02-12-2010 11:47 AM
I have a 64GB Extreme Pro 90mbs and 32GB Extreme 60mbs compactflash cards. While they perform pretty much the same in my cameras (both Canon and Nikon), they are very slow to download onto a Windows PC computer. As an example, I can download 1000 Raw images in 7minutes from an Extreme IV card. It takes TWICE AS LONG to download the same number of images from the Extreme Pro 90mbs and the Exteme 60mbs.
I have used several card readers: the Sandisk firewire 800, and a Calumet firewire 800. I have done tests on other computers and with other readers. The results are always the same. Both cards were purchased from reputable dealers so I'm certain they are genuine.
Anybody have similar results or a solution to this?
Solved! Go to Solution.
02-12-2010 03:49 PM
the current fire wire and usb reader are really maxing out what you can do performance wise on the bus. additionally the reader will have to be compatible with UDMA 5 for Extreme 60MB/s and UDMA 6 for Extreme Pro. you will need to use an express card adapter to get the full performance of the extreme 60MB/s and Extreme Pro cards. here is a link to SanDisk's Express card adapter.
02-12-2010 04:22 PM
Thanks for the response. At least now I understand the situation. My prior queries to Sandisk support had been a complete waste of time.
I do feel like I just wasted a lot of money on two verrrry expensive cards based on performance estimates that can only be achieved with download technology that isn't mainstream and probably won't be available on standard computers for some time to come. The Sandisk express adapter is fine for laptops, but a rarity on desktops. Then you add the UDMA 5 & 6 qualification and it makes things even worse. It would have been nice if these new cards could at least have been up to par with the older Extreme IV's, but they are so much slower downloading that I have pretty much cast them aside. What a waste.
The thing that amazes me is that the Extreme IV is sooo much faster than the new cards when it comes to downloading. (Parity would have been nice, but over twice as slow is ridiculous.) I've been running around picking up as many of the Extreme IV's as I can find since they appear to be discontinued.
03-22-2010 12:13 PM
I have noticed that while the 16GB Extreme IV CF card downloads backup to my Sanho Colorspace UDMA (at UDMA setting) at around 36-37MB/second, the 32GB Extreme Pro does so at around 25-26 MB/second.
This is very strange. At worst, it should not be much faster, but it should not be 30% slower!
Anyone else notice this behavior with backups to fast backup hard drives?
03-22-2010 12:15 PM
This does not appear responsive to the question. Why would the Extreme Pro card be SLOWER than the Extreme IV? And it's about 10-12MB/second slower than my Extreme IV card on my Sanho backup in UDMA mode.
05-05-2010 09:45 AM
That is exactly my experience. The new card is SLOWER that the older models.
It is annoying that Sandisk has released a card that purports to be faster, but in practical fact it is not as fast as its older models, particularly in downloading. What they are saying is that the new card requires a more technologically advanced card reader on the computer side to realize the true speed of the card. In our practical world, such a fast card reader is generally unavailable on desktop computers where most of the processing of these cards takes place. Consequetly, the increased card speed is worthless. Even the card reader Sandisk now sells requires a slot that is not prevalent on most desktop computers.
I say: Bring back the Extreme IV and shelf the new Extreme Pros until technology is ready for them. I used to have the greatest respect for Sandisk until this fiasco obviously aimed at garnering them PR by toutiing they have the world's fastest card.
05-05-2010 11:09 AM
technology is already catching up to the cards. the simple fact is that USB and firewire have limitations that do not support the transfer speed of these cards. this is why pc express card readers are needed. pc express ports have already taken the place of PCMCIA ports in all new laptops so going forward more and more computers will support the bus needed for these cards. now that USB 3 is coming you may see USB 3 reader capable of these speeds but market penetration of USB 3 is currently extremely low.
when technology advances you will not always be able to use older hardware to take advantage of new products but this is simply the nature of the electronics business. you can take for example computer processors, RAM, and hard disks. if your computer only supports ZIF socket processors then you can not use BGA processors, if your computer only supports DDR RAM you can not use DDR2, and if your computer only support PATA storage disks then you can not use SATA disks.
05-06-2010 04:30 PM
I have read all the comments here with interest since I am saving up for 2 x Extreme pro cards (64gb/90mb/s) for use in my pro-audio recorder. I wonder if the real point about these cards is that they are faster to Write than all the other cards since, this is what concerns me most whilst working at 192kHz/24bit! I guess if most people are using these cards with good camera's then the write speed (especially with video) might be a worthwhile factor.
Can anyone advise me about their experiences with write speeds before I make an expensive mistake please!
05-07-2010 09:57 AM
write speed may vary greatly depending on what host device the card is used in. I am not familiar with the pro-audio recorder you are speaking of but i really doubt it will take advantage of UDMA 6 transfer mode. Audio even uncompressed audio should not require all that much throughput so the slower cards would probably be just fine.
05-07-2010 12:47 PM
You say that "technology is already catching up to the cards...USB and firewire have limitations that do not support the transfer speed of these cards". This is exactly my point. The cards were introduced prematurely considerably before technology would be ready for them. Why? Probably for reasons of garnering PR for Sandisk. Sadly, technology is not ready for these cards, and, most importantly, on current technology these cards ARE SLOWER than older Sandisk cards.
Based on Sandisk claims of card speed, I paid $700 for a new 64GB card, and $200 for a 32GB card. That's $900 total. How do you think I felt when I discovered that these cards were SLOWER TO DOWNLOAD than my older Extreme IV cards? I was extemely upset and felt like I had been suckered into a purchase.
I had been a loyal Sandisk customer until this happened. Care to guess whose card I will be buying and recommending next? It won't be Sandisk.