Performance in FC Test
I used two patterns in FC Test: one included 900 files, 1MB each, while the other consisted of a single 900MB file. I compared the results with those I got in my earlier tests of portable storage media (see our Slimmo Disk4U 2.2GB and GS Magicstor 2.2GB PLUS CF-II reviews, among others), which were formatted in FAT16 with the default cluster size, too. I also include the results of 2GB CompactFlash cards from Transcend and PQI as well as of IBM Microdrive (1GB), Slimmo Disk4U and GS Magicstor (2.2GB each) hard disk drives, for the comparison’s sake.
The first diagram displays the results of creating (i.e. writing) 900 files, 1MB each. The hard disk drives all show similar performance, although the two devices from Hitachi can be called winners in their category, the junior model being slightly faster. Viewing the whole picture, however, we should agree that the CompactFlash cards are unrivalled leaders in speed. They are much faster than their competitors, although the two particular CompactFlash card models I use in the test are no record-setters in their own class.
The next diagram shows the speed of reading the 900x1MB pattern. Although the two CompactFlash cards are still faster than the other media, you can notice a difference: the two drives from Hitachi have broken away from the other three HDDs and nearly reached the speed of the PQI card.
The third diagram contains the results of creating (writing) one 900MB file. The CompactFlash cards are ahead, while the two Hitachi devices find themselves behind the Slimmo Disk4U.
The last diagram is about reading one 900MB file. The Microdrives from Hitachi have both accelerated suddenly. They are faster than the CompactFlash card from PQI, and almost catch up with the Transcend card. The Microdrives stop very short of the specified read speed of 7.2MB/s. The rest of the hard disk drives are lagging far behind Hitachi’s products.