Memorex TravelDrive and Mini TravelDrive

Test System:

To test the performance of the TravelDrive and Mini TravelDrive I ran a series of benchmarks using HD Tach RW 3.0.1.0 and SiSoft Sandra Lite 2005.SR2 (10.60). To get a feel for the "real world" performance, I also copied and pasted 500MB of random files and directories in Windows Explorer.

HD Tach RW 3.0.1.0:

The TravelDrive was the clear winner here. Looking at the screenshot above, you can see that its read, write and burst speeds were considerably faster than the Mini's. At the same time, there wasn't much of a difference when it came to random access times or CPU usage.

SiSoft Sandra File System Benchmark:

While I am not a big fan of SiSoft Sandra's CD-ROM/DVD benchmarks, it is a great tool if you want to test a system's performance quickly and easily. One of Sandra's more useful tests is the File System benchmark. This benchmark gives each drive an overall score, or "Drive Index", based on the results of its read, write, and seek tests.

The results here were similar to what we saw with HD Tach. With its faster reading and writing speeds, the TravelDrive scored a Drive Index of 23. The Mini, on the other hand, scored only a 15.

SiSoftware Sandra Removable Storage/Flash Devices Benchmark:

Designed with removable storage and flash devices in mind, this benchmark tests a drive's read, write and delete performance using four different file sizes (512 Bytes, 32kB, 256kB and 2MB). The results are then given in both operations per minute and the corresponding net transfer rate in kB/second. This benchmark also computes an "Endurance Factor", representing the wear and life expectancy of flash devices.

Now here's where things get interesting. When writing files 2MB and smaller, the Mini is actually the faster of the two. However, with larger files, the TravelDrive still has the advantage.

As I mentioned above, Sandra also expresses performance in operations per minute. To keep things simple, I've limited the results to the combined index and the total number of read/write/delete operations for each file size.

Here too, the Mini performed better with smaller files. Thanks to its faster writing speeds, it was able to complete many more operations than its sibling. On the other hand, the TravelDrive had a slight advantage with files 2MB and larger. Unfortunately, this had little effect on the drive's overall combined index.

The Endurance Factor represents the wear and life expectancy of a flash device. According to SiSoft, this number is computed by "dividing the average performance (normal condition, i.e. sequential write) to the lowest performance (high-stress condition, i.e. same block re-write)."

While the two drives were fairly close, the TravelDrive came out on top with an Endurance Factor of 22.6.

"Real World" Benchmark:

To test the "real world" performance of Memorex's new flash drives, I copied and pasted 500 MB worth of randomly generated files and directories. All of the files are between 10 bytes and 32MB in size and no more than four directories deep.

For some reason I expected the TravelDrive to pull through and take the top spot in this test. As you can see, that wasn't the case. While the full size TravelDrive was faster when reading back the data, the Mini took a good minute and a half less to complete our writing test.