In all the power consumption charts, I request give you provide a total energy consumed for the duration of the test (assuming it is the same time interval), not just the instantaneous consumption vs time. Peak power is good to figure out the power supply requirements - but we should be more concerned with the total energy consumed. Obviously, this is not very important for a thumb drive, but for the more power hungry components it may be a large contributor to the total cost of ownership.
Even if it drew 5W at all time and was plugged in 24/7 the yearly energy cost would only be in the $5-15 range (10-30 cents/kwh). In more realistic scenarios the dollar cost is going to be much lower. Where the absolute amount of power consumed might matter is scenarios where it's plugged into a phone or other device with a relatively small battery instead of wall power.
A 5W constant draw could cut the battery life on many laptops by 20-50%--I'd say that's very significant, though unlikely (the pictured case couldn't dissipate 5W). Still, knowing the watts/hour consumed by this device would be a useful metric.
Could you review the SanDisk 256GB Ultra Dual Drive, or another model with dual USB A and C ports on it? If/when I buy a new flash drive, I'd like a model that will work both with my older PCs and newer laptops/mobile devices without needing dongles.
SanDisk Extreme PRO USB 3.2 Gen1 Flash Drive is probably also a good choice, because it's made of Metal and has consistent speeds. Samsung MUF version cannot compete with SanDisk Extreme PRO as it has faster write speed sustainability over 150-200MBps (after dropping the speed). I think you should have reviewed that too. It's Type-A USB drive.
Came here to say this. I'm confused if the SanDisk Extreme PRO USB 3.2 supports UASP/Trim or not (I've seen several reports saying not), and would like to see a review covering that.
I had two of them and they certainly don't support UASP. They use internal disk driver like sata devices. As for trim, I guess you had to do it manually via optimize in Windows or some cli in linux
I’m not quite sure if I should blame it on my first own floppy based computers or the PDP-11/34 with its 10MB swappable hard disks that I earned my first IT money on, but I’ve always gone for swappable storage, including 5 ¼” SyQuest or even 3 ½ magneto optical disks, just for the flexibility and ease of doing backups.
Over the last years that was mostly hot-swap tray-less 2.5” drive bays and SATA SSDs, so NVMe was really a bit of a bother, especially once it became the only option in notebooks. I’ve tried basically every USB and Thunderbolt variant for SATA-SSD and NVMe and they typically came up way short. Some wouldn’t even retain the SSD characteristics (no TRIM), but even the Thunderbolt variant turned out to only pass two lanes of PCIe 3.0 on, which halved the Samsung 970 Evo Plus performance.
USB sticks were nothing but toys or “tape” for the longest time, but when I read your original Data Traveler Review, I decided to give it a try and bought a pair of 250GB units, especially since they were the same price as the fastest 128GB SanDisk units I’d used before, which performed at SATA levels.
They have lived up to everything you said and deliver practically identical performance to the 970 Evo Plus on Thunderbolt, at a vastly more convenient form factor and total price point. For anything with a type USB-A connector, I use a simple passive 4cm/1.5inch USB-C to USB-A plug converter.
They are wonderfully light, stunningly low-power for the performance (which *is* important when laptops run on batteries) and my only grief is that they are ever so slightly too wide (about a millimeter), so two of them don’t fit side-by-side into a notebook.
I’ve come to use them like removable hard disks, install full operating systems on them or only use them as data dumps. About the only thing I haven’t yet done yet is to use them in a RAID set, for which they have one critical quality: the backside is nicely flat and not riffled so a thermoprinter sticker with a disk label just fits perfectly on there. Without that, it’s just way to easy to lose track of what’s what.
Why do we have to choose between a type a and a type c? Why can't we have both on the same device. I know there are adapters but it's just another piece that can get lost.
Im sorry I guess I’m a little bit confused? If you’re transferring large files and they are important shouldn’t they be used on an external ssd with better reliability not a usb drive? I just don’t understand what this usb drive would be used for that fully uses the speeds that has a better more reliable and basically the same portability?
“ that has a better more reliable and basically the same probability”
Should be replaced with
*That would not be better suited for another solution that is more reliable and safer for the data and might be faster with the same portability maybe a tiny cable*
The significance of these devices is that they eliminate the distinction.
They are no longer "USB sticks", but external SSDs in a USB stick form factor.
