Corsair vs Kingston USB - Hardware

This is a discussion on Corsair vs Kingston USB - Hardware ; Which of those USB drives would you go for for use with Linux, if it really matters: USB2 CORSAIR 4096MB FLASH DRIVE $69.00 (CAN) Storage Capacity 4 GB Compatibility Non-specific Interface Type Hi-Speed USB Features Waterproof Expansion / Connectivity Interfaces ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Corsair vs Kingston USB

  1. Corsair vs Kingston USB

    Which of those USB drives would you go for for use with Linux, if it
    really matters:


    USB2 CORSAIR 4096MB FLASH DRIVE $69.00 (CAN)


    Storage Capacity 4 GB
    Compatibility Non-specific
    Interface Type Hi-Speed USB
    Features Waterproof
    Expansion / Connectivity
    Interfaces 1 x USB - 4 pin USB Type A
    Miscellaneous
    Included Accessories USB cable, lanyard
    Compliant Standards Plug and Play
    Software / System Requirements
    Software Included Drivers & Utilities
    OS Required Apple MacOS X / MacOS 9, Linux 2.4 or later, Microsoft
    Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
    Service & Support 10 years warranty


    DRIVE USB2 KINGSTON 4096MB DT $59.00 (CAN)


    Storage Capacity 4 GB
    Compatibility Non-specific
    Interface Type Hi-Speed USB
    Expansion / Connectivity
    Interfaces 1 x Hi-Speed USB - 4 pin USB Type A
    Software / System Requirements
    OS Required Microsoft Windows 2000, Microsoft Windows XP SP1 or later,
    Apple MacOS X 10.x or later, Microsoft Windows Vista
    Service & Support 5 years warranty
    Service & Support Details Limited warranty - 5 years


  2. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    Yugo wrote:
    > Which of those USB drives would you go for for use with Linux, if it
    > really matters:
    >


    Either should be fine. I think Kingston is a better brand but that is
    only my opinion...

  3. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:48:51 -0500, Yugo wrote:

    > Which of those USB drives would you go for for use with Linux, if it
    > really matters:
    >
    >
    > USB2 CORSAIR 4096MB FLASH DRIVE $69.00 (CAN)
    >
    >
    > Storage Capacity 4 GB
    > Compatibility Non-specific
    > Interface Type Hi-Speed USB
    > Features Waterproof
    > Expansion / Connectivity
    > Interfaces 1 x USB - 4 pin USB Type A
    > Miscellaneous
    > Included Accessories USB cable, lanyard
    > Compliant Standards Plug and Play
    > Software / System Requirements
    > Software Included Drivers & Utilities
    > OS Required Apple MacOS X / MacOS 9, Linux 2.4 or later, Microsoft
    > Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
    > Service & Support 10 years warranty
    >
    >
    > DRIVE USB2 KINGSTON 4096MB DT $59.00 (CAN)
    >
    >
    > Storage Capacity 4 GB
    > Compatibility Non-specific
    > Interface Type Hi-Speed USB
    > Expansion / Connectivity
    > Interfaces 1 x Hi-Speed USB - 4 pin USB Type A
    > Software / System Requirements
    > OS Required Microsoft Windows 2000, Microsoft Windows XP SP1 or later,
    > Apple MacOS X 10.x or later, Microsoft Windows Vista
    > Service & Support 5 years warranty
    > Service & Support Details Limited warranty - 5 years


    So what's the problem - $10 is $10.


  4. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    Yugo wrote:

    > Which of those USB drives would you go for for use with Linux, if it
    > really matters:
    >
    >
    > USB2 CORSAIR 4096MB FLASH DRIVE $69.00 (CAN)


    > Features Waterproof


    > OS Required Apple MacOS X / MacOS 9, Linux 2.4 or later, Microsoft
    > Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
    > Service & Support 10 years warranty
    >
    >
    > DRIVE USB2 KINGSTON 4096MB DT $59.00 (CAN)


    > OS Required Microsoft Windows 2000, Microsoft Windows XP SP1 or later,
    > Apple MacOS X 10.x or later, Microsoft Windows Vista
    > Service & Support 5 years warranty


    I don't think that it matters, but you may want to find out which USB-
    flash interface chip each one uses. I suspect that the Corsair uses
    an NEC chip because of the support for Windows 98, and NEC USB chips
    seem to be among the least troublesome as far as compatibility goes.


