[HN Gopher] Results of 500 MicroSD Benchmarks on SBCs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Results of 500 MicroSD Benchmarks on SBCs
        
       Author : bmlw
       Score  : 77 points
       Date   : 2022-03-21 19:10 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (bret.dk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (bret.dk)
        
       | walrus01 wrote:
       | I am far less concerned about read/write speeds than I am about
       | write endurance and overall reliability/lifespan of microSD cards
       | in raspberry pi 3/4.
       | 
       | Would be interesting to see a write torture test until failure
       | comparing the samsung "PRO ENDURANCE" microsd cards to regular
       | u1/u3 class cards.
        
         | bmlw wrote:
         | Hi! I'm the guy that tested these and I hear you, as I
         | mentioned at the bottom of the post, I'm currently working on
         | stress testing some of the cards through a series of sequential
         | read/write and random IO tests and as soon as I have enough
         | data to justify the post, I shall be putting it up. I don't
         | have a Samsung endurance card, though I'm testing a SanDisk MAX
         | ENDURANCE card in this round.
        
           | Sakos wrote:
           | I'm very interested in seeing how that SanDisk fares. Been
           | thinking about getting it.
        
         | qbasic_forever wrote:
         | Save yourself the headache and switch to USB booting to a
         | proper SSD. Don't try to get maximum lifetime or endurance from
         | dirt cheap micro SD cards.
        
         | dragontamer wrote:
         | I don't know if its true or not... but I feel like I lose data
         | when I leave my phone in the car.
         | 
         | Temperature-changes almost certainly changes the physics of the
         | microsd cards. I feel like what's reliable at room-temperature
         | (70F) may not be reliable at 32F or 140F.
         | 
         | Then again, Rasp. Pi setups probably don't care about
         | temperature. But I can imagine cameras, phones, etc. etc. that
         | are left in a car in a wide variety of temperatures who may
         | care.
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | yes, there was only 1 samsung card tested - they should test
         | more. Basically ALL my SD cards are different flavors of
         | samsung.
        
           | bigiain wrote:
           | > they should test more. Basically ALL my SD cards are
           | different flavors of samsung
           | 
           | I'm looking forward to your blog post with similarly detailed
           | results for your collection of Samsung cards.
           | 
           | (Or your offer of decent contracting rates so "they" can do
           | that for you.)
        
         | icameron wrote:
         | This is a good point, but there is a larger problem anytime you
         | are relying on SD cards for a R/W root partition. Especially
         | when making a product out of one of these boards. It's so easy
         | to follow a tutorial and start an idea from a Bone or Pi or
         | whatever and have some cool functionality and think it's ready
         | to sell. Unfortunately, many of these boards don't have on
         | board flash and by default are booting from SD card with a
         | Linux distribution. It will fail a lot more than a real hard
         | drive does. A cheap SD card is not the same as an SSD when you
         | get down to it, no way around it. Absolutely use the SD card to
         | log data, but don't make booting dependent on cheap removable
         | flash media. Choose an SBC that has high quality flash with
         | good EEC. Source: Experience datalogging with SBCs for 3
         | companies for 10 years of my career.
        
           | koz1000 wrote:
           | I'm curious about the quality of the uSD card holders on all
           | of these units. Do they all use quality non-corrosive fingers
           | with enough force on the contacts?
           | 
           | I once had an intern that told me all about his RPi project
           | to do model rocket telemetry, then after some interrogation
           | sheepishly admitted that the project never quite worked
           | because the g forces and vibration at launch were enough to
           | make the card holder lose contact and the kernel panicked.
           | Bummer.
        
         | sascha_sl wrote:
         | Two easy ways to mitigate this:
         | 
         | * run alpine in diskless mode, this way all writes are very
         | deliberate and you never have something like a journal eat
         | though your entire card
         | 
         | * use the SD card to boot EDK2 UEFI firmware, and enjoy booting
         | generic ARM images from USB
        
       | masyukun wrote:
       | This is great data! I sliced it 2 different ways in Google Sheets
       | -- by SD card and by Raspberry Pi board.
       | 
       | Agreed that Amazon Basics is the surprising front-runner for the
       | cards, although the IOPing results are shockingly bad for most
       | cards except SanDisk Ultra 16 + 32. Might need to use Analytical
       | Hierarchy Process to determine how each performance
       | characteristic should be weighted.
       | 
       | For boards, the top 3 in your tests by a wide margin are: 1)
       | Orange Pi i96, 2) BeagleBone Black (2GB eMMC), 3) Raspberry Pi 4
       | Model B (Revision 1.1 - 2GB)
       | 
       | https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ENHM6N38iHFd7dEYliaT...
        
       | cyounkins wrote:
       | Here's a massive dataset: https://pibenchmarks.com/
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | That's an odd database for SD cards. A lot of the images do not
         | match the SD card description (in size).
        
       | kup0 wrote:
       | I know USB booting on pi is still not perfect, but it almost
       | seems to make more sense at this point to boot off of a decent
       | USB flash drive, I would think? If you get a decent brand with
       | good benchmarks, I would think that reads/writes would blow all
       | SD cards away. What I'm not sure about is latency or lifespan,
       | though I would think _good_ USB flash drives are likely to be
       | better quality flash than SD, without really being significantly
       | costly in comparison?
       | 
       | I say this as someone that uses SD cards currently, and I
       | understand if others do also- it's the easiest/default option,
       | but I've definitely given thought to switching
        
       | dsr_ wrote:
       | I have to wonder how lucky the Amazon card is: is the
       | manufacturer consistent, or is it just a rebrand of whoever has
       | made them a deal this quarter? Or several rebrands?
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | I wonder the same thing.
         | 
         | I had a Kingston SATA SSD that failed. It didn't just become
         | read-only, it failed completely and catastrophically. One day
         | everything was there, the next day the drive couldn't access
         | anything.
         | 
         | I delved deeper after that and now stick to major
         | manufacturers.
        
         | bmlw wrote:
         | This is actually part of my worry too and I bought 2 units (of
         | the 2x64GB) from the UK and Swedish sites and both are showing
         | up as the same manufacturer etc. Would definitely like to hear
         | from others that have them though to see how consistent things
         | are over in North America.
        
       | Seattle3503 wrote:
       | My understanding is that the SD card standard is often the
       | bottleneck here. It would be nice if devices (like the Pi) could
       | move to the faster UFS standard.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | dtx1 wrote:
       | I'm suprised by the strong results of the amazon basic cards,
       | though what is missing from this dataset is the "how fast does it
       | die" measurement
        
         | bmlw wrote:
         | I started that testing around a week ago! Will hopefully have
         | enough data for a post in the coming weeks but it's a bit
         | easier to test for speed first and before you kill cards :D
        
       | von_lohengramm wrote:
       | I really dislike how the only the biggest number from each
       | category is bolded. I really doubt that 5 tests was enough to
       | make 21.21MB/s significantly (statistically speaking) faster than
       | 21.16MB/s.
       | 
       | Other than that, I'm really surprised by just how much faster the
       | IO on the RPi4 is. Quite the difference!
        
         | gompertz wrote:
         | My thought too. Appreciate the authors effort; but given how
         | tight all the numbers are along with the 5 tests, if I were the
         | experimenter I'd feel like this was a big waste of my time and
         | inconclusive.
        
           | nerdponx wrote:
           | Not at all IMO. Concluding that they all perform about the
           | same is informative in and of itself.
        
           | von_lohengramm wrote:
           | As a reader, I found this more interesting as an IO benchmark
           | of various SBCs. While it may not have been the first
           | benchmark of its kind, I don't really seek out that
           | information, so this was interesting to me at least.
        
           | bmlw wrote:
           | No need to worry, I often feel like what I'm doing is a waste
           | of time. I do agree with what someone else said though as I
           | feel like whilst the sequential reads and writes on most
           | boards are largely the same, the random reads/writes are a
           | little more varied and this may be what people are looking
           | for. In either case, if a PS5 card performs largely the same
           | as a PS15 card, I'd say it was worth doing for the money
           | savings. Whether that PS5 card will last as long as the PS15
           | one is a different matter but hopefully with some of the
           | other tests I'm doing, we'll find out!
        
             | von_lohengramm wrote:
             | Haha I know what you mean! It was just a nitpicky thing, I
             | found this interesting nevertheless.
        
         | bmlw wrote:
         | Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure if just leaving them as
         | is and letting the reader decide how they want to
         | interpret/read the results would be better? I'm doing these
         | mainly out of my own curiosity in my endless free time at the
         | moment and I'm new to creating content like this so I'm open to
         | feedback!
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | Having data bars like in excel[1] solves this issue. The
         | ability to easily visualize any difference is a nice bonus as
         | well. For instance 2.16 MB/s vs 2.55 MB/s is statistically
         | significant, but it's probably not something that you'll notice
         | in regular use unless you have a stopwatch. However 2.65 MB/s
         | vs 4.49 MB/s is easily noticeable.
         | 
         | [1] https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/use-data-bars-
         | col...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-03-21 23:00 UTC)