You could of course just add a cable in the middle, if you wanted some flexibility. Or add steel cover for the "shit happens" protection.
Of course a USB stick usually sticks out and therefore adds quite a bit of potential fragility to a notebook you might be moving around while working.
I have some USB media that is so small it almost disappears inside a USB-A connector... which doesn't quite eliminate the fragility nor offers quite that level of performance yet.
We used to have PCMCIA, CompactFlash and all sorts of other media that could disappear inside laptops and thus be safer from accidental destruction.
For a while I enjoyed notebooks that still had a CD/DVD drive bay with a SATA connector: with a simple plastic caddy I could then put a SATA-SSD in there and basically get a hot-swap tray for the notebook.
µSD cards are getting to SATA levels today and NVMe class performance may be not too far away.
I use these sticks mostly with NUCs, which are both stationary and rather painful when it comes to swapping storage e.g. to boot another OS. They are usually out of the "conflict zone" of lose hands yet within reach, so fragility is a very unlikely problem while the flexibility is a big bonus.
For very mobile laptops or big workstations something different might work better, but I appreciate the choice.
The reliability here is likely more than enough for many (most?) use cases. They don't publish TBW, but even the absolute worst case scenarios is likely more than adequate for basic backup.
I actually decided to start using these sticks for backup since they are so cheap (the 1TB USB-C version is on sale for $135 right now). I was considering maybe getting an enclosure and some NVMe sticks with published TBW specs, but decided it wasn't worth it. It is probably more likely I would damage something swapping NVMe sticks into an enclosure that just rotating these sticks.
Even if the TBW is something *insanely* low like 100 TBW these sticks will last me 5+ years if I am only doing a delta backup once a week. But they actually come with a 5 year warranty, which is kind of unheard of at this level. This leads to me believe that the TBW is probably quite respectable.
Kingston has the XS2000 too, which is twice as fast, goes up to 4TB, and comes in different (I guess you could call it "more traditional") form factor. Definitely more physically robust, but I'm not really transporting these anywhere. What's nice about these sticks, IMO, is you can label them and put them on a keychain and just keep them in a desk.
@ page 3: "USB 2.0 ports are guaranteed to deliver only 4.5W (900mA @ 5V)" You mean: "USB 2.0 ports are guaranteed to deliver only 2.5W (500mA @ 5V)" or "USB 3.0 ports are guaranteed to deliver only 4.5W (900mA @ 5V)" Does the 2.31W and 2.37W mean that it can operate in even a USB 2.0 port with just 500mA maximum capacity?
The length of 91.17 mm is problematic. The lever of 91.17 mm produces large "moment of force". Instead of 91.17 mm x 22.00 mm x 9.02 mm, use 55 mm x 20...40 mm x 15...20 mm. If it is too wide, it is going to be incompatible with some positionings.
Scenario 1 50 mm x 22 mm x 25 mm works fine for my needs. (25 mm is the thickness of a 92*92*25 fan that I use vertically on the side of a laptop.) Use the length of DataTraveler G4. Place the USB plug asymmetrically with respect to the height of 15...20 mm, so as the lower side doesn't get disturbed by the table. Ie imagine a DataTraveler G4 (without the USB plug) on top of another one (with the USB plug).
