Just a question, because in the past I had trouble with SD cards. . My 10 III is now in use. Which SD card is compatable with it?
I will suggest testing Sandisk Extreme Pro.
I bought a sandisk extreme 128GB and seems to work fine.
Thank you! Much appreciated.
Thank you. Will try that one too.
Are there incompatible SD cards? This is news to me.
Just get a quality brand, keep away from the cheap stuff.
I’ve had a great relationship with Kingston Canvas series cards, I can recommend those!
Thanks for your reply. Funny, I wasn’t certain because the Kingston did not work on my XA2, the Samsung Evo did however.
Now I have bought a Sandisk extreme. Will be ok.
I would like to buy a card as well some time in the (near) future. There’s a problem though and I thought it’d be better to ask you here: Which version did you get? Apparently there’s quite a few different ones and I am sorry but I am lost. But maybe I misunderstood something when looking at this website?
link to the different versions → link ←
one e.g. says Sandisk Extreme UHS-I U3, A2, V30, Rev-A1, another one reads R160/W90 microSDXC 128GB Kit, UHS-I U3, A2, Class 10 and then there’s a few more out there … Can you help me out here, please?
At first I went to a few shops. They only cards they sold were Samsung 32GB cards and they said that Sandisk makes your phone slower. I searched for it, but couldn’d find a serious confirmation of this story.
Website androidauthority.com gives some explanation about the letters and numbers on SDcards. The best brands are Samsung Evo, Sandisk, Kingston and Lexar. There seems to be a competition between Samsung and Sandisk.
I bought a Sandisk Extreme 128GB SDXC V30 for E25. It will come tomorrow.
Thank you @Kea . I couldn’t make sense of all these letters and numbers and hadn’t found any website properly explaining them yet.
Oh dear. I just did a quick benchmark on my X10III which has Kingston Canvas Select Plus 128GB V10 (SDCS2/128GB):
- Video file from camera, 3492 MB file
- File system:
- Flash to uSD: 188 seconds, 18.6 MB/s
- uSD to flash: 82 seconds, 42.6 MB/s
The filesystem seems to be exFAT - e.g. the factory default for the card.
So the card only delivers a fraction of its marketing numbers. That’s not really surprising to be honest… In real life, that performance is well enough for my use cases! Let’s see what the advertised performance is:
- Read: 100 MB/s
- Write: not specified
Perhaps all our SDcards will be exposed as not working as promised when we do benchmarks …
Adding another data point:
- Sony Xperia 10 III
- Sailfish OS 22.214.171.124
- Samsung PRO Plus micro SDXC 256GB U3 V30 A2
- 15.7GiB in a couple of gigabyte sized files
- Flash → SD in 8m 22s (32.8MiB/s)
- Flash ← SD in 6m 08s (43.7MiB/s)
I kept the phone awake during the copy (just some light browsing on the internet).
dd to see how fast the flash itself is:
time dd bs=1M count=1024 if=/dev/urandom of=test.bin 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes (1.0GB) copied, 4.097509 seconds, 249.9MB/s real 0m 4.42s user 0m 0.02s sys 0m 3.92s
So yeah, the SD card doesn’t seem particularly fast. But, it could still be a problem with the card reader rather than the card itself, right? I don’t have a good way to test this, perhaps someone with a laptop with a built-in sd-card reader can give it a try and compare to the speed in their phone?
I had to get an SD card for another device so I decided to upgrade my phone sd card instead and use the old one for the other device. The old card was formatted f2fs and was not encrypted. The new one is recognised as exFat.
Is it sensible to format the new card using f2fs? can it be encrypted or it’s not a good idea?
F2FS is designed for (“raw”) flash storage to maximize lifetime and performance, in that order. If SFOS supports it, it’s not a bad choice.