  5. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:48:51 -0500, Yugo
    wrote:

    >Which of those USB drives would you go for for use with Linux, if it
    >really matters:
    >
    >
    >USB2 CORSAIR 4096MB FLASH DRIVE $69.00 (CAN)
    >
    >
    >Storage Capacity 4 GB
    >Compatibility Non-specific
    >Interface Type Hi-Speed USB
    >Features Waterproof
    >Expansion / Connectivity
    >Interfaces 1 x USB - 4 pin USB Type A
    >Miscellaneous
    >Included Accessories USB cable, lanyard
    >Compliant Standards Plug and Play
    >Software / System Requirements
    >Software Included Drivers & Utilities
    >OS Required Apple MacOS X / MacOS 9, Linux 2.4 or later, Microsoft
    >Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
    >Service & Support 10 years warranty
    >
    >
    >DRIVE USB2 KINGSTON 4096MB DT $59.00 (CAN)
    >
    >
    >Storage Capacity 4 GB
    >Compatibility Non-specific
    >Interface Type Hi-Speed USB
    >Expansion / Connectivity
    >Interfaces 1 x Hi-Speed USB - 4 pin USB Type A
    >Software / System Requirements
    >OS Required Microsoft Windows 2000, Microsoft Windows XP SP1 or later,
    >Apple MacOS X 10.x or later, Microsoft Windows Vista
    >Service & Support 5 years warranty
    >Service & Support Details Limited warranty - 5 years


    You left out the most important detail - the rated read and
    write speeds. If the manufacturers don't even list the read
    and write speeds, assume they are incredibly slow compared
    to most modern USB drives, and that you should find another
    alternative that has a good write speed (since write speed
    is a larger variable, some may have similar read speeds but
    writing may be a larger difference among different drives).

    For a 4GB drive, those prices look high but I realize that's
    Canadian $, what does it translate into in USD?

    If the exchange rate is around 1.55:1, in the US we can get
    a 4GB drive with 15MB/s write for about $34 after rebate
    which is about $40 CAN?.
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820227145

    I would use that as a reference point, plus with a drive
    that large it would take quite a long time to utilize all
    that space if the write and read speeds aren't fairly high.

  6. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 02:58:56 -0400, kony
    wrote:


    >If the exchange rate is around 1.55:1, in the US we can get
    >a 4GB drive with 15MB/s write for about $34 after rebate
    >which is about $40 CAN?.


    Edit: meant exchange rate of 1.15:1

  7. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    kony wrote:

    > You left out the most important detail - the rated read and
    > write speeds.


    Aren't they standard for USB2 ?

    > If the exchange rate is around 1.55:1, in the US we can get
    > a 4GB drive with 15MB/s write for about $34 after rebate
    > which is about $40 CAN?.
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820227145


    It's not Corsair or Kingston, tough.


  8. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    larry moe 'n curly wrote:
    > Yugo wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Which of those USB drives would you go for for use with Linux, if it
    >>really matters:
    >>
    >>
    >>USB2 CORSAIR 4096MB FLASH DRIVE $69.00 (CAN)

    >
    >
    >>Features Waterproof

    >
    >
    >>OS Required Apple MacOS X / MacOS 9, Linux 2.4 or later, Microsoft
    >>Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
    >>Service & Support 10 years warranty
    >>
    >>
    >>DRIVE USB2 KINGSTON 4096MB DT $59.00 (CAN)

    >
    >
    >>OS Required Microsoft Windows 2000, Microsoft Windows XP SP1 or later,
    >>Apple MacOS X 10.x or later, Microsoft Windows Vista
    >>Service & Support 5 years warranty

    >
    >
    > I don't think that it matters, but you may want to find out which USB-
    > flash interface chip each one uses. I suspect that the Corsair uses
    > an NEC chip because of the support for Windows 98, and NEC USB chips
    > seem to be among the least troublesome as far as compatibility goes.


