Duracell 32gb UDMA 600x Compact Flash - To good to be true?

S

Symon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
23
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

As I've swung from SDHC into the now relatively new world (to me) of CF...I thought I'd ask here about the Duracell 32gb UDMA 600x Compact Flash Cards.

Reading around some are saying "Yay! They're great and excellently priced" and others are saying "Boo! They're snail slow and wrongly labelled".

Have any of you guys been brave enough to buy one? And are they worth the low price?

Massive thanks in advance :)
 
I bought an 8gb version, can't be bothered to test it (don't know how and only have a cheap card reader) but it doesn't really seem any faster than my 133x Lexar Pro...
 
That's interesting. I'd have thought, even if the Duracell is only 400 or 500x, it would still appear faster than a 133x :shrug:
 
maybe it is maybe it isn't but I doubt I'd ever find out in general shooting, I've only downloaded about 30 14mb RAW's (direct from the camera over USB) and it didn't seem overly rapid.
 
symon,

the transfer speed will depend on the card, the reader, and how it is connected to your computer. If you're only using USB1 then you're going to be limited by the USB connection and not the card itself. I don't know the actual data transfer rates of 133 vs 500 but I suspect that both will be faster than a USB1.

Thanks,
Rick
 
hyeongsoong said:
even usb 2 is up to 480 Mbit/s which is about 60MB /s .
Click to expand...

That's a theoretical maximum. In reality you'll be lucky to get 30 MB/s.

As for the Duracell (which are really Dane-Elec with a different label) the 600x refers to the, fairly irrelevant, read speed. It should be 90 MB/s but, as these measurements show, it doesn't get that fast - more like 80 MB/s. And the write speed is even worse - less than 60 MB/s. So they're not even 400x.

Duracell are attempting to deceive potential purchasers. If they're going to be shady about their card speeds what else are they going to try to get past us users? I wouldn't touch them.
 
Thanks guys.

The question was more to do with whether the advertised/quoted specs were true.

I've found some test results and as hollis says...the 90MB/s is more read. But 47MB/s write on a 32GB card, that cost me £60, is ok by me :) Yes, I went for it in the end lol

I was worried they'd be something like 20MB/s write.

Granted...this is for a 16GB which would likely be faster:

CFCardread-writespeeds05b.jpg


I dug around before buying but I do feel for those who buy thinking they'll get 90MB/s write. And agree with hollis, again, that it's deceitful. :rules:

ps. Not sure how the convo got onto USB! hehe
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top