Fandom

CHDK Wiki

Talk:Benchmarks

Back to page

598pages on
this wiki
Add New Page

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

Comments?

Fat-16 vs Fat-32 Edit

I was always bummed-out that my more expensive Transcend 150x card was always doggedly slow compared to a discount Dane-Elec 133x card. Shooting in high-speed burst I'd start getting the "busy" between shots after about 30-40 shots. Then I saw the FAT-16 formatted speed on the list here for the Transcend 4GB card and thought I'd try it. On one of the benchmark tests it actually surpassed the Dane-Elec card. Otherwise I was always getting speeds similar to those listed here for the FAT-32 Transcend 1GB card.

Suffice to say, if anyone has a 4GB card, they might want to try the FAT-16 formatting on it, not only for the boot feature but for an extra 40% increase in speed.

Here is another SD card Benchmark run for A620 Edit

I ran the Benchmark test with my A620 using a SanDisk Extreme III - 1Gb.

Results:
Write(RAW)= 9681
Write(Mem)= 9239
Write(64k)= 5104
Read(64k)= 6090

Can someone add this to this listed Benchmark results?

Benchmark for my cards on A570IS 1.01aEdit

Camera - A570IS 1.01a
Memory - SanDisc microSD 2.0GB
CHDK - AllBest 50
Benchmark ran in Play mode.

Flash-card
W (raw) : 5523
W (mem) : 5273
W (64k) : 4085
R (64k) : 5914


Camera - A570IS 1.01a
Memory - SanDisc Ultra II 2.0GB
CHDK - AllBest 50
Benchmark ran in Play mode.

Flash-card
W (raw): 10718
W (mem): 10326
W (64k): 5872
R (64k): 5893

Adding summary Edit

Maybe we could add a small conclusion/summary, eg warning people that it is useless to buy a card faster than 66X with a DIGIC II camera, because it will never go faster than 10MB/s / 66X ? Cyril42e 22:14, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Dark frame subtraction Edit

Who says it doesn't matter? It matters, it doubles the exposure time! LjL 14:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Glossary/explanation of units Edit

  • Are larger numbers 'better'? Are smaller numbers 'better'? (I know, it can be seen from kb/s that larger numbers are better, but I think it'd still help)
  • Maybe fill the background of the 'best' card in each camera green?

80.121.2.63 17:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

2 cards in PowerShot 710 IS Edit

Kingston 2GB normal (bought ~12/2008) w Raw 5058 w Mem 4726 w 64k 4369 r 64k 8070

Aldi microSD 2GB 20090507 w Raw 4840 w Mem 4568 w 64k 2849 r 64k 5769

I've tried to edit the Benchmark-page but it didn't show up, could someone with wiki-experiance add it, please.

Michael

Powershot SX100 results (4 cards) 0.9.8-766 Edit

A couple of results, if someone knows how to update them to the list ;)

kingston MicroSD 2GB, fat16, FW:c  6964,6864,6068,9153
Lexar MicroSD, fat16 FW:c 2GB 6600,5585,5516,6527
Sandisk Ultra II, MicroSD 1 GB, fat16, FW:c 10201,10872,6942,6501 
Pny Optima SDhc 80x 4GB fat32, FW:c 8781,7402,6113,6475

Juh@ 91.155.164.243 18:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

  • done. Fe50 06:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

A590is Edit

Camera - A590IS 1.01b Memory - Panasonic SD class 4 2.0GB

Benchmark ran in Play mode. Flash-card W (raw): 6195 W (mem): 5585 W (64k): 4905 R (64k): 9051 195.242.245.64 08:31, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

S3 IS - 8GB Kingston SDHC Edit

Camera - S3 IS 1.00a

Memory - Kingston 8.0GB
, FAT32


Benchmark ran in Play mode.

Flash-card

W (raw): 7310

W (mem): 6089

W (64k): 2951

R (64k): 5688

79.206.157.134 21:04, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

MacAndreas

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki