As everywhere as it is today, a flash drive, as we know it has existed for a decade that was introduced in late 2000. Trek Technology developed the first flash drive and IBM are marketed under the "DiskOnKey" brand, with a huge 8 MB of storage. He was impressive at the time given the form factor and because the disks were still widely used for transporting small amounts of data.

Coincidentally, the first implementation of USB 2.0 also introduced in 2000. Although the interface has continued to evolve and has become common in the last decade, it begins to show its age when performance is an issue. The maximum interface transfer of 60MB / s is no longer cutting it, especially when one considers that its communications are half duplex, meaning that data can flow in both directions, but not at the same time.
Even the fastest USB 2.0 flash drives can not match conventional hard drives today. Whereas it is often quoted hard disk drives as the slowest component on a computer, the time spent. The storage industry has been preparing for the transition to USB 3.0 connectivity for some time. Dubbed SuperSpeed ​​USB, USB 3.0 provides two-way communication (full duplex) and a tenfold increase transfer speeds and greater capacity while maintaining compatibility with USB 2.0 devices.

In terms of tangible improvements, USB 3.0 is not to reach their full potential at launch, but as it matures standard USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) considers it reasonable to achieve a rate of 3.2 GB / s, more or least enough to transfer a 27 GB movie in high definition just over a minute instead of 15 or higher with USB 2.0.

In recent years we have had a handful of USB 3.0 devices, and memory manufacturers now offer several flash drives that claim to use the extra yield offered by the redesigned interface. Today, we examine three 64 GB USB flash: The Nobility Series N005 AData, Kingston DataTraveler 3.0 and Ultimate Patriot SuperSonic.

As an added note, it is unfortunate that the USB 3.0 adoption is not happening as fast as he could, because neither AMD or Intel has provided chipset built-in support for the user interface. This seems more mainstream acceptance, however, while the desktop side, almost all new motherboards have support courtesy of a third-party drivers.

No comments:

Powered by Blogger.