Hundreds of SD cards tested reveal surprising performance and reliability gaps

Daniel Sims

Posts: 1,963   +53
Staff
Why it matters: Shopping for SD cards can often be confusing, as numerous brands appear outwardly similar in all respects except for price and capacity. However, rigorous testing can show significant differences in speed and reliability. Furthermore, some models feature far less storage space than advertised.

Memory card enthusiast Matt Cole has spent around two years testing hundreds of SD card models to discern their true capacity, performance, and endurance. Although some of the results are unsurprising, the data reveals notable trends and can serve as a useful shopping guide.

While Cole admits that his methodology isn't perfectly scientific, he thoroughly tested around 200 variants on several memory card readers using two Ubuntu PCs. He also developed and published a benchmarking tool to test for speed and spot fake SD cards sold by scammers. Users should back up their cards before testing them, as the software fills the entire device while running.

Some SD cards available from stores like AliExpress might advertise generous storage space at tempting prices, but they actually hold far less data than what they report to the host device. Cole's testing also exposed authentic name-brand cards that often store slightly less data than advertised. SanDian, Xiaomi, Nenovo, and Sony tended to be among the worst offenders.

Regarding performance, although AliExpress sells more fake SD cards, which are predictably slower than authentic models, even the store's legitimate name-brand variants fell behind cards sold on Amazon. Amazon SD cards outperformed them significantly in sequential and random read/write speeds on average.

The discrepancy persists in the endurance category as well. Although this part of the study is time-consuming and currently incomplete, Cole is testing the number of read/write cycles before each brand encounters minor, major, and complete failures. The best SD cards can last for over 5,000 cycles, while scam models can fail at roughly half that. Surprisingly, off-brand cards – authentic products from lesser-known manufacturers – exhibit good endurance. However, they perform worse than name brands and often falsely advertise their storage capacity.

Our guide on what all the SD card icons mean

Although Cole tested read and write speeds and reliability separately, the same models typically topped every chart, leading to a slightly surprising overall top 10 ranking. SanDisk, which earned our recommendation for value and performance, ranks third on Cole's list, while Lexar, our choice for high-capacity SD cards, fell just outside of the top 10.

The best-performing models are the 64 GB and 128 GB variants, with Kingston winning consistently. Other reliable brands include PNY, Delkin, HP, Kioxia, and Samsung.

Cole's database automatically updates to reflect changes to his spreadsheet, so interested parties should check the rankings regularly. The raw data is also available on a separate page.

Permalink to story:

 
Interesting to see the Samsung Pro Plus 128GB ranking near the top of the performance chart, while the 2TB version sits at the very bottom. I get that flash memory performance can vary by capacity, but isn't it usually the larger models that perform better? Maybe that only applies to SSDs that use the same chips across capacities and just scale them up. In this case, could the 2TB Pro Plus be using slower, higher-density chips to achieve that capacity? With such a big performance gap, isn’t it a bit misleading to brand them both as part of the same "Pro Plus" lineup?
^Ooops, didn't realize the bottom one was a "Sansumg Pro Plus 2TB" -- Thanks, @bclaymiles.
 
Last edited:
Interesting to see the Samsung Pro Plus 128GB ranking near the top of the performance chart, while the 2TB version sits at the very bottom. I get that flash memory performance can vary by capacity, but isn't it usually the larger models that perform better? Maybe that only applies to SSDs that use the same chips across capacities and just scale them up. In this case, could the 2TB Pro Plus be using slower, higher-density chips to achieve that capacity? With such a big performance gap, isn’t it a bit misleading to brand them both as part of the same "Pro Plus" lineup?

The device at the bottom of the chart is a "Sansumg Pro Plus 2TB" device, or in others, a cheap fake. I was similarly cornfused initially, had to open the chart up full screen and zoom in.
 
The device at the bottom of the chart is a "Sansumg Pro Plus 2TB" device, or in others, a cheap fake. I was similarly cornfused initially, had to open the chart up full screen and zoom in.
Oh wow! Nice catch! I was browsing from my phone, so big charts with tiny text are pretty cumbersome. Though, I guess I should've been more diligent as this is an article comparing cheap scam SSDs to legitimate brands.
 
Its unfortunate that people buy cheap brands. I've never had a problem as I usually only buy name brand cards like SanDisk.
 
I have bought more than my fair share of cheap cards off of places like TEMU, etc - I've found that nearly always, if the price/size seems to good to be true, of course it likely is, with the card failing after trying to use it. But in some cases, usually in smaller sizes (64GB & under), the card does work. Once, I got a no-name 400GB (kind of a weird non-standard size) card for $10, and it actually held that amount, wrote at an acceptable speed and continues to work to this day. But that one is definitely an outlier. Caveat emptor. :)
 
Matt Cole is testing microSD cards, not SD cards. SD cards are mostly used in digital cameras, whereas microSD are mostly used in other electronics. Matt is very careful about always using the correct name. Please correct your article, as it is plain wrong, as well as the picture you used that is misleading.
 
I appreciate quality devices, as I do construction tools, though for me it's a little pointless to buy A1 / top-quality SD cards given I still use a nearly 20-year old computer and cannot benefit from the inherent performance. But, the reliability is still important, though, so I'd def go with Kingston cards.

One lesson I learned of SD cards, approximately 15 years ago, is they're volatile, which is a fact I didn't know at the time. They have a tiny capacitor which holds a charge to maintain the state of the memory. If the cards are not inserted / recharged periodically, the data stored on them will be lost.
 
Back