Scenario 2 The 55 mm x 22 mm x 20 mm arrangement perhaps requires 2 PCBs, one on top of the other. Perhaps with 1 PCB the construction is difficult. You could use 1 PCB and a case of 50...55 mm x 35...40 mm x 10 mm. I repeat, it is going to be incompatible with some positionings.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
17 Comments
Back to Article
LonnieG - Monday, July 11, 2022 - link
In all the power consumption charts, I request give you provide a total energy consumed for the duration of the test (assuming it is the same time interval), not just the instantaneous consumption vs time. Peak power is good to figure out the power supply requirements - but we should be more concerned with the total energy consumed. Obviously, this is not very important for a thumb drive, but for the more power hungry components it may be a large contributor to the total cost of ownership.DanNeely - Monday, July 11, 2022 - link
Even if it drew 5W at all time and was plugged in 24/7 the yearly energy cost would only be in the $5-15 range (10-30 cents/kwh). In more realistic scenarios the dollar cost is going to be much lower. Where the absolute amount of power consumed might matter is scenarios where it's plugged into a phone or other device with a relatively small battery instead of wall power.YaBaBom - Friday, July 15, 2022 - link
A 5W constant draw could cut the battery life on many laptops by 20-50%--I'd say that's very significant, though unlikely (the pictured case couldn't dissipate 5W). Still, knowing the watts/hour consumed by this device would be a useful metric.DanNeely - Monday, July 11, 2022 - link
Could you review the SanDisk 256GB Ultra Dual Drive, or another model with dual USB A and C ports on it? If/when I buy a new flash drive, I'd like a model that will work both with my older PCs and newer laptops/mobile devices without needing dongles.Silver5urfer - Monday, July 11, 2022 - link
SanDisk Extreme PRO USB 3.2 Gen1 Flash Drive is probably also a good choice, because it's made of Metal and has consistent speeds. Samsung MUF version cannot compete with SanDisk Extreme PRO as it has faster write speed sustainability over 150-200MBps (after dropping the speed). I think you should have reviewed that too. It's Type-A USB drive.hubick - Monday, July 11, 2022 - link
Came here to say this. I'm confused if the SanDisk Extreme PRO USB 3.2 supports UASP/Trim or not (I've seen several reports saying not), and would like to see a review covering that.erinadreno - Tuesday, July 12, 2022 - link
I had two of them and they certainly don't support UASP. They use internal disk driver like sata devices. As for trim, I guess you had to do it manually via optimize in Windows or some cli in linuxshort-n-round - Monday, July 11, 2022 - link
I may have missed it, but did you check to see what speed the device was connected at with something like USBTreeView?abufrejoval - Thursday, July 14, 2022 - link
I’m not quite sure if I should blame it on my first own floppy based computers or the PDP-11/34 with its 10MB swappable hard disks that I earned my first IT money on, but I’ve always gone for swappable storage, including 5 ¼” SyQuest or even 3 ½ magneto optical disks, just for the flexibility and ease of doing backups.Over the last years that was mostly hot-swap tray-less 2.5” drive bays and SATA SSDs, so NVMe was really a bit of a bother, especially once it became the only option in notebooks. I’ve tried basically every USB and Thunderbolt variant for SATA-SSD and NVMe and they typically came up way short. Some wouldn’t even retain the SSD characteristics (no TRIM), but even the Thunderbolt variant turned out to only pass two lanes of PCIe 3.0 on, which halved the Samsung 970 Evo Plus performance.
USB sticks were nothing but toys or “tape” for the longest time, but when I read your original Data Traveler Review, I decided to give it a try and bought a pair of 250GB units, especially since they were the same price as the fastest 128GB SanDisk units I’d used before, which performed at SATA levels.
They have lived up to everything you said and deliver practically identical performance to the 970 Evo Plus on Thunderbolt, at a vastly more convenient form factor and total price point. For anything with a type USB-A connector, I use a simple passive 4cm/1.5inch USB-C to USB-A plug converter.
They are wonderfully light, stunningly low-power for the performance (which *is* important when laptops run on batteries) and my only grief is that they are ever so slightly too wide (about a millimeter), so two of them don’t fit side-by-side into a notebook.
I’ve come to use them like removable hard disks, install full operating systems on them or only use them as data dumps. About the only thing I haven’t yet done yet is to use them in a RAID set, for which they have one critical quality: the backside is nicely flat and not riffled so a thermoprinter sticker with a disk label just fits perfectly on there. Without that, it’s just way to easy to lose track of what’s what.
Flaming jizz - Sunday, July 17, 2022 - link
Why do we have to choose between a type a and a type c? Why can't we have both on the same device.I know there are adapters but it's just another piece that can get lost.
ISOProPlus6.89ghz - Monday, July 18, 2022 - link
Im sorry I guess I’m a little bit confused? If you’re transferring large files and they are important shouldn’t they be used on an external ssd with better reliability not a usb drive? I just don’t understand what this usb drive would be used for that fully uses the speeds that has a better more reliable and basically the same portability?ISOProPlus6.89ghz - Monday, July 18, 2022 - link
“ that has a better more reliable and basically the same probability”Should be replaced with
*That would not be better suited for another solution that is more reliable and safer for the data and might be faster with the same portability maybe a tiny cable*
abufrejoval - Saturday, July 23, 2022 - link
The significance of these devices is that they eliminate the distinction.They are no longer "USB sticks", but external SSDs in a USB stick form factor.
