SanDisk Extreme Pro USB 3.1 in the test

We offer second gear to the currently fastest USB sticks. After Corsair's newest and fastest version in the form of the Flash Voyager GTX could not completely convince, we want to look under the hood of another candidate. The current test candidate is called SanDisk Extreme Pro USB 3.1 Solid State and aims to deliver transfer rates of up to 420 MB per second. USB 3.1 is also advertised for more performance. We look under the hood.

Intro

Paper is patient. We were allowed to do that after ours too last test of Corsair Flash Voyager GTX in version B. The USB stick did not show bad results, but the maximum performance promised on paper was not achieved. The reason for this is often the fact that manufacturers use certain benchmark programs to determine their maximum performance - at Corsair this is ATTO Disk Benchmark.

We wanted to know how other representatives are currently doing on the market, which is why we ordered the SanDisk Extreme Pro USB 3.1 Solid State stick. Up to 420 MB per second should be possible here, and SanDisk also speaks of USB 3.1, which suggests higher performance. But here, too, paper is patient, because exactly one speaks of “USB 3.1 Gen 1 with 5 Gbit/s” and not of “Generation 2 with 10 Gbit per second”. In this case and the Gen 1 performance, you are at the usual level of USB 3.0 - i.e. 5 Gbit/s.

But in principle that doesn't hurt, because after deducting the protocol overhead, bandwidths of up to 500 Mbytes per second should still be left, and SanDisk speaks of a maximum of 380 MB / s for writing and 420 MB / s for reading. We check this in practice.

Bookmark:

• Corsair Flash Voyager GTX Rev B
• Roundup of the fastest USB sticks part 2
• USB 3.0 sticks - Roundup of the fastest sticks in 2012
• Inline Woodstick USB 3.0 with 64 GByte in the test
• extrememory USB sticks designed by brinell being tested
• The fastest USB 2.0 sticks in 2009

Test environment

Hardware

The test candidate

• SanDisk Extreme Pro USB 3.1 Solid State

The references

• Inline Woodstick USB 3.0 64GB*
• Lexar Jump Drive Trition*
• Do Xtreme IT*
• Sharkoon Flexi Drive Extreme*
• Sharkoon Flexi Drive Ultimate*
• Winkom USB 3.0 SLC*
• ADATA Superior S102 Pro*
• ADATA Superior S107*
• Corsair Flash Voyager GTX 128GB Rev B*
• Corsair Flash Voyager GT*
• Corsair Flash Voyager Slider*
• Corsair Flash Survivor Stealth*
• Extreme Memory Xplorer*
• Kingston Hyper X USB 3.0 DataTraveler*
• Do Xtreme Technology ES*
• Sandisk Extreme USB 3.0 Flash Drive*
• Sharkoon Flexi Drive Accelerate Duo*
• Super Talent Express ST4*
• Super Talent Express RC8*

Notebook: Dell Inspiron 17R Special Edition

• Intel Core i5-3210M* (2 x 2,5 GHz - max.Boost 3,1 GHz)
• Intel HM77 Express Chipset*
• 8 GB DDR3 memory*
• NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650M / Intel HD 4000
• Seagate ST1000LM024* (Mass storage)
• SATA 6 Gb / s - 4 x USB 3.0
• Crucial CT064M4SSD3* (Cache drive)
• Crucial CT128M4SSD3* (SSD test drive)

Other hardware / measuring devices

• Tenma 72-6185 clamp ammeter
• Tenma 72-820 infrared thermometer
• Vogel Digi Plus 202015 digital caliper

Software

General:

• Windows 7 64 bit (Service Pack 1)
• Intel Rapid Storage Driver 11.1.0.1006
• Intel chipset driver version 93.0.10.11
• USB 3.0 driver version 1.0.4.220
• Test software:
• AS SSD benchmark version 1.6.4013.39530
• ATTO Disk Benchmark Version 2.02
• Iometer version 2006.07.27
• Information on file templates:
• Windows 7 ISO file: 3.044 MB
• MP3 file directory: 200 files, 834 MByte
• Open Office Mobile directory: 834 folders, 6467 files, 302 MByte
• I-am-Alive game directory: 47 folders, 282 files, 2.048 MB

Background information

Synthetic applications

We have meanwhile largely parted with synthetic applications. We are currently only using the AS SSD benchmark to take a look at how the maximum data throughputs behave there. We leave out old applications such as ATTO Disk Benchmark because they hardly provide any information about practical behavior.

In addition, we use Iometer, with which we read 4K, 32K and 128K files from the stick and have them written to the stick.

Practical application tests

While experience with the use of hard disks and SSD drives shows that read access to such devices takes place for the majority of daily work, the situation is certainly a little different with mobile devices such as USB sticks. It can be assumed that in most cases the data written on the pen should be transported, which means that there is a clear weighting when writing files.

