- Obtained from: AliExpress
- Advertised capacity: 128GB
- Logical capacity: 125,085,155,328 bytes
- Physical capacity: 125,085,155,328 bytes
- Fake/skimpy flash: Skimpy (2.28% skimp)
- Protected area: 134,217,728 bytes
- Adjusted skimp: 2.17%
- Speed class markings: V30
- CID data:
- Manufacturer ID:
0x6f - OEM ID:
0x0305 - Product name:
0x455a534431(ASCII:EZSD1) - Product revision:
0x10
- Manufacturer ID:
| Sample # | 1 | 2 | 3 | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price paid | $3.89 | $3.89 | $7.01 | $4.93 |
| Serial number | 0xaa005ac1 | 0xaa00b853 | 0xaa00b386 | N/A |
| Manufacture date | Feb 2023 | Feb 2023 | Feb 2023 | N/A |
| Sequential read speed (MB/sec) | 79.24 | 91.26 | 90.05 | 86.85 |
| Sequential write speed (MB/sec) | 50.75 | 51.03 | 50.11 | 50.63 |
| Random read speed (IOPS/sec) | 2087.43 | 1782.33 | 1906.43 | 1925.40 |
| Random write speed (IOPS/sec) | 438.58 | 431.70 | 463.22 | 444.50 |
| Read/write cycles to first error | 2,272 | 109 | 514 | 965 |
| 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 | Platinum PT-CRSA1 | 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
After being initially impressed by the Hiksemi NEO 8GB, I went back to see what other options Hiksemi had available. I must have caught the 128GB while it was on sale (or mispriced), because they were priced at only $1.74 before shipping. Even after shipping, these cards are still an excellent value, coming out to just over 3 cents per gigabyte. The only reason why sample #3 was more expensive is because I gave one to a friend, then went back and re-ordered a replacement; the price had gone up in the meantime.
On the performance front, this is another instance where it feels like Hiksemi undersold the performance of their cards; both samples I’ve tested so far easily surpassed the benchmark for the only performance mark that they bore, the V30 mark. Sequential write speeds on all three samples were more than one standard deviation above the average, putting them in the 85th percentile.
All three samples are still undergoing endurance testing. These cards will obviously take longer to complete their endurance test given their size relative to the others in the survey — they are averaging about 4-8 read/write cycles per day.
- Sample #1’s first error was a four-sector wide address decoding error during round 2,273; it has survived 2,623 read/write cycles in total so far.
- Sample #2 experienced a two-sector wide data verification error during round 110; it has survived 1,654 read/write cycles in total so far.
- Sample #3’s first error was an 8-sector wide data verification error during round 515. It has survived 921 read/write cycles in total so far.
I’m a little disappointed that these cards didn’t fare quite as well on endurance tests as their smaller siblings — it looks like, in these cards at least, endurance was more a factor of time rather than read/write cycles. But overall, I feel like Hiksemi has been an unexpected standout among the cards I’ve tested. They’re priced very competitively, and perform as well as — or even better than — many of their name-brand competitors.
June 15, 2024 (current number of read/write cycles is updated automatically every hour)