Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Silicon Power 600x (16GB)

Memory Cards, Part 1: CompactFlash From 8GB To 64GB
By

Silicon Power offers 600x CompactFlash Type I cards at capacities of 8, 16, and 32GB. We received the 16GB model, which mopped up the competition in our benchmark runs.

Silicon Power's 91.6 MB/s interface performance is an all-time high result. The card doesn’t deliver maximum performance on sequential writes though, scoring between 50 and 82.4 MB/s. However, the read performance was really stunning. This was the only product to pass the 90 MB/s mark. A 91 MB/s minimum and 91.6 MB/s maximum speak loud and clear. Read performance was very fast and consistent, allowing copying of data from the card to a computer at the highest possible speed.

The 600x card also provided the highest Web server I/O performance in this review. File server and workstation I/O test results were more average. Interestingly, the operating temperature specs are a bit different here than on other memory cards. Silicon Power specs 0°C to 70°C, while other products may run in between -25°C and 85 °C. Like most other brands, Silicon Power provides a lifetime warranty.

Display all 12 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 5 Hide
    anamaniac , April 16, 2010 8:13 AM
    I am rather impressed that these little chips have this much throughput.
    Just a request, but, how about comparing a average SD, microSD, SDD and HDD just for a reference point?
  • 1 Hide
    otheos , April 16, 2010 10:33 AM
    What kind of CF reader did you use for these benchmarks?
  • 7 Hide
    ubergeek , April 16, 2010 11:25 AM
    Windows Vista? Haven't you heard Windows 7 is out?
  • -1 Hide
    awaken688 , April 16, 2010 12:01 PM
    Lexar seems to be the overall winner for sure. I'd definitely be buying that. I'm currently a SanDisk using for my pro work, but Lexar sure looks good in this category. Congrats to Transcend for putting up a good showing. They provide great value. Good article. As anamaniac pointed out, what device did you use for the reader?
  • -1 Hide
    cadder , April 16, 2010 2:43 PM
    The only speed metric that really matters is when the card is in the camera and the camera is writing sequentially to it. They aren't commonly used for random access and if you are reading from them you are probably limited by the reader or something else along the USB path. I have 4 different card readers and their performance varies widely.

    The speed and price of these is very unimpressive compared to current SSD's, but they are a bit smaller. However if you need to shoot raw at high framerates then there aren't any other options.
  • 3 Hide
    JohnnyLucky , April 16, 2010 3:14 PM
    Interesting recommendation for professional photography.
  • -1 Hide
    cadder , April 16, 2010 4:44 PM
    I forgot to put this in my previous post...
    A good test of these cards would be to get a DSLR, put the card in it, set it on raw and continuous and start timing. If possible you guys should add a test like this to your review.
  • -1 Hide
    bogcotton , April 16, 2010 5:14 PM
    Lol, can't wait for 5 years to pass so I can pick up a 64GB CF for £20.
  • -1 Hide
    hellwig , April 16, 2010 8:58 PM
    ubergeekWindows Vista? Haven't you heard Windows 7 is out?

    LoL. But seriously, they use Vista because its their standard testing environment. It would be unscientific to move to Windows 7, and compare the new results to anything they test on Vista. And I doubt they still have half the cards they tested on Vista to retest on 7, if they even wanted to do that.

    I mean, unless you know something about how Vista handles these CF cards, and can give a compelling technical reason to move to Vista?
  • 0 Hide
    nottheking , April 17, 2010 11:32 AM
    Good to know that nothing is spared any mercy when it comes to benchmarking it here. I must say I was surprised to see Samsung's offering readily exceeding its rated speed of x233, which'd work out to about 35MB/sec. Instead, for reads we see it tearing things up an nearly hitting 50MB/sec.

    And yes, I'll give another second on wanting to know what reader is used... And perhaps better yet, I wonder if Tom's might follow this up with another review of flash card readers?
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , April 18, 2010 6:59 AM
    What kind of card reader were used for the tests?
    If it was USB can you repeat the tests using Firewire?
    Why are there no SATA card readers on the market?
    (Only Addonics makes one as far as I know and very expensive here in Europe)
  • 0 Hide
    ravicai , April 18, 2010 6:41 PM
    ubergeekWindows Vista? Haven't you heard Windows 7 is out?


    Windows 7 still has a very small market share (10%) compared to Vista (20%). If anything they should have tested these cards on Win XP as it still has the highest market share (60-70%).