Corsair Flash Voyager GTR 32GB Flash Drive Review Comment Thread

[SKYMTL]

Flash drives may not be the marquee products like graphics cards and processors are, they do have their place in the PC market. In the last few years, both speed and capacity have increased exponentially while we are now seeing the dawn of the USB 3.0 age with its potential for absolutely blistering performance. Corsair on the other hand recently released their Voyager GTR series of flash drives that promise to push the limits of the current USB 2.0 interface and in this review we take a look at the 32GB version.

[ Read full article ]

[mikellini]

Nice review, nice product. I have a couple of questions though...

In the Testing Methodology section, it seems like the methodology listed is for hard drives/SSD's. Is this a clerical error, or something else? Or maybe I just read it wrong. Part of the reason I noticed is because I was looking for information on how the drive was formatted. I've found that the formatting of flash drives can have a drastic effect on performance, so I was curious about this... Can you comment, AkG?

[gingerbee]

none of the images work fro this review tried too browsers chrome,firfox = no joy

[Smoothie]

I concur, no images show up at all. The Specifications page doesn't load at all for me, the others load but with no pics.

[FreeKnight]

Thought it was just me, but I can confirm a 'no images' on Opera as well.

[SKYMTL]

General site issue. Sorry guys.

[Shadowmeph]

Nice review, I myself and slowly getting into flash drives and trying to learn how to make multiboot so I can make flash drive rescues and portable Linux versions this flash drive looks good but is a little pricey for me hehe

[HalifaxPete]

Images working now - thank you

Nice review - muchly appreciated

[AkG]

Originally Posted by mikellini

Nice review, nice product. I have a couple of questions though...

In the Testing Methodology section, it seems like the methodology listed is for hard drives/SSD's. Is this a clerical error, or something else? Or maybe I just read it wrong. Part of the reason I noticed is because I was looking for information on how the drive was formatted. I've found that the formatting of flash drives can have a drastic effect on performance, so I was curious about this... Can you comment, AkG?

All storage devices including flash drives will based on the same base methodology, just with a couple different tweaks due to the fact that not all the normal test suites work on thumb drives.

The alignment of the drive was 2048 via diskpar / 1024 via diskpart. That is what all drives used in the reviewed were setup with and what all future drives will be tested with. Interestingly the Corsair came with this aligment "out of the box". In future reviews this will be noted in the methodology. Thanks for brining it up as I simply forgot to include it.

[mikellini]

Originally Posted by AkG

The alignment of the drive was 2048 via diskpar / 1024 via diskpart.

Thanks AkG. Although, I'm not certain I understand that, not familiar with the diskpar/diskpart utilities. Is that an NTFS format with 2048 byte allocation size, or 1024? I've only ever used the GUI partition utility, and I know there's a huge jump in performance when switching from FAT to NTFS (at the default 4096). And I've heard it's very important to safely remove NTFS-formatted flash drives to prevent data loss...

Also, there was a flash drive formatting utility out there (I think it might have been from Corsair) that claimed increased performance on any flash drive, although I lost my copy and last time I looked for it I couldn't find it. Has anyone heard of this?