- Obtained from: AliExpress
- Price paid: $2.58
- Advertised capacity: 8GB
- Logical capacity: 8,053,063,680 bytes
- Physical capacity: 8,053,063,680 bytes
- Fake/skimpy flash: No
- Speed class markings: U1, V10
| Sample # | 1 | 2 | 3 | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Protected area | 0 bytes | 50,331,648 bytes (inaccessible) | 50,331,648 bytes (inaccessible) | N/A |
| Manufacturer ID | 0x00 | 0xfe | 0xfe | N/A |
| OEM ID | 0x0000 | 0x3432 (ASCII: 42) | 0x3432 (ASCII: 42) | N/A |
| Product name | 0x534d492020 (ASCII: SMI) | 0x5344313647 (ASCII: SD16G) | 0x5344313647 (ASCII: SD16G) | N/A |
| Product revision | 0x00 | 0x20 | 0x20 | N/A |
| Serial number | 0x00000000 | 0x000001af | 0x000007e1 | N/A |
| Manufacture date | Sep 2023 | Jun 2023 | Aug 2023 | N/A |
| Sequential read speed (MB/sec) | 17.60 | 68.44 | 18.63 | 34.89 |
| Sequential write speed (MB/sec) | 11.13 | 19.77 | 18.69 | 16.53 |
| Random read speed (IOPS/sec) | 1,147.21 | 385.88 | 375.45 | 636.18 |
| Random write speed (IOPS/sec) | 37.68 | 172.01 | 204.32 | 138.00 |
| Read/write cycles to first error | 3,013 | 5,449 | 11,821 | 6,761 |
| Read/write cycles to complete failure | 4,773 | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | 4,773 |
| Total days to complete failure | 71 | Not yet determined | Not yet determined | 71 |
| Card reader used | JJS CR-UTC4AC | JJS CR-UTC4AC | JJS CR-UTC4AC | N/A |
| Package front |  |  |  | N/A |
| Package back |  |  |  | N/A |
| Card front |  |  |  | N/A |
| Card back |  |  |  | N/A |
Discussion
Auotkn is another brand that came up frequently while browsing AliExpress. The visual design is almost identical to that used by SanDisk’s Extreme cards — to the point where a casual observer from 10 feet away likely wouldn’t notice the difference.
I initially found it curious that the first two cards displayed such wildly different results on the performance test. It wasn’t until I compared the CID data between the two — which, admittedly, I didn’t do until I was writing this up — that I noticed that they are completely different. Initially I thought that maybe I got the CID data mixed up with one of my other cards — after all, card #1 shared the same manufacturer ID, OEM ID, product name, and product revision as the one QEEDNS card I’ve tested, and sample #2 shared the same values as the Cloudisk and Bekit cards — but after rechecking the data, it appears that I recorded it correctly the first time. This points to the conclusion that Auotkn may be in the middle of switching manufacturers. Or that they source their cards from multiple manufacturers. Or that they’re reselling used cards. On second thought, maybe this doesn’t point to any conclusion in particular.
Regardless, the cards have performed well on their endurance tests. All three managed to endure well over 2,000 read/write cycles without any errors, making it only one of two models I’ve tested so far to do so. As of this writing:
Sample #1’s first true* error was a two-sector wide corrupted data error during round 3,013. It survived 4,772 read/write cycles; during round 4,773, the number of failed sectors exceeded the 50% threshold. Here’s a graph of what this sample’s progression looked like:
- Sample #2's first error was a 1,668 corrupted data error during round 5,450. It has survived 25,408 read/write cycles in total so far.
- Sample #3's first error was an eight-sector wide address decoding error during round 11,822. It was the third card in my collection to survive 10,000 read/write cycles (after sample #1 of the Hiksemi NEO 8GB and sample #3 of the Bekit 8GB). It has survived 19,012 read/write cycles in total so far.
Overall, while these cards have done well on endurance tests, the tradeoff is speed -- they performed terribly on all of their performance metrics. My advice is: don't buy them. There are better cards out there.
* Sample #1 experienced a failure during round 2,854, but this was due to problems with my code that handles disconnects/reconnects.
June 16, 2024 (current number of read/write cycles is updated automatically every hour)