HyperX Savage USB 3.1 Flash Drive Review

Jump To:

HyperX Savage USB 3.1 Drive Performance

HyperX Savage USB Flash Drive

CrystalDiskMark 5.0.2 x64

CrystalDiskMark is a small benchmark utility for drives and enables rapid measurement of sequential and random read/write speeds. Note that CDM only supports Native Command Queuing (NCQ) with a queue depth of 32.

cdm-savage

Benchmark Results:  On our desktop PC that uses an ASUS X99 Sabertooth motherboard with Windows 8.1 we found that CrystalDiskMark showed that we topped out at 429.5 MB/s sequential read and 213.5 MB/s sequential write on the boards integrated SuperSpeed+ USB 3.1 port. The 4K Random read and write speeds aren’t that good at 10MB/s read and 0.02 MB/s write, so don’t be planning on booting or running an OS off this USB 3.0 drive. 

ATTO v3.05

ATTO is one of the oldest drive benchmarks still being used today and is still very relevant in the SSD world. ATTO measures transfers across a specific volume length. It measures raw transfer rates for both reads and writes and places the data into graphs that can be very easily interpreted. The test was run with the default runs of 0.5KB through 8192KB transfer sizes with the total length being 256MB.

atto-benchmark

Benchmark Results: On ATTO we were able to get up to 350 MB/s read and 177MB/s write. Kingston advertises this drive as having 350 MB/s read speeds and 250MB/s for the write speeds, so we are spot on with the reads and a touch low on the write speeds. Note that the drive appears to have the best write performance with 64KB, 128KB and 256KB file sizes.

Anvil Storage Utilities 1.1.0

Anvil Storage Utilities is a very powerful tool that measures performance through a variety of tests which can be customized. Since some of the tests more or less duplicate what we get from other benchmarks we use already, we decided to use the IOPS (Input/Output Operations Per Second) testing on 4kb file sizes at a queue depth of 4, 16, and 32. IOPS performance is something SSD makers tout quite a bit but we generally don’t do a lot of IOPS testing because frankly a lot of users can’t relate to IOPS metrics as well and it tends to be more meaningful to the enterprise/server crowd. Still, it is another performance indicator with relevance and while some drives post good MB/s numbers, their IOPS scores aren’t always commensurate which this test will prove out.

anvil-savage

Benchmark Results:  We got 409.6 MB/s sequential read and 292.57 MB/s sequential write on the sequential 4MB file size tests on Anvil’s Storage Utilities benchmark using 100% compression. Pretty solid results for a USB 3.1 Flash Drive!

IOMeter

Iometer is an I/O subsystem measurement and characterization tool for single and clustered systems. It was originally developed by the Intel Corporation before being given to the Open Source Development Lab (OSDL) where it has remained since.

iometer-hyperx-savage

Benchmark Results:  The last test we wanted to make sure that the HyperX Savage drive wasn’t using an SLC cache to have great burst speeds in quick benchmark tests and then slow down to much slower sustained speeds after the cache fills up when it’s used in the real world to transfer large data files. We moved around some file folders that had about 50GB of images and videos on them, but wanted to show it in a benchmark and picked IOMeter for the task. We ran IOMeter for 60 seconds on the HyperX Savage to ensure that no marketing tricks were being used and found that none were. We set the test up on one worker with a queue depth of one and found that the read test was right at 385 MB/s and the write test was bouncing around 319 to 327 MB/s. Not bad considering this drive has 350 MB/s read and 250 MB/s writes and we far exceeded that. This test wrote nearly 20GB of data to the drive and would have easily filed up a caching solution if one was being used.

Let’s wrap this up!

Print
Jump To:
  • Thomas Michelsen

    I have this drive in the 256GB-version and it’s got absolutely horrid transfer speeds, when it comes to many small files. We’re talking speeds of kilobytes per second here. I’d most definitely not recommend it to anyone.

  • Fozer Laszlo
  • DoctorT

    Lol – USB 3.1 Gen 1 – What a scam.. This is just regular USB 3.0
    This will just confuze customers into thinking they have a 3.1 flash drive when they only have 3.0

    • Mike Mohney

      Not a scam, just confusing. The USB org now requires all USB makers (like Kingston) to call all USB 3.0 drives “USB 3.1 Gen 1.” Gen 2 controllers that provide the faster “3.1” speeds won’t be our until mid-2016.

      • YOUDIEMOFO

        So this is a marketing scam is what you are saying (hence it would be confusing to consumers)…. Telling someone that they are required to do so, but being totally false about the claims and what is actually going on is a joke to the consumer.

        • JW0914

          Either you have a misunderstanding of USB 3 or you’re misinformed/uninformed.

          USB 3 and USB 3.1 are NOT the same. USB 3.1 are classified as SuperSpeed, hence the SS that annotates any USB 3.1 port on a computer.

