Subscribe Sign in

Expensive flash drives: When and why it's worth paying more

Engadget
1 min read Rewritten in plain language

Accessories

Changed after publishing · 1 edit
  • the report was edited: 664 words added, 9 removed.

Outlets edit stories after they go out, usually without saying so. We keep what we saw the first time.

Show what we removed Rules applied: A1×2 A3×4 A4 A9 D2×3 D3×28 E3×9 F2×4 all 30 rules
  • Faster transfers are only part of the story when you're deciding whether a premium flash drive is worth it.
  • USB drives haven't absorbed those increases dollar for dollar, but cheap flash memory can no longer be taken for granted either.
  • The trick is figuring out what you're paying for.
  • The group behind USB now recommends using the max transfer rate for clarity, instead of "USB 3.2" followed by the generation — these cap out at 5 Gbps, 10 Gbps or 20 Gbps.
  • In a 10GB transfer test, Tom's Hardware measured Samsung's cheaper Fit Plus at 319.7 MB/s reads and just 58.4 MB/s writes.

5 sentences from our version of the report, chosen to cover it. Nothing here is written; every line is in the article below. How

Headline check

There is nothing in this headline a machine can check against the report: no figure, no name and no quotation.

Nothing was measured here, so nothing is claimed. How this is checked

Faster transfers are only part of the story when you're deciding whether a premium flash drive is worth it.

Flash drives aren't the first device you think about when considering the current sky-high cost of RAM and storage, but they've been affected. Thanks to AI and data center demand, NAND flash prices have risen. USB drives haven't absorbed those increases dollar for dollar, but cheap flash memory can no longer be taken for granted either.

While two drives of the same capacity may cost different amounts, usually the extra cost brings something you'll notice: faster transfers, stronger security or hardware better suited to life outside a desk drawer.

The trick is figuring out what you're paying for.

USB 3.0 was the first successor to USB 2.0. The two following standards were at first called USB 3.1 and USB 3.2, but everything was retroactively changed to use "Gen" names.

The group behind USB now recommends using the max transfer rate for clarity, instead of "USB 3.2" followed by the generation — these cap out at 5 Gbps, 10 Gbps or 20 Gbps. Thus, if you see "USB 3.2" on a box, it doesn't necessarily show how fast that drive will be.

For example, Kingston rates its DataTraveler Max at up to 1,000 MB/s reads and 900 MB/s writes. In a 10GB transfer test, Tom's Hardware measured Samsung's cheaper Fit Plus at 319.7 MB/s reads and just 58.4 MB/s writes.

Shortened to 1 minute of reading, this version reads 9.3 on the Niral Score.

You are reading our version, not theirs. This is Engadget's report shortened to its most important sentences, in plainer words, with verdicts and loaded words taken out. Plain description stays, and so do adjectives that carry a fact, such as "former" or "federal". The reporting, the facts and the quotations are theirs — quotations are never edited — and the indicators beside it measure this version. Hover or tap Adjectives to see every one left in the text.

How this outlet filed it, and how we rewrote it

No other newsroom we read has filed on this event, so there is nothing to compare it with yet.

Outlet Niral ScoreAdjectivesSourcingSentimentHappiness
Engadgetas they published this story 17.7 34 24 -0.1 47.4
Mundane Readneutralized from Engadget 14.7 32 24 -0.1 47.4

Sign in to react.

Comments

Nothing here yet.

Sign in to comment.

Questions

Readers can ask a question about this story here. Questions and answers are for subscribers. Sign in to read them.

Comments are read before they appear where anything in them needs a person to look. Nothing posted here is ever deleted; a comment taken down keeps its text and the reason, so the decision can be looked at again. How this works