Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: New SDHC flash memory

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,891
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked
    61 times in 53 posts
    • jonathan_phang's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage III Extreme
      • CPU:
      • i7 930 @ 4.2 ghz (200x21)
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Corsair XMS3 1600
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M4 128GB SSD + Misc Data Drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 1080 FTW
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850 Modular
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PB278Q (27" 2560x1440)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 100mb

    New SDHC flash memory

    Hi all,

    I recently got a new camera (Canon Ixus 900ti) and have found that it can take a maximum of 4gb in SD format and also use the newer SD High Capacity (SDHC) cards.

    Not asking if i *need* one, just presume I do, but will i still be able to use existing card readers to transfer data off from the camera? Thats how I've always done it so that the camera doenst have to be on, but I hear that the SDHC cards are FAT32 and old SD cards FAT16.

    Does this mean I need a new memory card reader? Or will they work fine, but just at a bottlenecked transfer rate (somewhat negating the higher max throughput)

    Thanks for any answers

    JP

  2. #2
    DR
    DR is offline
    on ye old ship HEXUS DR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    HEXUS HQ, Elstree
    Posts
    13,383
    Thanks
    1,035
    Thanked
    789 times in 358 posts
    Nope in theory all card readers should be able to read them

  3. #3
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb
    No, sorry, you do need a new card reader for SDHC.

    They use a different memory addressing scheme (byte addressing) which takes the maximum capacity of SDHC cards up to 2TB.

    See Wikipedia for details:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Digital_card#SDHC

    This Slashphone article has some more details on the addressing differences:
    http://www.slashphone.com/69/5162.html

    Regular SD cards will work in any device stating SDHC compatability.
    Last edited by Funkstar; 11-05-2007 at 01:03 PM. Reason: edited for clarity

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,891
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked
    61 times in 53 posts
    • jonathan_phang's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage III Extreme
      • CPU:
      • i7 930 @ 4.2 ghz (200x21)
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Corsair XMS3 1600
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M4 128GB SSD + Misc Data Drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 1080 FTW
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850 Modular
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PB278Q (27" 2560x1440)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 100mb
    Bugger, if thats true then I may just get a standard HD card, but shame, as I guess the higher transfer rate would help with getting data off them quicker - especiallywith photos getting bigger and bigger...

  5. #5
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb
    With a good quality SD card, you should have to sacrifice transfer rates.

    There are very few Class 6 cards out there as it is anyway, regardless of capacity.

    My personal favourites are Sandisk Extreme III or IV cards.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,891
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked
    61 times in 53 posts
    • jonathan_phang's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage III Extreme
      • CPU:
      • i7 930 @ 4.2 ghz (200x21)
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Corsair XMS3 1600
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M4 128GB SSD + Misc Data Drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 1080 FTW
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850 Modular
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PB278Q (27" 2560x1440)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 100mb
    I was thinking more of a class 4 or 2 really, as you say there arent too many class 6 cards - not at a decent price anyway. Thinking about it, is the increased transfer rate a gimick? I've rrealised that i dont know what the rate is for a normal SD card, so i dont have a comparison... I'm so drawn in by marketing hyperbole...

  7. #7
    Pedandic mo-fo IAmATeaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    South of the Watford Gap!
    Posts
    915
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    14 times in 14 posts
    • IAmATeaf's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5Q Deluxe
      • CPU:
      • Q6600@3.25
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 2GB Corsair 6400C5DHX XMS2
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 0.5TB 7200.12, 2 x 1.5TB 7200.11
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte GTX460 OC
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC6089B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung T240 24"
      • Internet:
      • 6Mb ADSL Max
    I can confirm that a normal or older card reader won't be able to read an SDHC card. I have a 4gb class 4 in my Casio, got it at the time for the higher transfer speeds but none of my card readers will read the card.

  8. #8
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb
    speed ratings for regular SD cards are usually based round the CD-ROM 'x' rating - i.e. 50x, 66x, 150x etc. o that would be N x 150KB/sec

    Really the only benefit of the faster cards on digital compacts is when transfering your pics on a card reader on a PC. Compacts are usually pretty crappy at getting the files on the cards in the first place, regardless of the card ebing used. dSLRs that use SD cards however are a lot quicker and do take advantage of quick cards.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,891
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked
    61 times in 53 posts
    • jonathan_phang's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage III Extreme
      • CPU:
      • i7 930 @ 4.2 ghz (200x21)
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Corsair XMS3 1600
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M4 128GB SSD + Misc Data Drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 1080 FTW
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850 Modular
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PB278Q (27" 2560x1440)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 100mb
    Quote Originally Posted by Funkstar View Post
    Really the only benefit of the faster cards on digital compacts is when transfering your pics on a card reader on a PC
    Thing is, thats why i was even considering really, as with larger res photos, it takes quite a while to copy them over in a batch. Was hoping SDHC would help out with that, hence the question about the reader. Still, i guess its not that imperative - just have to wait a bit longer really...

  10. #10
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb
    SDHC itself won't help. a slow card is still a slow card

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,891
    Thanks
    218
    Thanked
    61 times in 53 posts
    • jonathan_phang's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Rampage III Extreme
      • CPU:
      • i7 930 @ 4.2 ghz (200x21)
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Corsair XMS3 1600
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M4 128GB SSD + Misc Data Drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 1080 FTW
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850 Modular
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PB278Q (27" 2560x1440)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 100mb
    Quote Originally Posted by Funkstar View Post
    SDHC itself won't help. a slow card is still a slow card
    But isnt one of the main points of SDHC, apart from the expanded max capacity, also the increase in sustained transfer rate? Dont the classes (ie. 2,4,6) denote the transfer rate per second in mb???

    Anyway, guess its all irrelevant now, as i cba to shell out for another card reader...

  12. #12
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb
    all it means, as far as i can tell, is that hey have a new definition for the transfer rates. pants memory will still be pants, and good memory will still be good. But they have a new number to quote in their marketing material

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Cheapest Place to get a Compact flash Ultra 3 1gb memory card from?
    By 03peacheym in forum SHOPPING AND CLASSIFIEDS
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-05-2007, 05:47 PM
  2. Memory speed and IntelCore2 Dual E6600
    By Hans L in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 14-10-2006, 10:26 PM
  3. Samsung develops 16Gib flash memory
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 13-09-2005, 04:18 PM
  4. Overpriced Memory Not Worth It!
    By Allen in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 28-01-2004, 08:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •