[Macworld]

Post your comments for Review: LaCie Rugged USB3 Thunderbolt Series portable SSD is fast and affordable here

[LelandHendrix]

You wrote "While connected via USB 3.0 ... transferring our 10GB folder, the drive yielded a write time of 240.8 MBps, and a read time of 190.5 MBps."

This seems VERY suspicious, and not at all in line with the outcomes of your other tests of this same drive.

Are you certain these results are not transposed? I ask because in each one of your other results on this same drive (regardless of interface) as well as any other drive, the read speeds are always notably faster than the write speeds.

Additionally, "read time of 190.5 MBps" is suspect, because 190.5 MBps, or "Megabytes per second " is not a measure of time. So that is either a read RATE, or it actually is a representation of time that is incorrectly measured.

It would actually make more sense that the read TIME (expressed in seconds) is a lower that write time, but that would make the RATE (expressed in MBps) higher and not lower.

Very strange, and not at all logical.

[robertcoogan]

$200 for a 120GB drive??? I don't see the value. It may be speedy, but I can get a 1TB for a little more than half that price.

[sirtekalot]

Quote

You wrote "While connected via USB 3.0 ... transferring our 10GB folder, the drive yielded a write time of 240.8 MBps, and a read time of 190.5 MBps." This seems VERY suspicious, and not at all in line with the outcomes of your other tests of this same drive. Are you certain these results are not transposed? I ask because in each one of your other results on this same drive (regardless of interface) as well as any other drive, the read speeds are always notably faster than the write speeds. Additionally, "read time of 190.5 MBps" is suspect, because 190.5 MBps, or "Megabytes per second " is not a measure of time. So that is either a read RATE, or it actually is a representation of time that is incorrectly measured. It would actually make more sense that the read TIME (expressed in seconds) is a lower that write time, but that would make the RATE (expressed in MBps) higher and not lower. Very strange, and not at all logical.

Thank you for a very well thought out response.

[sirtekalot]

Quote

$200 for a 120GB drive??? I don't see the value. It may be speedy, but I can get a 1TB for a little more than half that price.

You may be miss that it is a rugged device; ment to take more than the average drive. Also, it is a SSD.

That said, I've never have much luck with these drive, from this company, and the customer service is abysmal at best.

[NickT]

Quote

$200 for a 120GB drive??? I don't see the value. It may be speedy, but I can get a 1TB for a little more than half that price.

..that's a 120GB SSD...

[Alanoiretblanc]

Clarity over calculators: While I know how to figure out the number of seconds for read/write speed to come up with a total time it would be clearer to say, for example, " Time to transfer a 10 Gb file was 2.24 min (Read- 190.5 MB/ sec, Write- 250 Mb/s). Then, get into the comparison of similar drives using total time. Chart anyone? My 2 cents for what it's worth.

[LelandHendrix]

This review has been featured in the sidebar all week, but there is still no correction for the erroneous "When transferring our 10GB folder, the drive yielded a write time of 240.8 MBps, and a read time of 190.5 MBps."

[IgorLeskovar]

From the first hand I can confirm that read speed is 2x higher (about 400 MBps) than write speed.
Interesting thing is that USB 3 speed is higher than Thunderbolt. First I suspected TB cable, but with Apple's original cable is the same thing...

[hayesk]

Quote

From the first hand I can confirm that read speed is 2x higher (about 400 MBps) than write speed. Interesting thing is that USB 3 speed is higher than Thunderbolt. First I suspected TB cable, but with Apple's original cable is the same thing...

Apple just released an update that included TB connectivity fixes - I wonder if that had something to do with it.

[rlav]

"To write/read a 10GB file, the Rugged drive scored 186.2 MBps and 247.1 MBps"

That's sloppy writing even if the figures haven't been transposed. A drive doesn't score anything in order to write or read a file. The writer has mixed up two other possible versions:

When writing/reading a 10GB file, the Rugged drive scored....

The Rugged drive took ______ to write/read a 10GB file.

[dmleves]

I purchased two of these drives for my 27" iMac and I think that it would have made sense to have a pass through port in order to daisy-chain a second drive. We're talking about relatively small drive sizes with SSD's and I've already run out of Thunderbolt ports when you add in my 27" TB display.