Using the drive's USB-C plug or it's USB-A plug (with an Aukey USB-C-to-USB-A adapter) directly into the MBP: Tested using Blackmagic Disk Speed Test, at Blackmagic's 1GB and 5GB sizes. Using this SanDisk 64GB drive in new/unused/pre-formatted (FAT32) condition, straight out the packaging.

Straight into a Thunderb15' fully spec'd Apple MacBook Pro. If I wanted these speeds I'd opt for a USB 2.0 USB drive.īy 'typically' I mean not massively fast, but at the expected speed most of these 150MB/s flash drives are rated for. Why? Why does this take so long compared with the 15 minutes it takes for me to transfer from the SanDisk CF Cards using the very same ports and technology?įor me, this device is absolutely not fit for purpose. This last process should take 10-15 minutes also, but in reality takes over TWO HOURS to complete. They simply renamed 3.0 to 3.1 for USB-C devices. I then transfer the copy fro my MacBook to this 256gb SanDisk 3.1 drive (rated 150mb/s read speeds) For those who don't know, 3.0 is the same as 3.1 (gen 1) in terms of speed. From the Compact Flash cards (160mb/s rated read speeds) I use a USB C 3.1 adapter and I transfer about 70gb of photos in about 10-15 minutes using his method. I'm a wedding photographer and halfway through the day I transfer all images taken to that point over to my MacBook Pro (USB-C only). However, this is where the positives (for me) stop.

With a 256gb storage you'll probably never run short of space, and having a retractable USB type C and standard USB connectors it's very convenient. It's a very handy, small USB stick that you can take anywhere with you.

Sandisk 256gb flash drive