    To tell the truth, I'm not very interested in Win98 compatibility. I'd
    rather keep $10 in my pocket.


  9. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    Yugo writes:

    > kony wrote:
    >
    >> You left out the most important detail - the rated read and write
    >> speeds.

    >
    > Aren't they standard for USB2 ?


    You're thinking of the interface speed. The read/write speed of the
    actual chips can be much lower.

    Another thing to look at is the actual capacities of the units. The
    real storage capacity is usually 10-15% under the labeled amount, even
    if 1k=1000.

    --
    Måns Rullgård
    mans@mansr.com

  10. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    Måns Rullgård wrote:
    > Yugo writes:
    >
    >
    >>kony wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>You left out the most important detail - the rated read and write
    >>>speeds.

    >>
    >>Aren't they standard for USB2 ?

    >
    >
    > You're thinking of the interface speed. The read/write speed of the
    > actual chips can be much lower.


    Oopsie, daisy, I didn't knwo that. I'll check. What is considered a
    good R/W spped ?

    > Another thing to look at is the actual capacities of the units. The
    > real storage capacity is usually 10-15% under the labeled amount, even
    > if 1k=1000.


    1k=1000 bytes seems pretty standard... for disks now, but how is the
    additional 10-15% justified?


  11. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    Yugo writes:
    >Oopsie, daisy, I didn't knwo that. I'll check. What is considered a
    >good R/W spped ?


    Beyond 25MB/s.

    Followups set to comp.os.linux.hardware.

    - anton
    --
    M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
    anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
    http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

  12. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    Anton Ertl wrote:
    > Yugo writes:
    >
    >>Oopsie, daisy, I didn't knwo that. I'll check. What is considered a
    >>good R/W spped ?

    >
    >
    > Beyond 25MB/s.


    > - anton


    According to this:

    USB supports three data rates:

    * A Low Speed rate of up to 1.5 Mbit/s (187.5 kB/s) that is
    mostly used for Human Interface Devices (HID) such as keyboards, mice,
    and joysticks.
    * A Full Speed rate of up to 12 Mbit/s (1.5 MB/s). Full Speed was
    the fastest rate before the USB 2.0 specification and many devices
    fall back to Full Speed. Full Speed devices divide the USB bandwidth
    between them in a first-come first-served basis and it is not uncommon
    to run out of bandwidth with several isochronous devices. All USB Hubs
    support Full Speed.
    * A Hi-Speed rate of up to 480 Mbit/s (60 MB/s).

    Hubs, even Hi-Speed hubs, serving a number of non-hi-speed devices,
    are likely to divide up a total bandwidth of 12 Mbit/s for such
    devices, which will slow them down unless the hub has transaction
    translator for each port. [3]

    Though Hi-Speed devices are commonly referred to as "USB 2.0" and
    advertised as "up to 480 Mbit/s", not all USB 2.0 devices are
    Hi-Speed. Hi-speed devices typically only operate at half of the full
    theoretical (60 MB/s) data throughput rate. The maximum rate currently
    (2006) attained with real devices is about half, 30 MB/s.[4] Most
    hi-speed USB devices typically operate at much slower speeds, often
    about 3 MB/s overall, sometimes up to 10-20 MB/s. The USB-IF certifies
    devices and provides licenses to use special marketing logos for
    either "Basic-Speed" (low and full) or Hi-Speed after passing a
    compliancy test and paying a licensing fee. All devices are tested
    according to the latest spec, so recently-compliant Low Speed devices
    are also 2.0.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB

    So, yes, above 25 MB/s should be pretty good. I suppose I'll have to
    pay a visit to Tom's hardware to learn more.

