My short answer: No! lol! My longer answer: I'm a sys-admin in my day job. If I wanted precise benchmark numbers, I have tools much better than File Manager for that. As a photographer, I was interested in subjective time to completion. Not data transfer rates. How much faster can I transfer files than USB 2.0.? These days, camera cache is much bigger and faster, so it's not as big of a deal for Write Speed. Also, in the 8 years since that video, USB-c/Thunderbolt and other protocols are out there. Motherboard bus speeds have improved as well. Back then, this was the ONLY quality USB 3.0 reader out there. It's still a good card reader (I still use it) but there are so many other, newer, cheaper options out there for you. Good luck!
Hey furulevi, Hmm, interesting question. This was over six years ago, but I don't think so. Here's why: 1. I closed and re-opened the windows between each test, so I doubt the file info would be cached between the sessions. 2. I tested multiple times on different days with different files, and many different cards, and the read and write tests were all about the same. There were reboots involved there, so no chance of caching. 3. I don't believe caching works that way. I think each new Copy or Move action is distinct. It reads from the source and writes to the target each time... File Manager wouldn't write the "old" cached data. It reads what's stored on disk each time. 4. In this case, I don't think it would matter anyway. This particular test only demonstrated Write speed. As you know, any data reads from the source disk would be cached into memory before writing to the target disk anyway. Let me know if you disagree on any of those points. I'm interested.
Yeah, this was only a write test. USB 3 was pretty new back then, and I did quite a few read tests as well. I just didn't post them on RUclips. My only point was to demonstrate that those new generation of readers could improve the workflow of photographers. I didn't really consider this a full on tech benchmark.
I think it should be ok but i just read a review and it only gets 3 out of 5,The Transcend card reader got 5 out of 5 and i ordered a replacement one from Amazon as i was having problems with it for instance on the first time i plugged it in the Blue light is lit up ok but when i unplug it it fails to light up and doesn't show up on my Mac a few others also have a similar problem with it I'm going to send this second one back.I also got the Kingston 64GB SDXC Card UHS1 U3 and 9 times out of 10 i got an error message this device cannot be read again others have a similar problem even PC users.
Oh sure. When I reviewed it 4 years ago, it was the only USB 3 reader. It was amazing compared to any other reader on the market. Hopefully, the newer models have passed it by.
Is there an actual newer model right now,i have had to send back the Transcend 3.0 Card Reader as after i unplug it from my Mac the next time i go to use it the Blue Light doesn't light and it fails to read my card.
My current DSLR uses XQD and CF only, so I haven't kept up on newer SD readers. I use this same reader for my newest SD card used in my GoPro. It's a SanDisk Ultra 64GB microSDXC UHS-I. Although it's readable, I can't verify that it operates at the fastest possible transfer rate. When you find the perfect reader among the current choices, I hope you'll let us know... or post your own video with your research results!
Hey andrnji1970, I know this was 5 years ago, but I'm going to respond anyway! You're right that this wasn't about showing the exact metrics. For me, it was about real world write times and how much my workflow could be sped up. It's the same reason I don't run extensive benchmarks on my graphics card... I'm less concerned with exact FPS and how many possible petaflops my GTX 1080 can produce. I'm more concerned with the real world experience. I love gear, but not for the gear itself. It's all about what can it do for me.
next time click the more detail tab on the dialog box to the bottom left so we can see the speed
My short answer: No! lol!
My longer answer: I'm a sys-admin in my day job. If I wanted precise benchmark numbers, I have tools much better than File Manager for that.
As a photographer, I was interested in subjective time to completion. Not data transfer rates.
How much faster can I transfer files than USB 2.0.?
These days, camera cache is much bigger and faster, so it's not as big of a deal for Write Speed.
Also, in the 8 years since that video, USB-c/Thunderbolt and other protocols are out there.
Motherboard bus speeds have improved as well.
Back then, this was the ONLY quality USB 3.0 reader out there. It's still a good card reader (I still use it) but there are so many other, newer, cheaper options out there for you.
Good luck!
Arnold Swarceneger voice
Wasn't the content (photos) already in RAM when using the Lexar reader??
Hey furulevi,
Hmm, interesting question.
This was over six years ago, but I don't think so.
Here's why:
1. I closed and re-opened the windows between each test, so I doubt the file info would be cached between the sessions.
2. I tested multiple times on different days with different files, and many different cards, and the read and write tests were all about the same. There were reboots involved there, so no chance of caching.
3. I don't believe caching works that way. I think each new Copy or Move action is distinct. It reads from the source and writes to the target each time... File Manager wouldn't write the "old" cached data. It reads what's stored on disk each time.
4. In this case, I don't think it would matter anyway. This particular test only demonstrated Write speed. As you know, any data reads from the source disk would be cached into memory before writing to the target disk anyway.
Let me know if you disagree on any of those points.
I'm interested.
Nice job thanks
Yeah, it was the first that was widely available, but still the nicest in it's class. Thanks for checking out my vids!
Good test on the 3.0 and wow! appr.~16.61 sec O___O
Why would you test the transfer rates from pc to cf instead of cf to pc??
Yeah, this was only a write test.
USB 3 was pretty new back then, and I did quite a few read tests as well. I just didn't post them on RUclips.
My only point was to demonstrate that those new generation of readers could improve the workflow of photographers. I didn't really consider this a full on tech benchmark.
Thanks for showing this video can it read the very latest SDXC UHS1 U3 Cards as i mainly film in 4K.
It reads SDXC, but I don't know about the newest revisions.
If I recall, this was the first of the USB 3.0 card readers, so it's been a while.
I think it should be ok but i just read a review and it only gets 3 out of 5,The Transcend card reader got 5 out of 5 and i ordered a replacement one from Amazon as i was having problems with it for instance on the first time i plugged it in the Blue light is lit up ok but when i unplug it it fails to light up and doesn't show up on my Mac a few others also have a similar problem with it I'm going to send this second one back.I also got the Kingston 64GB SDXC Card UHS1 U3 and 9 times out of 10 i got an error message this device cannot be read again others have a similar problem even PC users.
Oh sure. When I reviewed it 4 years ago, it was the only USB 3 reader. It was amazing compared to any other reader on the market. Hopefully, the newer models have passed it by.
Is there an actual newer model right now,i have had to send back the Transcend 3.0 Card Reader as after i unplug it from my Mac the next time i go to use it the Blue Light doesn't light and it fails to read my card.
My current DSLR uses XQD and CF only, so I haven't kept up on newer SD readers. I use this same reader for my newest SD card used in my GoPro. It's a SanDisk Ultra 64GB microSDXC UHS-I.
Although it's readable, I can't verify that it operates at the fastest possible transfer rate.
When you find the perfect reader among the current choices, I hope you'll let us know... or post your own video with your research results!
not a exact test: should show the mbps when doing it ;)
Hey andrnji1970,
I know this was 5 years ago, but I'm going to respond anyway!
You're right that this wasn't about showing the exact metrics. For me, it was about real world write times and how much my workflow could be sped up.
It's the same reason I don't run extensive benchmarks on my graphics card... I'm less concerned with exact FPS and how many possible petaflops my GTX 1080 can produce. I'm more concerned with the real world experience.
I love gear, but not for the gear itself. It's all about what can it do for me.
32mb/s???
wow, so many bugs!