I went with 16k, since I have both write and read speed issues with  
my TOPRAM 8GB SDHC card.

I need  it to be fast reading for TomTom Navigator 6 as well as being  
fast for writing backups.

Getting ready to test it out...

Roger

On Mar 16, 2007, at 12:13 PM, Jason wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I chose 32KB clusters to attempt to improve write speeds since that's
> the only complaint I have with SD cards in general. Overall I haven't
> noticed too much of a difference.
>
> Roger Prokic wrote:
> >
> >
> > So which cluster size would be best?
> > I look at the data below and I think 16k is the best...
> > But I think it means that you can actually store less information  
> the
> > larger the cluster size as there will be space wasted more often  
> than
> > not???
> >
> > Roger
> >
> > On Mar 14, 2007, at 11:11 AM, Jason wrote:
> >
> > It's not the card that determines the default formatting but the OS
> > that
> > does it. I'm not sure what the Treo's default is, but XP uses 4k. I
> > did this with a PC using the command-line format command that looks
> > like:
> >
> >> format f: /a:32k
> >
> > I would imagine there's a Mac equivalent.
> >
> > You can get the 8GB cards from a number of places on-line. I keep an
> > eye on dealuniversity.com, bensbargains.net and a couple of other
> > bargain hunting sites and found the 8GB A-DATA card for about $40
> > after
> > rebate from newegg.com.
> >
> > Roger Prokic wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Jason,
> >> Are all cards defaulted to a 4k size cluster?
> >> How do you format a card with a different cluster size?
> >> Do you do this from the palm or on a PC?
> >> (I have a Mac)
> >
> >> Roger
> >
> >> On Mar 14, 2007, at 1:59 AM, Jason wrote:
> >
> >
> >>> I have a 680 and an 8GB A-DATA "super" card and ran a couple of
> > tests.
> >>> The first column is with the default formatting and stuff still
> > on the
> >>> card (not really a fair test). Column 2 is 32k clusters, column 3
> >>> is 16k,
> >>> column 4 is 8k, column 5 is 4k. The default if 4k so it looks like
> >>> formatting the card helps clean out the crud:
> >
> >>> Default 32KB 16KB 8KB 4KB
> >>> File Create: 69% 109% 484% 253% 227%
> >>> File Delete: 69% 462% 128% 104% 181%
> >>> File Write: 16% 22% 20% 18% 18%
> >>> File Read: 682% 682% 692% 653% 644%
> >>> File Seek: 1685% 1966% 1685% 1475% 1180%
> >>> DB Export: 56% 70% 103% 64% 54%
> >>> DB Import: 395% 416% 428% 412% 393%
> >>> Record Access: 804% 905% 905% 861% 862%
> >>> Resource Access: 914% 914% 800% 834% 768%
> >>> VFSMark: 521 616 582 519 481
> >
> >>> I also noticed that if I re-ran the test without reformatting the
> >>> card the
> >>> results would drop. For example, a re-run with 32KB clusters  
> gave a
> >>> VFSMark of 573.
> >
> >>> For the hell of it I compared my 2GB, Ultra brand, 150x SD card  
> and
> >>> came
> >>> up with a VFSMark of 869, though most of that was due to screaming
> >>> creates
> >>> (1561%) and deletes (1387%). Writes were only 11% and everything
> >>> else was
> >>> on par with the 8GB card.
> >
> >>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Roger Prokic wrote:
> >
> >>> > Here is my results... Can I get others that have a Treo 680 and
> >>> an 8GB card
> >>> > to post their results?
> >>> >
> >>> > VFSMark Results Treo 680 TOPRAM 8GB SDHC
> >>> >
> >>> > File Create: 38%
> >>> > File Delete: 12%
> >>> > File Write: 14%
> >>> > File Read: 635%
> >>> > File Seek: 1475%
> >>> > DB Export: 8%
> >>> > DB Import: 345%
> >>> > Record Access: 841%
> >>> > Resource Access: 783%
> >>> >
> >>> > VFSMark: 461
> >>> >
> >>> > ---
>
> - -Jason
>
> - -----
> --- There are no absolute statements. I'm very probably wrong. ---
> "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its  
> limits."
> - Albert Einstein
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQCVAwUBRfrCNayvi1v8SpM5AQL2TgP/QHAOXRSIZIyl9pdYHXVySoCrh7NakQVv
> F3LWzi2jDNYg7b3QpxTqtq95Alxl96vkw/BtPTkqxqD29v2mSrRjI0bVkWPaO3PI
> 4Gg3a5ijdXLE32PSE/XDmD9Hugjdy4Q/zbVuCU5tZ4ToQi3braQfpEJKoxEtTOXC
> BaRk2ChRL/8=
> =0W4r
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to