Xbench review12/29/2023 ![]() I already had a SanDisk SDDR-399 reader which I used exclusively for the testing, even though the Lexar came with a reader, I found this guy was a bit better for whatever reason on my Mac. The Prograde Digital UHS-II V90 64GB I already had Transcend "700S" 64GB UHS-II (same random write 4K IOPS QD as my existing SanDisk, but, UHS-II) Sony "Tough" SF-G64T/T1 (fastest random write 4K IOPS QD per online benchmarks) Toshiba "N502" (fastest random write 512KB speed per online benchmarks) The "real deal" Lexar 2000x UHS-II (to rule out perhaps the Prograde Digital wasn't so good) I preferred the former and wondered if perhaps another UHS-II card might give me more SanDisk-like performance (more consistent) but faster FPS rate.Īfter a deeper dive online I settled on a couple options: To my dismay, my first shooting with the Prograde Digital 64GB (indoors), I found it did deliver much faster buffer clearing times than my SanDisk UHS-I card, but, when driving AI-servo with C-RAW, the SanDisk kept chomping away on a buffer-full condition in a few, ka-chunk, ka-chunk, ka-chunk, vs the Prograde paused on full buffer and then after a bit rattled off a burst of high speed and paused again, repeat. ![]() I'd heard good things so I figured I'd give them a shot considering Lexar has been cream of the crop in the past. To start, I did some basic reading on reviews for UHS-II cards, and came across Prograde Digital, they apparently are formed from the ashes of the old Lexar, not to be confused with the new Chinese-owned Lexar. Long read ahead, highly technical, but should be informative not just for EOS R owners, future EOS M6 Mark II owners, but also future camera's sporting UHS-II. However, after I got my recent Prograde Digital 64GB UHS-II v90 card (top of the line) and under certain circumstances got more favorable results with my existing SanDisk Extreme Pro (UHS-I), I quickly realized something was up and a deep dive on the subject was in order The read and write speed are up to 16x faster than only one of the HDD.With the new EOS M6 Mark II looming and it's smaller buffer but, UHS-II support, it's time for me to finally make the jump from UHS-I to UHS-II. See? Not even 4 of the faster HDD's in the world (actually in the top 10) can come close to one single SSD. That's where we can really the SSD shine. The details of this test show that in average, the MacBook Pro SSD is about the same speed as one Seagate 7200.11 HDD. It can read an write about 270 MB/s but remember there is FOUR HDD here not just one. The Mac Pro use a Caldigit RAID card with 4 Seagate 7200.11 500 GB HDD in a RAID 5 setup. Here, we see that the Sequential read/write of the disk is way slower than the one from the Mac Pro. There is no reason for this result to be so close on both sides.Īs I say earlier, SSD's benchmarks are very tricky to read. How come a little 9400M GT is running as fast as a 8800 GT. The 8800 GT and the 9800 GT have the same overall performance so there's nothing strange at seeing a 9400M GT under a 8000 GT. It represent how the graphic card will render basic images, text and shape on the screen. This test is about the same as a Direct2D test. In fact, you can see that the new MacBook Pro's memory is close to twice as fast. You can see that the DDR3 at 1066 gHz is a very good gain over the old MacBook Pro's that used about the same memory as the Mac Pro but with only two channels. The result is a direct comparison of DDR3 dual channel vs DDR2 quad channel. ![]() Here, the results should be much higher on the Mac Pro side since the xBench is limited to 4 thread. I never saw a benchmark that give valid result on the first shot. Here, you can see the big difference between the two computers. This test look at how much power it can get from a multi-threaded environment. It gives a pretty good way to show how architecture difference can influence the result. It test how it handle it in a single threaded environment. It doesn't test the real computational power of the processor. I will take the result from the 9400M since they are more accurate. Here's a resume of the results with a little explanation from myself.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |