Super Talent ExpressDrive (32 GB)
The performance of Super Talent's black ExpressDrive didn’t attract a lot of attention either in the practical benchmark testing, where we read and wrote 2 GB of data in different file sizes, or in the I/O benchmarks. It did, however, hold its own in the combined reading and writing tests. In the sequential operation test we measured up to 84 MB/s for reads and 45-28 MB/s for writes. On its Web site, Super Talent claims results of nearly 130 MB/s, which are based on benchmarking tools that assume that 1 KB equals 1000 bytes instead of 1024 bytes. This explains a part of the difference.
Super Talent offers a proprietary driver with the ExpressDrive, claiming it improves performance, as was indeed the case in most benchmarks. In some cases, we saw a decline in performance, but it was so slight as to be negligible. The interface bandwidth, which expresses maximum potential performance, even increased from 84.8 to 127.1 MB/s. That's much closer to Super Talent's spec for this drive. All in all, however, the difference in sequential reading and writing enabled by the proprietary driver is hardly noticeable in practice.
To the ExpressDrive's credit, it is not too expensive. We found the 32 GB model for $120, which is acceptable. Last but not least, Super Talent offers a comforting five-year warranty for this drive.
The article is a complete failure. You THG people ignored encryption as a metric. Why??!!
Flash drives are cheap. Company information and regulatory items (HIPAA for example) are priceless.
I'm a "road warrior" that depends on a flash drive for my daily work: IRONKEY. My employer provides it. I am legally required to use it. It is hardware encrypted. The drive might be stolen or lost, but the data will not seen by any unauthorized user.
If I lose my drive, the physical media is lost. I have medical databases that I am required to keep secret via government regulation. My drive will wipe itself after 10 incorrect login attempts.
Do any of the reviewed drives on THG do this?
This in my opinion is altogether a different topic and should be covered in different article where the encryption also as well as over performance be compared.
Agreed, I'll pass that feedback along to the author.
I did read the article. One drive supporting cryto does not a metric make, which I mentioned. That feature is an anomaly and not a fundamental feature (metric) of the article.
"Maybe you should read."
Reading is good. Comprehension is even better. I suggest you begin there, since you obviously cannot do that.
Your post reads like an advertisement and you complain that they didn't do an encryption comparison when only 1 drive supports it at hardware level. On top of that cant you read, this is a USB 3.0 test, ironkey only does 2.0. Furthermore your employer provides your drive so what difference would it make if they said your ironkey was a slow but safe piece of $#!t? This is an everyday-user drive roundup for fast file transfer, not a business specific roundup that would be useless to most tom's readers. You said it yourself, your company provides secure storage since they expect you to move important files. Typical users won't need this and if they do the decision most likely will be out of their hands. Additionally in a security environment the protection far outweighs the need for speed, so the test metric would be completely different than how consumer grade drives would be tested.
You don't seem to comprehend the use of your drive and what features the owner actually values.
we do not always looking for speed, we are also looking for backup or archive of sensitive data.
and other peoples are looking for speed only, for sure, because they hate loosing time in data transfert :)
but the same questions are also for classic HDD, not only USB keys.