• Visstix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I am slightly confused why they use UHS-I instead of UHS-II (or even UHS-III) for such a big capacity. Seems like people needing so much capacity probably write a lot of data in a short time. UHS-II is 3 times quicker.

    Then again maybe they are aiming for devices that can’t even run UHS-II

    • kn33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      3 months ago

      Could be a trade-off issue. They can get capacity or speed but not both yet.

    • Nikita@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      3 months ago

      I can imagine this being useful for cases where you write a lot of data over a longer time period. Think CCTV (with low-medium resolution). You can keep a sizeable archive locally and never have to swap cards