition of data conductors in the USB 3.0 cable. Hard to describe but if you look at the ends of the cables the end of the MicroUSB 2.0 cable is identical to one side of the 3.0 one. Charging is accomplished using this edge of the 3.0 cable so charging speed is no different between the two types but the additional conductors for data transfer yield increased transfer speeds on 3.0.
Sorry I am a bit confused. Where is the test results of using the SD card slot?
They are the ones without the asterisks.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
muzzy996 said:
They are the ones without the asterisks.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. But those without the asterisks are either usb 2.0 or usb 3.0. I am looking for data related to the Ultra and Extreme PRO inserted into the sdcard rather than usb slot. Am I missing something?
I'm not sure where the confusion lies. Hopefully what I describe below will clear things up for you. All of the information is right there with headings and all.
Its broken up to 3 sections:
Section 1 - Note Pro Internal Storage: describes copying either 1.9GB single movie file or 1.4GB worth of photos to the internal memory of the tablet (not MicroSD) . . . utilizing EITHER a USB 3.0 cable connected to the computer, OR a USB 2.0 cable connected to the computer.
Section 2 - Sandisk Ultra 64GB: describes copying either 1.9GB single movie file or 1.4GB worth of photos to Sandisk Ultra 64GB card while its inserted in the tablet . . . utilizing EITHER a USB 3.0 cable connected to the computer, OR a USB 2.0 cable connected to the computer. . .
The card reader results (which are now identified with asterisks) are merely there to show what the file transfer times are IF THE CARD IS IN YOUR COMPUTER as opposed to being in the tablet. I included the card reader results to show you the maximum write speed of the card using the same test . . taking the tablet completely out of the equation. I suppose this is where you're getting confused because you're seeing the phrase "card reader" and thinking that I'm plugging a reader into the USB port of the tablet . . I'm not . . Again the purpose of testing write speed to the microSD cards in a card reader that's plugged into the PC is to set the benchmark for how fast the memory card really is without the tablet even being a factor.
Section 3 is the same thing as section 2 except for the Extreme Plus . . .
Again, all times are WRITE times . . either to the stock internal memory of the tablet or two the microsd card which is either inside the tablet or in an external card reader connected to the PC (no tablet involved).
By reviewing the times you can clearly draw a few conclusions:
1) that if you buy a Sandisk Ultra then the memory is slow enough to completely negate the need for a USB 3.0 cable when copying data to the card from any external source (clearly no matter what cable is used the times are the same) and
2) that the Extreme Plus is about twice as fast as the Ultra for write speed.
3) that the write speed for the tablet's internal memory is faster than the extreme plus which is currently one of the fastest available microSD cards
muzzy996 said:
I'm not sure where the confusion lies. Hopefully what I describe below will clear things up for you. All of the information is right there with headings and all.
Its broken up to 3 sections:
Section 1 - Note Pro Internal Storage: describes copying either 1.9GB single movie file or 1.4GB worth of photos to the internal memory of the tablet (not MicroSD) . . . utilizing EITHER a USB 3.0 cable connected to the computer, OR a USB 2.0 cable connected to the computer.
Section 2 - Sandisk Ultra 64GB: describes copying either 1.9GB single movie file or 1.4GB worth of photos to Sandisk Ultra 64GB card while its inserted in the tablet . . . utilizing EITHER a USB 3.0 cable connected to the computer, OR a USB 2.0 cable connected to the computer. . .
The card reader results (which are now identified with asterisks) are merely there to show what the file transfer times are IF THE CARD IS IN YOUR COMPUTER as opposed to being in the tablet. I included the card reader results to show you the maximum write speed of the card using the same test . . taking the tablet completely out of the equation. I suppose this is where you're getting confused because you're seeing the phrase "card reader" and thinking that I'm plugging a reader into the USB port of the tablet . . I'm not . . Again the purpose of testing write speed to the microSD cards in a card reader that's plugged into the PC is to set the benchmark for how fast the memory card really is without the tablet even being a factor.
Section 3 is the same thing as section 2 except for the Extreme Plus . . .
Again, all times are WRITE times . . either to the stock internal memory of the tablet or two the microsd card which is either inside the tablet or in an external card reader connected to the PC (no tablet involved).
By reviewing the times you can clearly draw a few conclusions:
1) that if you buy a Sandisk Ultra then the memory is slow enough to completely negate the need for a USB 3.0 cable when copying data to the card from any external source (clearly no matter what cable is used the times are the same) and
2) that the Extreme Plus is about twice as fast as the Ultra for write speed.
3) that the write speed for the tablet's internal memory is faster than the extreme plus which is currently one of the fastest available microSD cards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you very much for the excellent tests!
So I bought this microSD:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00M55BS8G?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s01
(SanDisk Extreme 32GB)
and when I used crystal mark with my laptop card reader to bench it I got read and writes (even random 4k) around 20MB/s, which I think might be due to my laptop being somewhat old (2012). And when I tried using a benchmark on my S5 I got read and writes around the 30s. I was expecting reads to be much higher than that. I already ran FakeFlashTest and had no problems. Should I be worried that it could be a counterfeit? Am I probably doing something wrong?
Sounds normal to me, especially for the built-in reader. An USB3 Reader for the PC, which also harmonizes well with the particular card, could show much higher reads. Counterfeits usually have only 8GB, resulting in data corruption if mor stuff gets onto them. Counterfeit sticks always have a USB2 interface, to make it harder to test their real capacity.
I have such Sandisk mSDs, Class10 UHS I. Class 10 guarantees a continuous minimum transfer rate of 10mbyte/s, and if the reader is compliant, a somewhat higher rate according to UHS I standard.
lecorbusier said:
Sounds normal to me, especially for the built-in reader. An USB3 Reader for the PC, which also harmonizes well with the particular card, could show much higher reads. Counterfeits usually have only 8GB, resulting in data corruption if mor stuff gets onto them. Counterfeit sticks always have a USB2 interface, to make it harder to test their real capacity.
I have such Sandisk mSDs, Class10 UHS I. Class 10 guarantees a continuous minimum transfer rate of 10mbyte/s, and if the reader is compliant, a somewhat higher rate according to UHS I standard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, I tried using my brother's laptop and the results were much better! Its seems that the S5 cant really use it to its full potential though. At least I can record 4k directly to it
So, anyone already using the new USB Type C Pendisks? It's a great backup solution if the Nexus 6P supports them.
This is promising! Any usb c pendisk should work.
From: http://www.computerworld.com/articl...m-lexar-one-from-sandisk-go-head-to-head.html
"The Type-C USB port is expected to be available on 12% of smartphones in 2016, according to research firm IDC. So, I also tested the thumbdrive by downloading the 1.81GB .mpeg file to a Nexus 6P smartphone, which uses a Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 v2.1 processor.
I was surprised at how slow the transfer was; it took the Lexar 4 minutes and 47 seconds to move Star Wars onto the smartphone. The transfer speeds varied between 4.4MB/s to 7.8MB/s, considerably slower than USB 3.1's 10Gbps advertised speed. The SanDisk took 4.49 seconds to upload the movie and ranged from 4.3MB/s to 10.3MB/s transfer speeds."
joooe said:
This is promising! Any usb c pendisk should work.
From: http://www.computerworld.com/articl...m-lexar-one-from-sandisk-go-head-to-head.html
"The Type-C USB port is expected to be available on 12% of smartphones in 2016, according to research firm IDC. So, I also tested the thumbdrive by downloading the 1.81GB .mpeg file to a Nexus 6P smartphone, which uses a Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 v2.1 processor.
I was surprised at how slow the transfer was; it took the Lexar 4 minutes and 47 seconds to move Star Wars onto the smartphone. The transfer speeds varied between 4.4MB/s to 7.8MB/s, considerably slower than USB 3.1's 10Gbps advertised speed. The SanDisk took 4.49 seconds to upload the movie and ranged from 4.3MB/s to 10.3MB/s transfer speeds."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He'd probably be less surprised if he did his homework and realized that the USB-C on Nexus6p is advertised to transfer at USB 2.0 speeds.
Yes, but that was the Lexar pen. The Sandisk one transfered the file in 4.49 secs. Forget it. 4 minutes and 49 secs.
I currently own a Kingston DataTraveler microDuo 3C (64Gb) and couldn't be happier with it. I'm not sure about the phone transfer speeds but on a PC, it scores 20MB/s writing speed. I could watch a 2Gb 1080p .mkv movie I had stored there with my good Chromecast with 0 lag or stuttering, really recommended!
What is pendisk? Thumb drive?
I was wondering what "pendisk" was also. Lol
I'm using the Kingston dt duo
I am using a adapter pretty cheap. Well its fast like ? check out those pics. Working real good ?
It provides and give painless to transfer content between new-generation tablets and phones1, and PC and Mac computers.
As an example, A Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra (Snapdragon) has UFS 3.1 storage and USB C 3.2 Gen 1
https://www.samsung.com/levant/smartphones/galaxy-s22-ultra/specs/
UFS 3.1 is supposed to have 2100MB/s read, 1200MB/s write, 100k IOPS read, 70k IOPS write
https://www.droid-life.com/2020/03/...at-crazy-fast-with-new-ufs-3-1-storage-chips/
https://semiconductor.samsung.com/us/estorage/ufs/ufs-3-1/
When connecting the phone to a PC using a USB-C rated 10gpbs cable, you don't even get anywhere 500MB/s copying a single large file.
The phone has USB C 3.2 Gen 1x1 which has a raw bandwidth of 5Gbit/s.
If we account for the overhead due to 8b/10b encoding (20%), it should still have 500MB/s
Let's say there is a hypothetical overhead of 30% due to "os and ****", that should still give 350MB/s
The copy speed from phone to PC is still nowhere near 350MB/s. It is only doing 180MB/s copying a single 11GB file.
What's worse is the file explorer completely stops working until the copying is complete
The phone is fresh from a factory reset and has no other data.
Same behaviour on S21, S20 and Note 10.
I also verified the USB C cable is actually rated 10gbps by testing it with an NVME to USB adapter.
raclimja said:
UFS 3.1 is supposed to have 2100MB/s read, 1200MB/s write, 100k IOPS read, 70k IOPS write
https://www.droid-life.com/2020/03/...at-crazy-fast-with-new-ufs-3-1-storage-chips/
https://semiconductor.samsung.com/us/estorage/ufs/ufs-3-1/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's referring to internal read/write speeds I think...
blackhawk said:
That's referring to internal read/write speeds I think...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The interface connection between PC and phone uses USB C 3.2 Gen 1x1 which has a bandwidth of 500MB/s, but you cannot even get 50% of that on best case scenario (copying a single large file)
UFS is a new memory card standard that's set to replace microSD.
IMO only interesting speed values therefore are read / write speeds it can perform -> IOPS ( read: Input/output operations per second ) .