          I would encourage you to research why there’s a distinction and why the distinction must be in place. Instead of labeling something you either don’t understand as a “scam”, perhaps you could choose to enlighten yourself by doing 5 minutes of research on google.

          Controller’s matter, as they dictate the speed at which data can be read or written

      • JW0914

        It’s not confusing at all… it takes all of 2 minutes on google to discover the difference and why there’s a difference.

        • DoctorT

          To the regular uneducated consumer – it is very confusing and will lead them to believe they either do not support the new spec, or they will think it is “real” USB 3.1 (which it isn’t).

        • JW0914

          I’m failing to see how that would confuse any consumer… unless they’re a mindless drone. These are not children who are going to be buying electronics, they are teenagers or adults, both categories of which have access to the internet in some form, whether first hand or second hand. It takes less than 15 seconds to google “USB 3 vs 3.1”, another 60 seconds [I’m being generous here] to find a link that has an explanation, and another 60 seconds to skim the article for the defining differences… all told, 2min 15sec.

          If a consumer does not wish to take 2 min and google something they don’t know, they have no one else to blame but themselves for any confusion they may experience. It’s called personal responsibility, a quality many on forums and threads wish to overlook in order to blame one authority/company or another authority/company.

          There is nothing confusing about USB 3 vs USB 3.1 vs USB 3.1 v1. Each is a separate standard, much the same as HDMI 1.2, HDMI 1.3, HDMI 1.4, and HDMI 2.0. If a consumer does not wish to learn and understand the meaning and differences of a certain standard over another, then either 1. they should blindly pick a device, be happy, and not complain, or 2. not use an electronic device at all. Each of us has a 3lbs mass of neurons inside the skull known as a brain… it’s useless if someone doesn’t choose to use it.

        • JW0914

          nvm… I misunderstood what you had typed and just realized we were stating the same thing. Sorry about that =]

        • DoctorT

          http://www.anandtech.com/show/9485/intel-skylake-z170-motherboards-asrock-asus-gigabyte-msi-ecs-evga-supermicro

          Scroll down to the bottom of this for an example of USB 3.1 Gen 1 vs. 2.

    • JW0914

      Either you have a misunderstanding of USB 3 or you’re misinformed/uninformed.

      USB 3 and USB 3.1 are NOT the same. USB 3.1 is classified as SuperSpeed, hence the SS that annotates any USB 3.1 port on a computer. USB 3 has a max theoretical transfer speed of 5gbps vs USB 3.1’s 10gbps

      I would encourage you to research why there’s a distinction and why the distinction must be in place. Instead of labeling something you either don’t understand as a “scam”, perhaps you could choose to enlighten yourself by doing 5 minutes of research on google.

      Controller’s matter, as they dictate the speed at which data can be read or written. Ever wonder why many USB 3 drives can’t r/w beyond 40 or 50 MB/s? Ever compared PNY’s Turbo USB 3 drives vs SanDisk’s Ultra USB 3 drives and wondered why there’s such a massive performance difference (or any other USB 3 drive for that matter). Most users buy USB 3 drives thinking they’re going to get incredible speeds, never bothering to research the speed they should be able to get and finding a product to match.

      • DoctorT

        I perfectly know the difference between USB 3.1 and 3.0.
        But USB 3.1 gen 1 IS identical to USB 3.0 – it just has a bumped up name, functionally it is exactly the same. This will lead to confusing customers into thinking that they either don’t support the “new” spec, or that this Gen 1 USB is actually 10 GBps, which it isn’t.

        http://www.anandtech.com/show/9485/intel-skylake-z170-motherboards-asrock-asus-gigabyte-msi-ecs-evga-supermicro
        Scroll down to the bottom of this page to see a comparison of Gen 1 vs 2. As Anandtech says it’s all a marketing shenanigan.

        • JW0914

          Saying they’re identical is like saying SATA2 is identical to SATA3… they’re not identical as I plainly stated in my above post.

          USB 3.0 is limited to 5gbps MAXIMUM transmission of data
          USB 3.1 is limited to 10gbps MAXIMUM transmission of data

          Yes, those are theoretical limits, however USB3.1 will still maintain a speed twice that of USB 3.0 provided both are connected to devices capable of utilizing that transmission rate

        • JW0914

          nvm… I misunderstood what you had typed and just realized we were stating the same thing. Sorry about that =]

      • James

        USB 3.1 Gen1/USB 3.0 = ~5Gbps
        USB 3.1 Gen 2 = ~10Gbps

        USB 3.1 Gen1 has the exact same specifications as USB 3.0

      • Will

        Dude, arguing on the internet is like drag racing on the street. You might win but you’re still a retard for doing so…. You’ll never convince that moron of anything, so why bother… You are right, but you’re wasting your time.

        • JW0914

          Perhaps you should have read the last post in that thread prior to posting…