    Followups set to originals


  13. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 15:13:16 -0500, Yugo
    wrote:

    >Måns Rullgård wrote:
    >> Yugo writes:
    >>
    >>
    >>>kony wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>You left out the most important detail - the rated read and write
    >>>>speeds.
    >>>
    >>>Aren't they standard for USB2 ?

    >>
    >>
    >> You're thinking of the interface speed. The read/write speed of the
    >> actual chips can be much lower.

    >
    >Oopsie, daisy, I didn't knwo that. I'll check. What is considered a
    >good R/W spped ?
    >
    >> Another thing to look at is the actual capacities of the units. The
    >> real storage capacity is usually 10-15% under the labeled amount, even
    >> if 1k=1000.

    >
    >1k=1000 bytes seems pretty standard... for disks now, but how is the
    >additional 10-15% justified?



    No, 1K is never standard. When it's kiloBYTES, it is a
    binary system and data is stored on it in this system so 1K
    is 1024. Capacity is a descriptor of (in this context) a
    data storage device. The capacity represented must
    necessarily be equal to that in it's sole use- to store the
    data. There is no OS that stores 1K as 1000 bytes.

    A good read/write speed depends on the price, the fastest
    drives cost the most of course. For a 4GB drive I would not
    get anything under the 15MB/s write speed I mentioned
    previously. Ignore read speed, it is always faster and not
    as much of a variable as write speed... unless you had a
    particular use where you only write very few times but are
    continually reading that data, in which case you might
    justify the cost savings.

    Often they will be rated for (n)X speed, like 60X, 133X,
    150X. n = 150K/s read speed. This tends to be a primary
    part of the product description, but as mentioned above you
    would want to read the fine print as to what write speeds
    they spec, and more often than not, if no write speed is
    listed you might be getting one of the slowest write speeds
    of any current generation model.

  14. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 11:03:41 -0500, Yugo
    wrote:

    >Anton Ertl wrote:
    >> Yugo writes:
    >>
    >>>Oopsie, daisy, I didn't knwo that. I'll check. What is considered a
    >>>good R/W spped ?

    >>
    >>
    >> Beyond 25MB/s.

    >
    >> - anton

    >
    >According to this:
    >
    >USB supports three data rates:
    >
    > * A Low Speed rate of up to 1.5 Mbit/s (187.5 kB/s) that is
    >mostly used for Human Interface Devices (HID) such as keyboards, mice,
    >and joysticks.
    > * A Full Speed rate of up to 12 Mbit/s (1.5 MB/s). Full Speed was
    >the fastest rate before the USB 2.0 specification and many devices
    >fall back to Full Speed. Full Speed devices divide the USB bandwidth
    >between them in a first-come first-served basis and it is not uncommon
    >to run out of bandwidth with several isochronous devices. All USB Hubs
    >support Full Speed.
    > * A Hi-Speed rate of up to 480 Mbit/s (60 MB/s).


    Forget about these, assuming you are buying a modern product
    it will be USB hi-speed. We are not talking about the USB
    speed, we are talking about the product read and write
    speed. Different products using the same Hi-Speed USB2
    interface can and often do vary quite a lot in their actual
    performance in writing (mostly) and reading (to a lesser
    extent, when talking about 4GB sizes).



    >
    >Hubs, even Hi-Speed hubs, serving a number of non-hi-speed devices,
    >are likely to divide up a total bandwidth of 12 Mbit/s for such
    >devices, which will slow them down unless the hub has transaction
    >translator for each port. [3]



    Ignore this too, we are talking about what the product
    manufacturer specs as the READ and WRITE speed. Nothing
    else/other/different/not-usb.



