If its for small files like documents it will be fine but larger files you will see how slow these are are copying, personally i would get a 3.0 drive you can get them for around the same price and same size if you look around. Or pay a bit more for even faster speeds.
Yes i do own one but its a smaller size (32gb) and the read/write of it is terrible, that bad its thrown in a draw and only used to give files to friends because not even them will nick it. lol
huangxq2 to LS83
27 Feb 16#6
For small files, it is even slower.
It did not bother you, may because for small files, the total size you need to transfer is not big, therefore, the total during is not long for you.
It is a model with very bad performance. People do not waste your money.
I have many USB drives. Over the years, I have noticed that I tend to only use the Sandisk Extreme I have, because it is fast for both small and large files. It is the only USB drive which has very high speed but at acceptable price.
m_cozzy
27 Feb 161#4
I had one also, so slow as to be unusable.
huangxq2 to m_cozzy
27 Feb 161#5
I agree with you.
Do not buy this one.
This model is a bad model.
Cheaply made and slow.
Spend few pounds more and get something decent.
Do not be fooled by it states it is USB 3.0, that does not mean it is fast.
brianzion
27 Feb 16#7
its not just the drive that causes slow data transfer there are a lot of other factors that can impair performance. click here
huangxq2 to brianzion
27 Feb 16#8
Your point is valid.
But this drive is very slow even when all conditions are right. It is limited by itself.
If you are saying this to defend the drive, no need, it is easily proven.
Compare to 64GB Grixx USB 3.0 at £11.99 from 7dayshop
110/166 MB/s
0.14/5 MB/s
Test on the same machine one after another.
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 64GB is one of the worst USB 3.0 drive, do not defend it.
You tell me is this drive slow or not? Is it good at £13? Why is the £12 Grixx not better by miles?
DennisG
29 Feb 16#9
I had two of these and was so shocked by the slow speeds, I did some unscientific tests of transferring one gig to various devices. this was a real outlier. shockingly slow, and every time this device is posted in deals, many pipe in with the same observation.
sandisk are ruining their reputation by letting this exist!
only good things i can see this working for are things like photo frame and usb mp3 players - will take ages to move your data onto there, but for playback it *should* read the small files quick enough for it not to be an issue
helmethead to DennisG
29 Feb 16#10
I'd like to agree with the "Don't Buy This" comments. I have one of these - bought at Tesco - and the packaging is probably just this side of legal.
It says "USB 3.0" compatible but it's actually USB 2.0. Hence the slow speeds. It's compatible with USB 3.0 because every USB 2.0 device is compatible with USB 3.0. IMHO they're marketing it to look like it's a proper USB 3.0 drive when it isn't.
ian47
6 Mar 16#11
Only good for write once or twice to fill with mp3's for the car. Then it's a bargain. For everyday use dog slow
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
great price for 64GB flash drive
11 comments
https://mobymemory.com/uk/sandisk-cruzer-blade-64gb-usb-2-0-flash-drive-memory-stick.html?utm_source=google_shopping
Yes i do own one but its a smaller size (32gb) and the read/write of it is terrible, that bad its thrown in a draw and only used to give files to friends because not even them will nick it. lol
It did not bother you, may because for small files, the total size you need to transfer is not big, therefore, the total during is not long for you.
It is a model with very bad performance. People do not waste your money.
I have many USB drives. Over the years, I have noticed that I tend to only use the Sandisk Extreme I have, because it is fast for both small and large files. It is the only USB drive which has very high speed but at acceptable price.
Do not buy this one.
This model is a bad model.
Cheaply made and slow.
Spend few pounds more and get something decent.
Do not be fooled by it states it is USB 3.0, that does not mean it is fast.
But this drive is very slow even when all conditions are right. It is limited by itself.
If you are saying this to defend the drive, no need, it is easily proven.
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 64GB
5/19 MB/s sequential write/read speed
0.006/5.5 MB/s random write/read speed
Compare to 64GB Grixx USB 3.0 at £11.99 from 7dayshop
110/166 MB/s
0.14/5 MB/s
Test on the same machine one after another.
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 64GB is one of the worst USB 3.0 drive, do not defend it.
You tell me is this drive slow or not? Is it good at £13? Why is the £12 Grixx not better by miles?
sandisk are ruining their reputation by letting this exist!
only good things i can see this working for are things like photo frame and usb mp3 players - will take ages to move your data onto there, but for playback it *should* read the small files quick enough for it not to be an issue
It says "USB 3.0" compatible but it's actually USB 2.0. Hence the slow speeds. It's compatible with USB 3.0 because every USB 2.0 device is compatible with USB 3.0. IMHO they're marketing it to look like it's a proper USB 3.0 drive when it isn't.