Are Sandisk "ultra extreme" cards faster then generic cards?

James3shin

Diamond Member
Apr 5, 2004
4,426
0
76
Is the "Ultra Extreme III" just a label/marketing gimmick from Sandisk or is it really a faster performing card compared to say a Kingston class 6 SDHC?
 

Maximus96

Diamond Member
Nov 9, 2000
5,388
1
0
I really doubt you'll notice much difference during normal use. I got three 4 gb extreme iii cards for free after rebate but othrwise I'd go with whatever cheaper name brand card I can find.
 

troytime

Golden Member
Jan 3, 2006
1,996
1
0
i can tell the difference when shooting with my d80 in machine gun mode for sure (compared to regular kingston cards, not sure if they're class 6 or whatever)
 

corkyg

Elite Member | Peripherals
Super Moderator
Mar 4, 2000
27,370
239
106
Originally posted by: sswingle
I think thats just what they call their class 6 cards.
Correct!

"Sandisk is expanding its range of Extreme III media with new 4GB SDHC? and Memory Stick PRO Duo?cards. The SDHC is rated as 'Class 6' which guarantees a minimum sustained write speed of 6MB/s, although Sandisk say it is capable of 20MB/s. It will also be bundled with a MicroMate? USB 2.0 reader, ensuring compatibility with the new standard. The Memory Stick PRO Duo? card is said to have a sequential read/write rating of 18MB/s"

From DPR
 
D

Deleted member 4644

hmm. I think that the cards are rated at 15 mb/sec where as most class 6 cards are 6 mb/sec. I *could* be wrong about that, but I believe I am correct.
 

randomlinh

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,846
2
0
linh.wordpress.com
They are faster in my experience. But it really depends on which Kingston (or any card manufacturer). Everyone has their cheap "meets class 6 minimum requirement" card, and then they have the "kicks class 6 minimum's ass" card. Ok, maybe not everyone, but you get the point. In most point and shoots, it likely won't matter too much unless you hit video. For an SLR or HD video, I'd get a fast card because I like to shoot high FPS sometimes.
 

bobdole369

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2004
4,504
2
0
Every single card, from every single maker/brand/model, etc performs differently. They are all..... snowflakes.... Seriously - check out this test - granted its mostly CF, but the architecture is the same.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bi...ulti_page.asp?cid=6007

They vary even by lot number it seems. Anywhere from crawling to lightning fast. Generally speaking - the label won't give you a solid basis for speed.
 

Zenmervolt

Elite member
Oct 22, 2000
24,514
36
91
Originally posted by: bobdole369
Every single card, from every single maker/brand/model, etc performs differently. They are all..... snowflakes.... Seriously - check out this test - granted its mostly CF, but the architecture is the same.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bi...ulti_page.asp?cid=6007

They vary even by lot number it seems. Anywhere from crawling to lightning fast. Generally speaking - the label won't give you a solid basis for speed.

Note that those lists show a lot of dependence on the camera. For example, if a camera supports the new UDMA CF cards, it will be much faster when using the 300X cards, but if the camera does not support UDMA, then that 300X card isn't really going to buy you much.

In my A100, I cannot tell the difference between a 100X card and my 300X card, but with my A700 there's a huge difference. This has to do with both the processing engine in the camera and the A700's ability to use the newer UDMA CF cards while the A100 doesn't recognise that transfer mode and defaults to the slower PIO mode. In this case, it's not the card that's slower, it's the camera.

If you look at the tables you link to, you'll see that the newer cameras consistently take advantage of the faster card write speeds while older models do not. For example, the best that the old 5D can manage with a SanDisk Extreme IV 4GB is 7.375 mb/sec while the 5D Mk II with the same card hits 29.504 mb/sec. This is much more indicative of the camera's ability than of the card's. The older 5D is using PIO mode, while the Mk II has the ability to take advantage of UDMA which yields much higher speeds for the Mk II.

ZV
 

Koing

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator<br> Health and F
Oct 11, 2000
16,843
2
0
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: bobdole369
Every single card, from every single maker/brand/model, etc performs differently. They are all..... snowflakes.... Seriously - check out this test - granted its mostly CF, but the architecture is the same.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bi...ulti_page.asp?cid=6007

They vary even by lot number it seems. Anywhere from crawling to lightning fast. Generally speaking - the label won't give you a solid basis for speed.

Note that those lists show a lot of dependence on the camera. For example, if a camera supports the new UDMA CF cards, it will be much faster when using the 300X cards, but if the camera does not support UDMA, then that 300X card isn't really going to buy you much.

In my A100, I cannot tell the difference between a 100X card and my 300X card, but with my A700 there's a huge difference. This has to do with both the processing engine in the camera and the A700's ability to use the newer UDMA CF cards while the A100 doesn't recognise that transfer mode and defaults to the slower PIO mode. In this case, it's not the card that's slower, it's the camera.

If you look at the tables you link to, you'll see that the newer cameras consistently take advantage of the faster card write speeds while older models do not. For example, the best that the old 5D can manage with a SanDisk Extreme IV 4GB is 7.375 mb/sec while the 5D Mk II with the same card hits 29.504 mb/sec. This is much more indicative of the camera's ability than of the card's. The older 5D is using PIO mode, while the Mk II has the ability to take advantage of UDMA which yields much higher speeds for the Mk II.

ZV

The limiting factor in most cases is the camera. If your camera can outpace a average camera you are well worth spending your £££ on faster cards.

I just ordered a SanDisk Extreme IV for the 5D that is coming my way next weekend. The difference between the IV and the III was £12 and I thought to myself for the extra £12 I can save some time from transfering from a card reader to the pc. I'll have to upgrade my card reader to take notice of this though :p

Koing