PNY supplied us with a retail sample of their Elite 512GB card to put through our comprehensive memory card evaluation routine. The PNY Elite microSDXC 512GB is a UHS-I card with a Class 10 (Speed Class) / U1 (UHS Speed Class) / V10 (Video Speed Class) rating. With the industry migrating to 3D NAND, the capacity per die has seen significant increase, allowing for microSDXC cards to reach these capacities. At Computex 2018, we also saw plans from ADATA and Team Group to sell 512GB microSDXC cards. Starting with the 400GB SanDisk Ultra microSDXC UHS-I card ( $153 at $0.3825/GB) introduced in August 2017, we now have the Integral 512GB and the PNY Elite 512GB in the market as well. Recently, we have seen a number of high-capacity microSDXC cards getting introduced. SD's popularity and affordability has meant that almost all consumer cameras come with a SD card slot. Currently, the standard and micro sizes are more popular in the market. The cards also come in various sizes - standard, mini, and micro. Its popularity is evident by the fact that it has spawned two follow-ups in the same form factor - starting with the SDSC in 1999 for capacities between 1MB and 2GB, we got SD High Capacity (SDHC) in 2006 (up to 32GB) and SD eXtended Capacity (SDXC) in 2009 (up to 2TB). It gained traction even in areas where CompactFlash had been preferred, thanks to its small size. SD (Secure Digital) cards were introduced in 1999, as an update to the existing MultiMediaCards (MMCs). This piece evaluates one of the highest capacity microSDXC card currently available in the market - the PNY Elite microSDXC UHS-I 512GB version. We recently started in-depth evaluation of the performance of various memory cards. ![]() ![]() Many computing systems (PCs as well as smartphones) also support SD / microSD cards for augmenting local storage capabilities. CompactFlash (CF) became popular in the late 90s, but, has now been overtaken by Secure Digital (SD) cards. There are different varieties of memory cards catering to various performance levels. People used to call two-rank DIMMs double-sided, but then someone came out with a four-chip DIMM that had two 16-bit chips per side with one side wired through to the interface on the other side.all ancient history now.Digital cameras and camcorders employ memory cards (flash-based removable media) for storage of captured content. Reminder: Ranks refer to the complete set of ICs that make up a 64-bit "side" of a module. Whether that's good enough or not is a matter for experimentation. Of course Mini ITX boards often have shorter pathways, and the lack of extra DIMM slots can improve stability slightly, so your odds of supporting four ranks at DDR4-3600 1T are slightly improved. More ranks gives you better performance, but often won't be stable at 1T when set to DDR4-3600. Have you seen widespread problems with mini-ITX boards running 2 DIMMs in their lowest stable 1T timings at the larger capacities (2 x 16GB or 2 x 32GB)? Or are they much better than the 4 slot boards for the lowest 1T timings due to just having only 2 slots?I'm referring to ranks because both 2x 16GB kits and 4x 8GB kits tend to be four-rank. You mentioned a number of the larger boards with 4 slots can't run all 4 stable at 1T. Pretty much anything from DDR4-2933 upward will make your system rock if you can keep the timings down, and your biggest benefit comes from two ranks per channel.ĢBe_or_Not2Be said:So let me ask you - most mini-ITX boards only have 2 DIMM slots. If you look at two rank configurations, 3200 C14 1T is only around 1% behind 3600 C16 1T. The problem is that a bunch of combos won't run stably at 1T with four ranks of DDR4-3600. Well, it is interesting, especially if you are looking at optimizing even to smaller percentages of improvement! Not that I worry too much about whether I'm getting 121% vs only 119% I don't have anything that heavily memory-performance oriented anyway.The sweet spot is two ranks per channel at the tightest timings you can get. However, from the tests shown, a lot of 3600 is at 2T already, and the highest 2T performers are still inching past the highest 1T performers. I thought 3600 was the sweet spot for Ryzen for getting 1T (higher would only be 2T) due to the backend fabric setting everything higher than 3600 to 2T. Overclocking and Latency TuningĢBe_or_Not2Be said:Hmm. ![]() The test system uses AMD’s fast Ryzen 7 3700X to feed data through MSI’s memory-mastering MEG X570 Ace from Toshiba’s OCZ RD400 SSD, while Gigabyte’s GeForce RTX 2070 Gaming OC 8G pushes the pixels. Readers who’d like to understand a bit more about that data rate and timings should check out our PC Memory 101 feature. We’re fortunate enough to have a full range of 2x 16GB DDR4-3200 kits with 16-18-18-36 timings to compare, and have included the cheapest of those for this battle of value supremacy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |