I think all the devices performed well and will provide most users with plenty of musical enjoyment between charges, and how far are you from a USB charge port in your day-to-day life?
#Iflash device hd usd full size#
This is even higher than the full size Kingston U1 512Gb which only draws ~95mA a power consumption of only 313mW. WOW! While the Sandisk 200Gb MicroSD only draws ~65mA an amazing power consumption of only 214mW while being read from, the Samsung EVO 128Gb MicroSD on the other hand draws an incredibly high ~110mA a power consumption figure of 363mW. To analyse the runtime results further I wanted to look in to actual power consumption of each storage option and how much power the different combination of cards consume.įor this set of tests, I done a full sequential read of the entire storage space while recording the power consumption – the results have been averaged. IFlash-Dual & iFlash-Quad are able to return good runtimes due to the highly efficient power saving features which keep any cards which are not being used in an idle / sleep mode, so in effect most of the time only one card is active and being accessed. The most surprising element of these results is in the SD card realm!! The iFlash-Quad wth 4 MicroSD cards effectively has the same runtime as a single full size SD card. The iFlash-Dual also comes in with excellent runtimes – again all of the SD cards based iFlash adapters return amazing runtimes. The HDD returned a solid performance and sits in the middle ground but having the drawback of its limited capacity. This was always the expected outcome, the mSata drives draw quite large currents during powerup and my iFlash-sata itself has a high performance chipset converting a very high speed SATA bus to the slower iPod PATA bus. I setup a low tech IP camera to take a photo of the iPod every minute, which allowed me to time exactly when the iPod switched off (to the nearest minute). This was done for the MP3 and Lossless playlist for each storage combination.
The iPod was fully charged, reset and booted up, the playlist was selected and played.
#Iflash device hd usd 320kbps#
So as mentioned above we have two playlists, one with 320kbps MP3’s (~6Mb per track) and the other with high bitrate lossless m4a files (~30Mb per track). The User Experience reflects the benchmarking results above – the ultimate in smooth scrolling through thousands of albums, near instant album art display goes to the SD cards…. The SD platform is designed to be ready for access in under 100mS, and the SD cards have virtually instant access times – which result in a blistering 5.7 & 5.6 seconds buffer fill times. The mSata comes in 2nd with a time of 6.7 seconds this maybe surprising but the SATA bus actually takes some time to handshake and negotiate the link from powerup. HDD is the slowest at 7.5 seconds which was to be expected as it takes over 1 second for the drive to spin-up before actually reading any data. While the SD cards have the slowest raw transfer speeds, they are hands down winners of the Read-ahead and access times test. As a reference, freshly restored iPod boots up in around 24 seconds. The SDXC only takes 2 seconds longer to boot – The overriding factor is the time the iPod takes to parse through the iTunes database. Considering the mSata read speeds are much faster than the SDXC. Interestingly, it looks like the storage read speed does not impact the boot time as much as you would expect. I chose this as the original 160Gb hard drive is very efficient as far as spinning platter disks go and the 7.5g itself is the most efficient of this generation of iPods. Test was conducted on the 7.5g iPod Classic, originally came with 160Gb hard drive. While in actual use the runtimes will be shorter, it still provides a very useful comparison of the different storage mediums. The test is pretty simple – load up each storage option with the same music, hit play and see how long it takes for the iPod to shutdown. Making their debut is the iFlash-Solo and iFlash-Quad, it will be very interesting to see how 4 MicroSD’s compare against the fullsize SD cards used in the iFlash-Solo & iFlash-Dual.ĭuring April 2016, all the SD iFlash adapters were updated to a new platform (internally named iFlash85), with this new platform I have squeezed a little more efficency out of the chipset as well as reducing power and startup times – however, the agressive power saving used in the iPod’s means that the iFlash board sits idle most of the time, so this will not result in much change in the final runtimes compared to the previous platform. Here is the 2016 runtime shootout results.
0 kommentar(er)
