By Jens Birch
Back to the Olympus 5050 online resource | Olympus 4040 and 5050 users group |
This is a summary of a survey of the Olympus C5050 write speeds to different memory cards compiled by Jens Birch. Most of the write speeds were kindly measured and reported to me by the members of the Olympus 4040 and 5050 discussion forum. Some write speeds could be found in the archives of that discussion forum and many data points were supplied by Andrzej Wrotniak.
The tests were made according to Andrzej Wrotniak's method in the following way:
Explanation
of the tables
Any comments or questions can
be
mailed to me.
Results, sorted by write time
Cardtype | Brand | Model | Size(MB) | Write time in seconds | Firmware | Reference |
CF | Transcend | 30x | 512 | 3,8 | 77 | (a) |
CF | Lexar | 12x | 256 | 3,9 | 78 | (b) |
CF I | Transcend | 30x | 512 | 3,9 | 78 | (a) |
CF | Ridata (Ritek) | 512 | 4 | ? | (a) | |
CF | Sandisk | Ultra | 512 | 4,0 | ? | (b) |
CF | Transcend | 20x | 256 | 4,0 | ? | (b) |
CF | PNY (Toshiba?) | 256 | 4,2 | 76 | (c) | |
CF | Transcend | 30x | 512 | 4,2 | ? | (b) |
CF I | Transcend | 30x | 512 | 4,3 | 77 | (a) |
CF | Lexar | 40x | 512 | 4,5 | 78 | (a) |
CF | Lexar | 4x | 512 | 4,5 | 78 | (a) |
CF | Hagiwara/Toshiba | 128 | 4,6 | 76 | (c) | |
CF | Lexar | 12x | 256 | 4,7 | 78 | (a) |
CF | PQI | 256 | 4,8 | 77 | (a) | |
CF II | IBM Microdrive | 1024 | 5,0 | 78 | (a) | |
CF | Lexar | 12x | 256 | 5 | 78 | (a) |
CF | Lexar | 4x | 512 | 5,0 | 78 | (a) |
CF | Lexar | 4x | 256 | 5,0 | ? | (b) |
CF | Viking | 256 | 5,0 | 78 | (b) | |
CF | Memorex | 128 | 5,2 | 76 | (c) | |
CF | Sandisk | Ultra | 256 | 5,9 | 76 | (c) |
CF II | IBM Microdrive | 1024 | 6,3 | 76 | (c) | |
SM | Olympus | 128 | 6,7 | 76 | (c) | |
SM | Olympus | 32 | 6,7 | 76 | (c) | |
xD | Olympus | 256 | 6,9 | 78 | (b) | |
xD | Olympus | 32 | 7,0 | 78 | (b) | |
SM | No name | 128 | 7,0 | 77 | (a) | |
CF | Viking | 8x - 15x | 256 | 7 | ? | (a) |
xD | Olympus | 128 | 7,5 | 77 | (a) | |
xD | Olympus | 32 | 7,5 | 78 | (a) | |
xD | Olympus | 32 | 7,7 | 77 | (a) | |
SM | Sandisk | 128 | 7,9 | 76 | (c) | |
xD | Olympus | 256 | 8,1 | 78 | (a) | |
xD | Fuji | 128 | 8,1 | 76 | (c) | |
CF | Ridata (Ritek) | 20x | 256 | 8,2 | 78 | (a) |
xD | Fuji | 256 | 8,2 | 76 | (c) | |
SM | PNY (Toshiba?) | 128 | 8,2 | 76 | (c) | |
xD | Olympus | 32 | 8,4 | 77 | (a) | |
CF II | Sandisk | 12x | 512 | 8,5 | 77 | (a) |
xD | Olympus/Toshiba | 32 | 8,7 | 76 | (c) | |
SM | Sandisk | 128 | 9,0 | 77 | (a) | |
CF | SimpleTech | 256 | 9 | 78 | (a) | |
CF | Sandisk | 256 | 10,4 | 76 | (c) | |
CF | Sandisk | 128 | 11,1 | 78 | (a) | |
CF | Sandisk | 128 | 12 | 78 | (a) | |
CF | Sandisk | 64 | 18,3 | 78 | (a) | |
CF | FM Computer | 32 | 21,2 | 78 | (a) |
I thank all those in the Yahoo Olympus4040_5050
forum who have contributed to this test survey and also those who have
encouraged me to carry it through. Furthermore, I express my thanks to
Andrzej Wrotniak who gave his permission
to include his data in this work.
Linköping 17/8 2003
Jens
Birch