Which files are written to USB sticks is certainly very different and depends on the needs of the individual user. The scenarios we have chosen look like this:

• Writing and reading a very large file
• Writing and reading an MP3 directory
• Writing and reading a game directory (exemplary for a larger amount of data with files of different sizes)
• Installation of Open Office Mobile (exemplary for folders with a large number of small files)

We assume that the choice of these individual tests represents the closest possible everyday practice for the different user groups and that each user will find the area that suits them best.

Measurement runs

Since you can definitely determine performance differences between brand new and used USB sticks, the test candidates were completely written to and deleted twice using the Iometer. The measurements then made were repeated three times and the results were averaged.

Limitations

Hardware limitations in our measurements cannot be ruled out at all, but they cannot be avoided in everyday life either. For example, in order to exclude hard drive limitations when writing or reading, the Crucial M4 SSD is used, which in principle should be armed against the performance specifications of the manufacturers of USB sticks.

Impressions, technical data and scope of delivery

Key data and scope of delivery

Dimensions and weight are an essential criterion for USB sticks in some places. Anyone who always carries the stick with them, even on a key fob, usually wants smaller dimensions so that the key ring is less bulky or the resistance in the pocket is not too great. In addition, there is the fact that USB sticks to be extended can collide with other connections on the right and left. This is not the case with the SanDisk Extreme Pro USB 3.1. The manufacturer has remained more or less true to its design for many years. While the first USB 3 versions were still delivered in a plastic housing, aluminum has been used as the basic structure since the Pro version.

The dimensions remained more or less identical, as did the weight. And so this stick is extremely compact, will not block another USB port on notebooks, fits in every pocket and is not noticeable in terms of weight. We have tried the slider function for many years and can at least attest to the veteran from 2012 that it still fulfills its function without any problems.

With around 69 cents per gigabyte of capacity, today's test candidate certainly does not play in the cheap league of USB 3.0 sticks. In terms of price, you simply align yourself with the current market level and place yourself there. The scope of delivery on the hardware side is - like Corsair - extremely modest. There is an eyelet to create an attachment for a keychain or a chain. However, there is nothing suitable in the scope of delivery.

For this purpose, SanDisk offers its own encryption software, with which you can create a folder on the stick in order to protect particularly protected data with 128-bit AES encryption. In addition, there is a one-year license for the backup software RescuePro Deluxe. Both are a little more than we experienced at Corsair, which operates at the same price level with its product.

Impressions and practical experiences

As mentioned earlier, SanDisk has remained true to its design for years. The first stick in this class also looked almost identical, had practically the same dimensions and almost the same weight and was able to convince us with its appearance years ago. With the first Pro version about two years ago, the plastic housing was separated and the shape was packed in silver-colored aluminum. With the current version it will be black again. The outer housing is made of black lacquered or anodized aluminum, the slider area in the middle part remains in glossy plastic.

In addition to the now dark color, it differs from the previous version with the USB 3.1 lettering at the lower end of the middle section - there was previously only USB 3.0 lettering.
Exactly there, in the area of ​​this lettering, SanDisk has also integrated a blue LED status light, which signals access to the stick. A little inconspicuous, but absolutely functional considering the format specifications.

In a certain way, the deficiency of dirt protection remains, of course, because the slider does not have a protective cap. When transporting it in your pocket, you should always make sure that no lint or tissue residue gets into the opening of the stick.

Despite the compact format, the slider function is easy and pleasant to use. The stick has a sufficiently large bulge that you can operate the slider even with large hands.

Compatibility tests and general

As in our big roundups, we test the candidates on at least two USB 3.0 and two USB 2.0 systems for their suitability for use. This also applies to today's test subjects, who, however, were tested on five different computers with a USB 3.0 connection and two additional devices with USB 2.0, and also on a system with USB 3.1 functionality. We didn't encounter any compatibility problems. However, the USB 3.1 system is clearly slower to write than the USB 3.0 devices.

This is likely due to the very young Ryzen 7 platform used. A serves as the basis here MSI X370 XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM with an AMD Ryzen 7-1700 processor. In principle, AMD's X370 chipset should support USB 3.1 by default, but the implementation takes place using an ASMedia controller, which is connected to the MSI board via PCI Express lines. At this point, we are currently assuming a not yet fully developed driver, which is why the write performance is a little better than the typical test system, but the read performance is clearly worse. We will investigate this fact more closely in the course of our Ryzen mainboard tests.

There is nothing wrong with the read results using the AS SSD benchmark. Here one even delivers somewhat faster values. In any case, this theoretical test clearly falls short of its promises, which is probably due to the fact that we did not choose the program preferred by SanDisk for these measurements. In the best case, we see 380 MB / s reading, but only a maximum of 340 MB / s writing. These are not bad and by no means worse than the Corsair results, but are far better, especially when writing. But they had promised up to 420 Mbytes per second reading and up to 380 Mbytes per second when writing.

Once again, a young test candidate falls short of his promises, but is at least on the right track.

