High quality USB 3.0 flash drive?

I'm looking for a USB flash drive to serve as a boot drive. A flash drive with performance and reliability comparable to a 64 GB SSD would be best, but eMMC level would also be acceptable.

 

Ones of that nature could cost as much as the equivalent SSD. If you don't mind paying for it they can be nearly as fast as an SATA 3 SSD.

I can attest to the Kingston Hyper X (my how the price has dropped) which is still about as fast as they come.

 

I also have the Kingston HyperX and still working with no problems

 

I was curious as to how far USB drives have come in the year since I purchased my Kingston Hyper X so I did some checking. Although its still one of the fastest, its dropped from #2 when I bought it, to #4 according to results from Tom's Hardware.

In any event, anything over 200 Mb/s is still very good. If your wondering what they chose as the fastest drive it was the Toshiba Trans-Memory Ex (300 Mb/s), but for overall best performance the top prize went to Sands Disc Extreme.

 

Thanks for the article. The random performance of even the fastest USB drives is pretty bad... Even the relatively speedy Sandisk Extreme can only manage about 5% the random write performance of a modern SSD

 

Nevertheless, they have their uses. Besides, imagine if we could equal that speed in a USB drive form factor? Would you pay $2000 for 32GB? My videos certainly transfer fast enough.

 

Sandisk Extreme will be the best for your usage scenario. I have the 64GB variant and I can say that it is indeed VERY good.

 

Well they've been making SD and CF cards since forever so its only natural that they would want a piece of the USB drive action. And it looks like they're doing pretty good at it too.

Thankfully it won't hit your wallet as hard as their CF cards do. Those puppies are nearly twice the cost of a comparable SSD. The 128GB variant on Amazon is $700!

Of course, that is for the top of the line Extreme Pro version UDMA 7 (The state-of-the-art right now, and the fastest of its kind.) suitable for things like the acquisition of 4k video. Although at that size there's only enough space for 20 minutes of video.

Fortunately there are less expensive variants, for the more pedestrian user, if you don't mind slowing down a bit.

 

Yeah, the Sandisk Extreme seems like the best bet. The fact that it's pretty cheap doesn't hurt either Honestly I was hoping for a USB stick with a Sandforce or Marvell controller inside, but I guess I'll just have to take what I can get.

On that note, apparently the secret sauce that makes the Sandisk Extreme so much faster than the competition is that it's actually powered by the same SSD controller as the Sandisk U100. Given how the U100 is basically the slowest SSD available today, I can't help but imagine the kind of performance that a USB 3.0 flash drive could potentially deliver with a better controller...

 

Has anyone tried the Super Talent RC8? It's Sandforce based with excellent numbers - but I haven't seen real world performance. A solid review can be found here:

Super Talent USB3 Express RC8 100GB Flash Drive Review - Windows To Go Tested and Certified | The SSD Review

 

It performs nicely indeed, but not for that price... I just checked eBay - Super Talent RC8 50GB variant for $226.49 + $43.71 shipping. (SanDisk Extreme 64GB can be found at $70).

 

Mushkin Ventura Ultra

Mushkin Ventura Ultra 240GB USB 3.0 Flash Drive Review | TweakTown

Price vs Performance.
http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/cont...ra_ultra_240gb_usb_3_0_flash_drive_review.png

 

Curious to see some CDM 4k results on that Mushkin, but looks promising!

 

CDM is OK but I prefer Anvil Storage Utilities above all others.

http://www.ssdaddict.com/apps/AnvilBenchmark_RC6.zip

 

Or Anvil results

 

I am pretty happy with the ADATA 3.0 64gb drive I got from Newegg recently.

 

How much did you pay for that?

 

I need to put one of these on my Christmas list. At SATA 3 speeds it would make a faster hashcash than my internal mSATA.

 

Just curious, but is there one with say a 90-degree-bend socket?

 

Well you could certainly get an adapter to do that. Just make sure you get the right side and angle to direct the stick so it won't cover any other ports. In the case of the Precision, it would have to be on the right side and face connector end forward.

The "up" orientation would also be possible to get it out of the way if you don't mind the antenna look? Still, if all else fails, you could simply get an extension cord and just slide it out of the way of your mouse or access.

At $250 for a USB, I'd hope anyone contemplating getting it would at least invest in a secure a lock for it (I use BitLocker). Otherwise, leaving it behind would certainly provide some hurt for most of us.

