The mechanism makes it difficult to install the drive into narrow ports, which is why I prefer non-retractable flash drives. The building is unstable and made of weak materials. But considering the low cost and quick recording time, this is easily overlooked. There is a tiny overstatement in the entry. The stated reading speeds are not achieved. It's possible that larger capacity models have greater speeds. Has been found to be original. Scanned screenshots of test results for things like USB…

Although the speed is significantly slower than anticipated, it costs roughly the same as classmates. The speed on this connector is 2–2.5 times faster than USB 3.0, which is not just there on paper. Attached is a screenshot of the tests. It's too early to evaluate reliability because it was just purchased. I might add it later. The cost is higher than I had anticipated, but I required a flash drive with a write speed greater than 5 MBs, so I made my decision based on reviews despite the high…

Anyone who only needs a slow but reliable USB flash drive write speed can get one. I expected 50-60 mb/s and got less than a third of that, so it's not a good fit for me. The speeds are not advertised anywhere on the box, but users have reported faster transfer rates after verifying their claims using various benchmarking tools online and in reviews. The file was copied from a Samsung EVO SSD, and I used Windows 10 on a 6-core 12-thread machine to achieve this lightning-fast transfer rate. You…

The speed is significantly higher compared to that of their "younger brothers" from the same business, who have 64 and 32 GB respectively. The younger flash drives produced by the same business have been in service for more than three years, while this particular drive has been in use for more than half a year. There have not been any issues to this point. The mechanism that allows the blade to be retracted does not become damaged, but it is not always or particularly convenient to use. Does…

who writes that the copying speed decreases when set to zero, this is the same story. The following is the answer to such flash drives in general, which was pulled from a specialist forum that was discussing another flash drive but had a problem that was similar to this one: "a bad flash drive puts part of the file into the buffer, then saves it from the buffer to disk, and so on until it copies the entire file." This results in a recording that "jerks" due to its nature.

This is my third flash drive from this manufacturer. The first two, which I have been using for several years, work properly with a smaller capacity. Hope this one doesn't disappoint.

Just a beast! I purchased version 3.1 and plugged it into the usb 3.1 port, I certainly did not expect this. I recorded a 2.5 GB movie in 40 seconds, the speed was about 60 mb / s ! From a flash drive to a computer back in 6.5 seconds, I didn’t even have time to determine the speed, I jumped under 1-2 GB / s! I don’t know how it will behave further, but so far I’m happy as an elephant, the speed is much higher than declared. Even in port 2.0 it records 30 Mb/s. . For several months of work…

Its pros: It turns out that you can’t just accidentally fold a flash drive. It's cool. There is no need to be afraid of this. The brand is very worthy, the speed is really good. Some cons: If plastic would inspire more confidence, then the flash drive would not have a price.

Pros below: + No obvious problems The actual reading speed is higher than stated. Has cons: The write speed in real conditions is somewhere around 28 mb.

Its pros: The previous flash drive of this company worked faithfully for about 10 years, was lost. The new one is exactly the same. Some cons: The flash drive broke after 2 months. It takes 1 hour to record 1 MB.

Different pros: Nice fast flash drive. No worse or better than others in this class. Has cons: Plastic, this causes insufficient strength. But what can you demand from a budget product?

I bought two pieces, so all of the following is not a consequence of the marriage of a particular instance, but a lack of either the model as such, or a separate batch of flash drives. Recording speed: USB 3.0 jumps from 0 to 30 MB / s, never rises higher. Moreover, it jumps constantly: the graph is a high-frequency sinusoid (0-20-30-20-0-pause for a few seconds-again in a circle). The duration of the recording of a movie (i. E. one large file) with a volume of 5.5 GB is about 10 minutes (OS…

CrystalDiskMark gives a write speed of 50MB, but in fact, how many times I have not tried to write something to this flash drive, there is no such speed. It constantly jumps from 0 to 30, and such waves are recorded all the time . As a result, we have an average speed of 10 mb at best, this is when connected to usb3.0. Pros below: there is no indicator, the speed is low, there are no advantages . Has cons: low recording speed, which constantly jumps, the recording goes like a cardiogram .

I bought 3 pieces more than a year ago: 32.64 and 128 GB, the first one is with a backup copy of Windows, so I can’t say about reliability) I use the rest every day, they work flawlessly. Has some pros: until they die) the recording speed, as written on the package, sometimes sags, but not critical (throwing films of 10-30 GB each, the recording speed via usb 3.0 after 5 minutes, an average of 37 mb / s, suits me) Cons: the exit mechanism is a complete sadness, for a year of use on 2 flash…

1) When writing / deleting, the flash drive constantly stops recording / deleting at intervals from 2 to 10 seconds. As a result, the speed jump. Budget SSDs with TRIM disabled only do this when the Over Provisioning and SLC cache areas are exhausted, and only after the entire space is filled, and here immediately and in any situation. At the same time, the price of the version for "128" is equal to the price of SSD for 120. 2) Average read-write speeds for the "32Gb" version on a FAT32…

I have been using the 16 GB version for a year. In use all the time, I store working documents of different formats. The flash drive is filled with a third of many small files. There are no complaints about the work of the flash drive. During the use of the sliding mechanism did not disappoint. The flash drive is fixed quite well. On 4-ku, the standard for me is the sliding mechanism in Sandisk. In general, I recommend.

Got pros: The item was purchased from an online store. Sealed in unopened blister. The courier delivered on time. Different cons: A 128GB flash drive actually turned out to be 107GB of memory. What was very surprising

Pretty fast but a good example of why benchmarking software has no idea. Here's what Crystal Disk Mark says (and the photo shows the transfer of two video files in Windows 10 with an SSD source and this drive connected to a fast 3.0-compatible USB 3.0 port): Sequential Read (Q=32, T = 1): 102.911 MB/s Sequential Write (Q=32, T=1) : 97.646 MB/s Random Read 4 KB (Q=32, T=1) : 6.301 MB/s [1538.3 IOPS] Random Write 4 KB (Q=32 , T=1) : 0.262 MB/s [64.0 IOPS] Sequential Read (T=1) : 105.711 MB/s…