Testing a fake 128GB Samsung EVO+ micro SD card

For about $45 you can buy a Samsung 128GB Micro SD card from Amazon. Sellers on Ebay offer them new for a lot less. I selected one for $26, shipped (from S. California), suspect it would be a fake, but curious what I would get. What I got looked reasonably real (shown here after opening).


My phone and laptop both reported full 128GB of space. Interestingly, the case contained the regular disclaimer that 1GB = 1000,000,000 bytes, but presumably in an attempt to avoid suspicion the card reported a full 128GB of space (using 1024^3 = 1GB). I tested it by copying some files to it and immediately had problems. The transfer rate was abysmal, between 1 and 2 MB/s, nothing close to the advertised rate on the package. And Windows kept on saying the card wasn't inserted, or needed to be checked for errors. After checking for errors some of the files were missing. I figured maybe the first part of the disk was bad, corrupting the FAT file system data, so I partitioned the disk in two, starting with a dummy 8mb partition.




The dummy partition helped. The write speed of the disk went up to about 5MB/s and Windows stopped reporting damage to the file system.

I also got more systematic and used a tool called H2testw to verify the actual storage space on the card. h2testw is not the nicest tool, but it got the job done, revealing that a full 24gb of "usable" space on the disk. Well, sort of usable: even keeping within that fraction of space, some of the data written was corrupted, though well below 1%.  So the card had about 20% of the advertised 128gb, which is a pretty bad deal for $26, especially given the random corruption of that 24gb (undetected until read back). For comparison, Amazon currently sells real 32GB Samsung cards for $16, or 50 cents/GB, whereas this card cost about 100 cents/GB.

I suppose I could use it to store my MP3 collection for playing back on a old phone. Time will tell if the usable storage remains usable long enough to make even that worthwhile.

Final note: that SD card adapter was so cheap that it failed after just a couple insertion/removal cycles. See the crack in the lower left corner. Thus, all my tests were conducted with a genuine Samsung adapter.


Comments

Post a Comment

Email me

Name

Email *

Message *

Popular posts from this blog

Panasonic TH-42PX75U Plasma TV review: input lag and upscaling tested using the piLagTesterPRO

Image
This 720p Plasma TV from 2008 is very unique and quite nice in many ways. It used to retail for around $1300. If you can find one it's a great choice for retro gaming.  Overview/Image quality This is a plasma TV, which generally means at least the following: nearly infinite viewing angles, and jaw dropping weight. That's true in this case as well. This 42" model weights 75lbs.  At native resolution (720p) this TV crops 20 pixels off the top/bottom and 30 off the sides. 480p/i crops 20 pixels off all sides. Both modes have aliasing, too, though it's not too bad. There's really no excuse for aliasing on a TV this big: you know the panel was designed specifically to be a tv. Why not hit 720p exactly? And as for 480p/i, they could have at least offered a zoomed out mode with black borders and 1:1 pixel mapping. But no such luck. There are zoom/stretch options to crop even more, but none that crop less. While the native resolution supposedly is 1366 x 768 it does accept
Read more

piLagTester PRO order page

Image
The piLagTesterPRO measures your monitor's input lag and response time. It is a cheap, full featured add-on to the Raspberry Pi; I provide the sensor and required software, you provide the Pi (a $5 pi Zero is more than sufficient). Although it has a DIY aesthetic, it is quite functional and in fact offers quite a lot more features than the commercial alternatives (Leo Bodnar and the Time Sleuth), and has been tested with over 40 TVs, including 4k models .  Here's what it looks like in action: The pi draws a black background, and then roughly once a second displays a set of target rectangles (top/middle/bottom). You place the sensor over the desired target, and the piLagTester measures the monitor's response starting from the moment the frame of video data is sent over the Pi's HDMI port. This is plotted in the graph, which is sideways for space reasons. The lag tester measures two thresholds. In red it shows how long it takes for the monitor to start displaying t
Read more

A $5 TV Input Lag tester using a Raspberry Pi Zero

Image
High speed monitors are all the rage now, with quoted response times  of 1-4ms. But does that mean that 1-4ms after you make an input (say, jump) you will see that on your screen? No. Often a much bigger issue is  Input lag. This is   the delay between your computer / game console sending a video frame to your display and your display starting to actually show it, and it ranges from 4ms to 80ms. The problem with measuring input lag is that you can't, at least with everyday hardware. The solution for hardware review sites is to purchase dedicated lag testers such as the leo bodnar tester,  timesleuth (both ~$100), or the pi lag tester pro ($40) or use homegrown methods utilizing an oscilloscope ("free" if you already own a $400+ oscilloscope and perhaps a $50k+ engineering degree). Here I introduce a $5 solution (or, "free" if you own the required equipment). What's required: A Raspberry Pi Zero ($5 + S&H from several sources). This single board c
Read more