 

Sandisk Extreme USB 3.0 Flash Drives. About $60 for 64GB capacity.


Don't bother with SSD-based drives. When you're talking about USB drives, convenience and portability are far more important than pure raw performance. You only need a drive that is "fast enough".

 

So you're recommending against SSD-based drives while simultaneously recommending the SSD-based Sandisk Extreme?

 

My mistake for not being more clear.

I meant, stick with USB thumb drive form factor. Don't go with a 2.5" SATA drive in a USB 3.0 enclosure for the sake of higher performance (random reads and sequential writes), because that has a much larger form factor than a USB thumb drive.

The actual internals of the drive itself don't matter... as long as you keep the slim and portable form factor of a USB thumb drive.

 

Not exactly a fair list of pros and cons. For one, there are disadvantages to using USB drives:

First, the very thing that you mentioned that makes it attractive, also can be a double edged sword when it comes to keeping track of the thing. I've lost a half dozen USB drives but zero enclosures.

Another limitation is a USB can't do double duty. An SSD can be internal or external or occupy an array. For those of us that have devices for recording like cameras and their peripherals, the HDD/SSD form factor is the only choice.

One more thing is that Windows won't allow me to designate a USB as storage drive for my scratch disc. However, I can use an SSD in an external enclosure for that purpose.

They're also a bit cheaper per GB then the standard USB 3.0, and a lot cheaper for an equivalent read/write speeds of a top level USB. Not that I don't like a licktysplits USB.

 

Not exactly a fair list of cons from you either.

Flash drives aren't made for any of those purposes. They're made to be cheap, easy on-the-go plug-'n'-play storage devices. That's why they're small, slow, use USB, come with as little as a single GB of storage, and are dirt cheap.

These functions are the jobs for SSD's, which were made to be boot and/or cache devices. That's why they use SATA, use high-speed flash memory, come with sizes ranging from 32GB or 64GB all the way to 500GB or 1TB.

Please try to know your apples and oranges before criticizing something for not being useful for things outside of their intended purposes.

Now for the OP: why do you need a flash drive for a boot drive? Can't use a SD Card?

 

Yes, this system doesn't have an SD card reader. It doesn't have eSATA, FireWire or Thunderbolt, either. USB is pretty much the only choice short of exotic solutions like add-in cards and PXE booting.

 

False. And I think you've been caught in a time loop for the past 5 years. We have USB 3.0 now.

The same as USB.

 

False...how? And you think I can't read the title of this thread?

 

USB flash drive uses the flash memory that are used in SSDs, if this sentence makes sense to you, we're talking now

before USB3.0, yes, flash drives are badly made because even the badly made flash drives can reach the practical maximum speed of USB2.0

NOW there's the higher throughput USB3.0, in which guess what, its practical maximum speed cannot be reached by "dirt cheap" flash memory and controllers, and the practical max speed CAN in fact, reach somewhere above SATA2 maximum speed, thus a good quality USB3.0 flash drive NOW can be used as a boot drive

business aims of USB2.0 flash drives couple years back, aim at making quality product that runs close to full speed, as technolofy advances the business target is easily met, thus the product by that time will start to aim at achieving similar results(reasonable speed) at lower cost

its the same process for USB3.0 flash drive development, the current business aim is to maximise 3.0 port speed, THEN by making technology advancements the goal gets achieved easier, they can start aiming at lowering the cost of maximising performance (which isn't met now)

business aim is maximising performance now on 3.0 drives so NO, they are not made to be dirt cheap, its just technology advancements that they will eventually be able to produce the same thing at dirt cheap cost(same for HDD generations, they used to cost way more for way less performance)

 

300MB/s+ read but only 100MB/s write?

Is SLC inherently worse at reading? The SLC thumb drives I've seen all perform better at writing but worse at reading for some reason. (Actually most of them have higher seq write than read.)

 

Just to say I think these Mushkin Ventura Ultra USB 3 sticks are great. Best bit of tech I have bought in a long whiole. I have tested write speeds for a 5GB film and 6GB of raw photos and it is faster than one of my msata SSDs and as fast as the other (probably read speed are not as fast but that is a USB 3 limitation.

The price US$145 from Newegg (I paid more but will get another) seems great value to me and the thing is built like a tank.

If you are looking for 'cons'
1) It does run a bit hot - you will notice it is hot when you pick it up
2) It is a bit bigger than some photos might suggest - certainly bigger than the average USB thumbdrive.