The stick is formatted with exFAT (Extended File Allocation Table), a Microsoft standard, which, however, also works on the Linux and Mac systems mentioned. The logon in Windows is done as a “USB drive”. Unfortunately, in the past we had to find out that some sticks, which only register as a USB drive in the system, could not be made bootable under Windows 7. However, we did not test this point with the SanDisk Extreme Pro USB 3.1 - nor whether the previous problems with Windows 10 are a thing of the past.

At this point, however, the topic seems to us to be quite suitable to supplement our own test criteria with this chapter. We lost quite a few hours trying to make USB drives bootable. As soon as time allows, we want to rework at this point.

Test series and results

Iometer 4K test

Iometer 32K test

Iometer 128K test

Read / write ISO file

As a basis for this test, we use a 3.044 MB ISO file, which is written to the stick by our Crucial M4 SSD, in order to be later written to the SSD from there. With this procedure, we simulate the writing and reading of large files, which in principle should allow every representative to run to their top form. After all, this is equivalent to writing / reading large files sequentially.

Read / write MP3 files

The copying of MP3 files to a mobile data carrier can certainly be described as a typical practical application. We use a directory with a total size of 834 Mbytes in which there are 200 MP3 files - all of which are larger than 2 Mbytes. Here, too, we copy from the Crucial M4 SSD to the test subject and later back to the SSD.

Open Office Mobile installation

Open Office Mobile has established itself as a popular application with lively USB stick users in recent years. The hodgepodge of different applications allows the user to use his stick almost as a mobile operating system on different PCs. However, OO Mobile is also a tough test for most USB sticks. During installation, almost 6.500 files are written to 834 folders to be created, and the majority of the files are still well below the 4 KB limit.

Copying a directory of games

In the last practical test, we copy a file folder with a total size of 2.048 MB onto the stick. The 282 files contained in the folder are arranged in 47 sub-folders and have many different file sizes. From small files to larger files, everything is represented here.

Other measurements

input

While USB 2.0 devices labeled “High Power” are allowed to draw 500mA of current through the USB port, the SuperSpeed ​​specification has nearly doubled that. Corresponding devices may now request a maximum current of 900 mA. Of course, the power supply via the 5-volt line has remained the same. Thus, a maximum power consumption of 4,5 watts is permissible for USB 3.0 devices, but this must not exceed 2.0 watts for USB 2,5 models.

To be on the safe side, we now measure two values ​​on these devices, namely the power consumption during start-up peaks and once the maximum power consumption during write access.

In all cases, the test candidates remain within the norms. When it comes to starting behavior, the Super Talent RC8 catches the eye, which consumed 1,5 watts in the measurement. In terms of maximum power consumption, it is the Kingston model, which with a power consumption of 3,75 watts is really not very far from the permitted 4,5 watts.

We recorded one interesting observation only once in the test. When the Super Talent Express RC8 was connected, the laptop's operating system reported that a device had caused an overvoltage. The laptop, socket and USB device continued to work perfectly afterwards. The incident could not be reproduced.

Our current test candidate from Corsair is partly in the midfield, partly in the top range, but harmless in all areas.

Temperatures

The last test is probably more of a “precautionary measure”. Due to the faster technology and the permitted higher current flow, higher temperatures are also often reported in USB 3.0 devices. Of course, such temperature developments are also due to the design here and there.

Although the devices never felt really hot in our tests, we simply took the temperatures using an infrared thermometer to be on the safe side. We measured the roughly warmest spot on each stick. However, the following results quickly show that the devices behaved quite inconspicuously across the board - the "hottest" representatives were in the range of 40 °C and with a maximum measurement difference of 7 °C hardly any significant difference from the coolest representatives.

Conclusion

Again, there is a certain frown after this test. In some disciplines, an old USB stick - depending on the technology used - still manages to beat a top model from 2017. The reasons for this are called progress! And in this progress, however, the current technology is used, which means that SSD controllers are paired with TLC memory chips, just as they are used in current entry-level SSDs.

This progress not only shows advantages, but in the course of the price war one should no longer expect that manufacturers of inexpensive products such as USB sticks dare to issue expensive models with SLC chips. Such measures are not appreciated enough; they only become clear in special tests. So you just have to draw a line.

But we don't want to badmouth the new models. Both young representatives, especially today's candidate from SanDisk, are predominantly at the top of the comparisons and show what performance is possible today. Of course, you shouldn't blindly trust the manufacturer's promises, as our test shows. Nevertheless, it remains fast, really fast, and the new SanDisk model can certainly score points even with small file sizes, which are the freestyle. The circumstances why Iometer sees worse values ​​here than the practical benchmarks are somewhat unclear to us.

As a result, we like today's presentation of SanDisk clearly better than that of Corsair. You stay true to your shape, compactness and functionality. A little software is offered for those who need it. In terms of price, you play at the top. Around 90 euros are due if you want to call the 128 GB model your own. The price definitely fits in this performance class, if you need this performance.

[pg], April 02, 2017