- Obtained from: AliExpress
- Price paid: $3.99
- Advertised capacity: 128GB
- Fake/skimpy flash: Fake flash*
- Protected area: 134,217,728 bytes (inaccessible)
- Speed class markings: U3, V30, A1
- CID data:
- Manufacturer ID:
0x00 - OEM ID:
0x3432(ASCII:42) - Product name:
0x5344313647(ASCII:SD16G) - Product revision:
0x20
- Manufacturer ID:
| Sample # | 1 | 2 | 3 | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Logical capacity | 95,420,416,000 bytes | 97,517,568,000 bytes | 101,711,872,000 bytes | 98,216,618,667 bytes |
| Physical capacity | 95,420,416,000 bytes | 97,517,568,000 bytes | 101,711,872,000 bytes | 98,216,618,667 bytes |
| Manufacture date | Nov 2023 | May 2023 | Jan 2005 | N/A |
| Serial number | 0x00000398 | 0x00000308 | 0x00000381 | N/A |
| Sequential read speed (MB/sec) | 0.77 | 94.04 | 93.88 | 62.90 |
| Sequential write speed (MB/sec) | 0.75 | 15.49 | 15.70 | 10.65 |
| Random read speed (IOPS/sec) | 170.46 | 1,495.08 | 1,499.67 | 1,055.07 |
| Random write speed (IOPS/sec) | 104.73 | 210.36 | 214.32 | 176.47 |
| Read/write cycles to first error | 768 | 203 | 34 | 335 |
| Read/write cycles to 0.1% failure threshold | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | Not yet determined |
| Read/write cycles to complete failure | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | Not yet determined |
| Total days to complete failure | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | Not yet determined |
| Card reader used | JJC CR-UTC4AC | JJC CR-UTC4AC | JJC CR-UTC4AC | N/A |
| Package front |  |  |  | N/A |
| Package back |  |  |  | N/A |
| Card front |  |  |  | N/A |
| Card back |  |  |  | N/A |
Discussion
Ok, this has to be one of the weirdest trio of cards I’ve reviewed so far.
A number of new brands of questionable flash appeared towards the beginning of 2024, and this was one of them. I imagine that they’re trying to mimic Lexar, since the design mirrors that of the Lexar Blue 633x (including the “633x” mark). But what really made them weird? The fact that all three are different sizes — and none of them is 128GB. Rather, they’re all somewhere between 64GB and 128GB. I would have understood if the CID register indicated that they were 128GB but had turned out to actually be 16GB — in fact, the product name in the CID register is “SD16G”, which I’ve only ever seen associated with 16GB cards — but that wasn’t the case here. They are the size that the CSD register says they are.
On the performance front…well…sample #1 got the lowest sequential read/sequential write scores of any card I’ve reviewed so far — primarily due to the fact that it failed to break even 1MB/sec in either one — and the second worst random read score. Samples #2 and #3 did better, but were still below average in 3 out of the 4 categories — only scoring above average in sequential read speeds.
Endurance tests for all three cards are still ongoing:
- Sample #1’s first error was a single bit flip, in a single sector, during round 768. It has survived 1,198 read/write cycles in total so far.
- Sample #2’s first error was a string of bit flip errors affecting 120 sectors during round 204. It has survived 1,182 read/write cycles in total so far.
- Sample #3 experienced a 1,152-sector wide data verification error during round 34. It has survived 1,132 read/write cycles in total so far.
On a random side note, it was pointed out that the word “somnambulist” refers to someone who sleepwalks. It definitely felt like there was some sleepwalking involved in the creation of these cards.
November 4, 2024 (current number of read/write cycles is updated automatically every hour)