An expert who has achieved level 3 by getting 1000 points
An expert that got 10 achievements.
An expert that got 5 achievements.
An expert who has achieved Level 3.
Re: Speed of CF vs SD in Axim
The reason CF COULD be faster is that it is a parallel connection (16bit IIRC) while SD/MMC is serial in nature. Now, assuming the INTERFACE were the limiting factor in the speed this could become significant. Unfortunately the interface is NOT the limit (in most cases), the limit is the actual fetching of data from the memory itself. Being Flash it is nowhere near as fast as some of the other types of memory we are used to. It is especially slow when being written to. Newer cards out there are faster then older ones, but in the end I doubt you would notice much if any difference between the speed of a CF versus an SD/MMC card
- If you need clarification, ask it in the comment box above.
- Better answers use proper spelling and grammar.
- Provide details, support with references or personal experience.
Tell us some more! Your answer needs to include more details to help people.You can't post answers that contain an email address.Please enter a valid email address.The email address entered is already associated to an account.Login to postPlease use English characters only.
Tip: The max point reward for answering a question is 15.
Since a SD memory card is about the same size [width and thickness] as a Memory Stick, I doubt there will ever be an adapter available between these two formats. There just isn't any room unless they came up with a very large adapter which would stick out and be unwieldly.
You can get Compact Flash adapters (which are much larger) from a company called Pretec for about US$59.00, plus I'm sure there are others. I use a full sized PC Card adapter on my laptop to convert between the SD Memory card for my Axim X5 and the SmartMedia card for my digital camera and MP3 player.
just a guse but the batery looks to have enouth mA to run a CF 802.11b card and an sd blue touth card
i think if you will be connected to a network or a wifi connection i would invest the money in the 3400MAH insted of the 1440MAH.
> The Panasonic 256MB SD card is twice as fast as the cheap SanDisk
> 256MB I bought from Costco for $65. Saving the 5-shot burst at
> 4MP, the Panasonic card takes only 2-3 seconds to save, whereas the
> SanDisk card takes 5-6 seconds. Although the SanDisk works just
> fine in video mode - I was able to fill the card with video. The
> extra speed is also very noticeable on the Panasonic SD through my
> 8-in-1 SanDisk USB2 reader on WinXP copying the files to my hard
> Has anyone tried SanDisk's "ultra" or other performance versions?
> Any reason why the Panasonic is so much faster?
the panasonic SD is rated at 10Mb/sec. ditto for the Sandisk Ultra II. I've got both versions of the Sandisk. the regular Sandisk is only rated at 2 Mb/sec which explains the slow save speed. the Sandisk Ultra II is much faster compared to the regular Sandisk.