Showing Results: Most Recent
Pros: Great performing drive (before it died in ~1 yr). OCZ customer service was quick about authorizing a return. We'll see how long it takes for the replacement to arrive.
Cons: Failed in about a year. Comparing drives with more than 100 reviews on Newegg, it is clear that OCZ has a poor track record for reliability compared to some of their competitors (Intel, Samsung, and Crucial for instance). Personally, I'm not willing to chance my data with OCZ SSDs anymore . I hope you are listening, OCZ. A low price might get you initial customers, but you will not win repeat business from folks with failing drives. Or from the tons of negative reviews they will post.READ FULL REVIEW
This review is from: ADATA N005 Pro 32GB USB 3.0 Flash Drive (Gray) Model AN005P-32G-CGY
Pros: Very fast transfer of large files. Smaller than most other high-performance USB flash drives.
Cons: Chokes when transferring many small files. While smaller than other high-performance drives, it is still too bulky to comfortably carry on a keychain. The cap *will* fall off if you keep it in your pocket all day. The "key chain" hole is too wide to work well with a keyring, but it works with a lanyard, if that make sense.
Other Thoughts: Performance Test (real world files)
Test1: A single zipped file totaling ~700MB
Read speed = 170 MB/s
Write speed = 45 MB/s
Test2: 1600 small files totaling 1000MB
Read speed = 15 MB/s
Write speed = 8 MB/s
Notice the huge speed difference between transferring one large file versus many small files. This is still much faster than normal flash drives. For comparison, my San Disk Cruzer Micro 16GB drive wrote those same 1600 files at only 2 MB/s and read them at only 4 MB/s. Excruciatingly slow! This drive is MUCH MUCH faster, but don't expect it to blow your mind when transferring many small files. No flash drive in this price range and size-class can handle small files very well.
Moral of the story: If you've got lots of small files to transfer, it may be faster to zip them into a single file before transferring them.
Pros: 4GB more space (formatted capacity) than most "60 GB" or "64 GB" SandForce drives. Superb read and random access performance. Worked perfectly on my Toshiba R705 laptop (The OCZ Vertex 2 and Corsair F60 each had boot/sleep/hibernate issues)
Cons: Write speeds are slower than the SandForce based drives. Prices tend to be a little higher. But Crucial SSDs have a better track record for reliability and compatibility.
Other Thoughts: The higher price and lower write speeds were a reasonable tradeoff for better compatibility and reliability. The 4GB of extra capacity (real world formatted capacity) compared to SandForce drives is a huge bonus on these smaller drives.READ FULL REVIEW
Display Name: Steve R.
Date Joined: 03/10/11
Some manufacturers place restrictions on how details of their products may be communicated.