You could of course just add a cable in the middle, if you wanted some flexibility.
Or add steel cover for the "shit happens" protection.
Of course a USB stick usually sticks out and therefore adds quite a bit of potential fragility to a notebook you might be moving around while working.
I have some USB media that is so small it almost disappears inside a USB-A connector... which doesn't quite eliminate the fragility nor offers quite that level of performance yet.
We used to have PCMCIA, CompactFlash and all sorts of other media that could disappear inside laptops and thus be safer from accidental destruction.
For a while I enjoyed notebooks that still had a CD/DVD drive bay with a SATA connector: with a simple plastic caddy I could then put a SATA-SSD in there and basically get a hot-swap tray for the notebook.
µSD cards are getting to SATA levels today and NVMe class performance may be not too far away.
I use these sticks mostly with NUCs, which are both stationary and rather painful when it comes to swapping storage e.g. to boot another OS. They are usually out of the "conflict zone" of lose hands yet within reach, so fragility is a very unlikely problem while the flexibility is a big bonus.
For very mobile laptops or big workstations something different might work better, but I appreciate the choice.
ralphthemagician - Thursday, September 8, 2022 - link
The reliability here is likely more than enough for many (most?) use cases. They don't publish TBW, but even the absolute worst case scenarios is likely more than adequate for basic backup.I actually decided to start using these sticks for backup since they are so cheap (the 1TB USB-C version is on sale for $135 right now). I was considering maybe getting an enclosure and some NVMe sticks with published TBW specs, but decided it wasn't worth it. It is probably more likely I would damage something swapping NVMe sticks into an enclosure that just rotating these sticks.
Even if the TBW is something *insanely* low like 100 TBW these sticks will last me 5+ years if I am only doing a delta backup once a week. But they actually come with a 5 year warranty, which is kind of unheard of at this level. This leads to me believe that the TBW is probably quite respectable.
Kingston has the XS2000 too, which is twice as fast, goes up to 4TB, and comes in different (I guess you could call it "more traditional") form factor. Definitely more physically robust, but I'm not really transporting these anywhere. What's nice about these sticks, IMO, is you can label them and put them on a keychain and just keep them in a desk.
Arbie - Tuesday, July 19, 2022 - link
Wow - what a thorough report! Like a technical white paper. Thanks.Chrestos SV1GAP - Friday, September 16, 2022 - link
@ page 3:"USB 2.0 ports are guaranteed to deliver only 4.5W (900mA @ 5V)"
You mean:
"USB 2.0 ports are guaranteed to deliver only 2.5W (500mA @ 5V)" or
"USB 3.0 ports are guaranteed to deliver only 4.5W (900mA @ 5V)"
Does the 2.31W and 2.37W mean that it can operate in even a USB 2.0 port with just 500mA maximum capacity?
Chrestos SV1GAP - Friday, September 16, 2022 - link
Design a version of "Kingston DTMAXA" with much smaller length.https://www.kingston.com/en/usb-flash-drives/datat...
From https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/dtmaxa_en.pdf
"Dimensions
Type-C: 82.17 mm x 22.00 mm x 9.02 mm
Type-A: 91.17 mm 22.00 mm x 9.02 mm"
The length of 91.17 mm is problematic. The lever of 91.17 mm produces large "moment of force".
Instead of 91.17 mm x 22.00 mm x 9.02 mm, use 55 mm x 20...40 mm x 15...20 mm.
If it is too wide, it is going to be incompatible with some positionings.
Scenario 1
50 mm x 22 mm x 25 mm works fine for my needs. (25 mm is the thickness of a 92*92*25 fan that I use vertically on the side of a laptop.)
Use the length of DataTraveler G4.
Place the USB plug asymmetrically with respect to the height of 15...20 mm, so as the lower side doesn't get disturbed by the table.
Ie imagine a DataTraveler G4 (without the USB plug) on top of another one (with the USB plug).
Scenario 2
The 55 mm x 22 mm x 20 mm arrangement perhaps requires 2 PCBs, one on top of the other. Perhaps with 1 PCB the construction is difficult.
You could use 1 PCB and a case of 50...55 mm x 35...40 mm x 10 mm.
I repeat, it is going to be incompatible with some positionings.