Some CompactFlash benchmarks

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
It's interesting to see how generic CF cards
perform when tested. Many are faster than you
might think, although not blazing fast.

Re: Some CompactFlash benchmarks

Quoted text here. Click to load it

looks like you have a slow card reader.  here's a substantially more
comprehensive test with speeds *much* faster than what you got:


Re: Some CompactFlash benchmarks

nospam wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Write speed also depends on how full the card is with what
kind of files:


Re: Some CompactFlash benchmarks

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 17:01:14 -0700, nospam

Quoted text here. Click to load it

There's no evidence of this yet.  All his cards are quite
old and unrated (for any reasonable purpose of rating, what
real use is there when it's rated for a very low speed?,
"4X" was a quite low speed, today's "unrated" new-stock
cards  generally achieve closer to 40X read with an optimal

The card reader could still be a bottleneck, though of the
few I have, none (assuming USB2 era not USB1) bottleneck
below about 12MB/s.   They will tend to bottleneck the
faster new cards or from transfer of many smaller files.
Rob Galbraith's tests were of faster cards, while Joe was
showing what's possible with quite old and/or low-end cards.

To the OP, if you're interested in peak CF performance than
seek a modern generation CF3 or CF4 spec'd card (merely
having it state "CF spec" is not enough), generally rated at
150X to 266X, and use a CF-IDE adapter instead of USB.  With
a modern 266X rated card running in UDMA mode from such an
adapter you should see up to (per your test, actual rate
depends on use) about 35-40MB/s read speed and a little over
20MB/s write.

Shopping online is probably a better bet than going
mail-order.  For example in 2GB size,

Site Timeline