    >
    >Though Hi-Speed devices are commonly referred to as "USB 2.0" and
    >advertised as "up to 480 Mbit/s", not all USB 2.0 devices are
    >Hi-Speed. Hi-speed devices typically only operate at half of the full
    >theoretical (60 MB/s) data throughput rate. The maximum rate currently
    >(2006) attained with real devices is about half, 30 MB/s.[4] Most
    >hi-speed USB devices typically operate at much slower speeds, often
    >about 3 MB/s overall, sometimes up to 10-20 MB/s. The USB-IF certifies
    >devices and provides licenses to use special marketing logos for
    >either "Basic-Speed" (low and full) or Hi-Speed after passing a
    >compliancy test and paying a licensing fee. All devices are tested
    >according to the latest spec, so recently-compliant Low Speed devices
    >are also 2.0.
    >
    >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB
    >
    >So, yes, above 25 MB/s should be pretty good. I suppose I'll have to
    >pay a visit to Tom's hardware to learn more.
    >
    >Followups set to originals


    It is unrealistic to expect 25MB/s write speed from most,
    and even those spec'ing it, will tend to have a real-world
    figure lower than this. It might read at 25MB/s though.

  15. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    kony wrote:

    > Ignore this too, we are talking about what the product
    > manufacturer specs as the READ and WRITE speed.


    Very interesting, Kony. It would be nice of you if you could provide
    "specs as the READ and WRITE speed" of any USB2 key on either Corsair
    or Kingston sites.

    Thanks again!


  16. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 22:32:36 -0500, Yugo
    wrote:

    >kony wrote:
    >
    >> Ignore this too, we are talking about what the product
    >> manufacturer specs as the READ and WRITE speed.

    >
    >Very interesting, Kony. It would be nice of you if you could provide
    >"specs as the READ and WRITE speed" of any USB2 key on either Corsair
    >or Kingston sites.
    >
    >Thanks again!



    The answer is no, because you are equally capable of going
    to their website and seeking a read and write speed.
    "read", "write", not "USB". It's just that simple.

    Go to their website and check. As I'd already mentioned,
    when a manufacturer fails to mention any speed it is because
    it is not fast enough to be rated, it is their lowest speed
    product, slower than everything else modern.

  17. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB


    Yugo wrote:

    > larry moe 'n curly wrote:


    > > I don't think that it matters, but you may want to find out which USB-
    > > flash interface chip each one uses. I suspect that the Corsair uses
    > > an NEC chip because of the support for Windows 98, and NEC USB chips
    > > seem to be among the least troublesome as far as compatibility goes.

    >
    > To tell the truth, I'm not very interested in Win98 compatibility. I'd
    > rather keep $10 in my pocket.


    I was referring to Windows _2098_ compatibility.

    I mentioned Win98 only because it's a way of identifying which USB
    chip is used, and some chip brands have more compatibility problems
    than others do -- see www.usbman.com, www.everythingusb.com, and
    www.fatwallet.com/t/28/496281 (latter applies to hard drive
    enclosures, but it shows how bad some USB chips are).


  18. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    kony wrote:

    >> It would be nice of you if you could provide
    >>"specs as the READ and WRITE speed" of any USB2 key on either Corsair
    >>or Kingston sites.


    > The answer is no, because you are equally capable of going
    > to their website and seeking a read and write speed.
    > "read", "write", not "USB". It's just that simple.


    Providing the links wouldn't have taken 1/10 of the time who took to
    write your silly messages. Trolling on newsgroups is pretty simple too!


  19. Re: Corsair vs Kingston USB

    On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 23:49:14 -0500, Yugo
    wrote:

    >kony wrote:
    >
    >>> It would be nice of you if you could provide
    >>>"specs as the READ and WRITE speed" of any USB2 key on either Corsair
    >>>or Kingston sites.

    >
    >> The answer is no, because you are equally capable of going
    >> to their website and seeking a read and write speed.
    >> "read", "write", not "USB". It's just that simple.

    >
    >Providing the links wouldn't have taken 1/10 of the time who took to
    >write your silly messages. Trolling on newsgroups is pretty simple too!



    You have worn out your welcome.

+ Reply to Thread