ADATA Premier 32GB

  • Obtained from: AliExpress
  • Price paid: $2.99
  • Advertised capacity: 32GB
  • Size of protected area: 83,886,080 bytes
  • Speed class markings: Class 10, U1, V10, A2
  • CID data:
    • Manufacturer ID: 0x1d*
    • OEM ID: 0x4144 (ASCII: AD)*
Sample #123Average
Logical capacity31,037,849,600 bytes31,954,305,024 bytes31,954,305,024 bytes31,648,819,883 bytes
Physical capacity31,037,849,600 bytes31,954,305,024 bytes31,954,305,024 bytes31,648,819,883 bytes
Fake/skimp flashSkimpy (3.01% skimp)Skimpy (0.14% skimp)Skimpy (0.14% skimp)Skimpy (0.14% skimp)
Adjusted skimp2.74%-0.12%-0.12%-0.12%
Product name0x5344202020 (ASCII: SD   0x5553440000 (ASCII: USD)0x5553440000 (ASCII: USD)N/A
Product revision0x100x200x20N/A
Serial number0x000000e80x00000dac0x00000eb9N/A
Manufacture dateJan 2021Feb 2023Feb 2023N/A
Sequential read speed (MB/sec)94.3293.7893.7893.96
Sequential write speed (MB/sec)20.7328.7828.3125.94
Random read speed (IOPS/sec)2,817.461,097.46959.471,624.80
Random write speed (IOPS/sec)401.98264.57262.53309.69
Read/write cycles to first errorNot yet determinedNot yet determined00
Read/write cycles to complete failureNot yet determinedNot yet determinedNot yet determinedNot yet determined
Total days to complete failureNot yet determinedNot yet determinedNot yet determinedNot yet determined
Card reader usedJJS CR-UTC4ACJJS CR-UTC4ACJJS CR-UTC4ACN/A
Package frontN/A
Package backN/A
Card frontN/A
Card backN/A

* This manufacturer ID/OEM ID is pretty well known to be associated with ADATA.

Discussion

ADATA is a brand that I’ve come across a few times now, during both my Amazon and AliExpress searches. They appear to be a fabless manufacturer based out of Taiwan. Seeing as how they’re a member of the SD Card Association, I’ll lump them in with the “name-brand” cards.

There appear to be (at least) two versions of this card floating around out there, possibly from two different manufacturers. One appears to be a little bit older (from early 2021), while the newer version is more recent (early 2023). Both versions performed about the same on sequential read tests; however, the older version scored slightly worse on sequential write tests, slightly better on random write tests, and significantly better on random read tests. On the downside, it was skimpier than the newer version.

Performance results for these cards were kinda all over the place. For example, as I mentioned above, sample #1 got a random read speed that was almost three times higher than the other two. Sample #2 also got pretty horrible read speeds on its first attempt, but were more in line with the scores from sample #3 on the second attempt.* Some samples got scores that were above average, while some got scores that were below average.

With the exception of sample #1’s random read scores, all scores came within one standard deviation of average. More specifically: sequential read speeds were above average, while all other scores (again, with the exception of sample #1) were below average. Sample #1 had a random read score that was more than one standard deviation above average; its sequential write score was below average, while its random write score was just average.

Endurance tests for all three cards are still ongoing:

  • Samples #1 and #2 have not yet reached the 2,000 read/write cycle mark. They are currently expected to get there sometime in August 2024.
  • Sample #3’s first error was a 42,624-sector wide address decoding error during round 1. It has survived 234 read/write cycles in total so far.

* I don’t normally re-run performance tests — because performance can go down the longer a card has been in use — however, this card is being tested on my son’s server, on which he had some other workloads going that might have affected the outcome, and he needed to reboot the machine shortly after the endurance test started. This meant that I had to start my program over from scratch, because my program will refuse to resume from a save state if the endurance test hasn’t completed at least the first round of testing. The results of the second performance test came out much better, so I decided to go with the results of the second performance test.

June 8th, 2024

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *