Lexar launches Professional SL100 Pro Portable SSD with USB 3.1 Gen 2 speeds

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware
Storage maker Lexar on Wednesday announced the Mac-compatible Professional SL100 Pro Portable SSD, its signature feature being a USB-C port with with USB 3.1 Gen 2 speeds.

Lexar Professional SL100 Pro Portable SSD


Incorporating Gen 2 allows the drive to hit read speeds up to 950 megabytes per second, and write at 900 megabytes per second, Lexar said. DataVault Lite is included for 256-bit AES encryption, and its chassis is built to be drop- and shock-resistant.

Two cables are included: one for "pure" USB-C connections, and another to connect to USB-A ports at the expense of performance.

Another selling point is size. The product is a little over 0.4 inches thick, and less than 3 inches long, making it possible to stash in a pants pocket.

The drive will ship later in April. Three capacities are planned: 250- and 500-gigabyte models will be $99.99 and $149.99, respectively, while a 1-terabyte model will jump to $279.99.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 947member
    I don't think i'll ever get over the ridiculousness of calling USB "USB 3.1 Gen-2"... it's just dumb.
  • Reply 2 of 13
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,745member
    elijahg said:
    I don't think i'll ever get over the ridiculousness of calling USB "USB 3.1 Gen-2"... it's just dumb.
    omshardware.com/news/difference-between-usb-3.1-gen1-usb-3.1-gen2,36941.html
  • Reply 3 of 13
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,652member
    It would be nice to see this as a TB3 drive that falls back to USBc if the host doesn’t support TB3.
  • Reply 4 of 13
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 947member
    gatorguy said:
    elijahg said:
    I don't think i'll ever get over the ridiculousness of calling USB "USB 3.1 Gen-2"... it's just dumb.
    omshardware.com/news/difference-between-usb-3.1-gen1-usb-3.1-gen2,36941.html
    I know the difference, it's just stupid to add further ambiguity to the versioning. What's wrong with USB 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 etc?
  • Reply 5 of 13
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,745member
    elijahg said:
    gatorguy said:
    elijahg said:
    I don't think i'll ever get over the ridiculousness of calling USB "USB 3.1 Gen-2"... it's just dumb.
    omshardware.com/news/difference-between-usb-3.1-gen1-usb-3.1-gen2,36941.html
    I know the difference, it's just stupid to add further ambiguity to the versioning. What's wrong with USB 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 etc?
    Ah, understood. I personally use 3.0 etc to describe them. 
  • Reply 6 of 13
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,295member
  • Reply 7 of 13
    lorin schultzlorin schultz Posts: 2,739member
    MacPro said:
    But doesn't the SATA interface in the drive limit transfer speeds to around 500-ish mb/s?
    aaronsullivan
  • Reply 8 of 13
    Would be a nice little side accessory to an iPad Pro with USB-C if iOS gets an update to allow for regular file access. Though, I am losing track now, I don't think the iPad USB spec does 3.1 gen 2? Anyway, here's hoping Apple does something about this for iPad Pros this year with the iOS update, would be amazing to have apps able to access files directly on external storage, but I'd be happy with just easy transfer of files... digression: that, and Safari having feature parity with the Mac version would go a long way.
  • Reply 9 of 13
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,295member
    MacPro said:
    But doesn't the SATA interface in the drive limit transfer speeds to around 500-ish mb/s?
    If you add a bare SSD to the adapter I posted the link to there is no 'in the drive' component, just the connector, and the SSD.  The SSDs own limitations are a given whatever the useage.   That's what I love about this setup, no power supply, no boards ... nothing to go wrong. The Manufacturer's stated speed is: 
    • USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) adapter cable with USB-C connector for 2.5” SATA drives.
    I have seven such bare SSDs, two with the $18 USB-c and five with USB3 that cost $9.  I use them on PCs and Macs.  All my Macs run NTFC for Mac so all these SSDs are interchangeable for data transfer.
    edited April 4
  • Reply 10 of 13
    Eric_WVGGEric_WVGG Posts: 622member
    right but it's still limited to SATA speeds

    if these are NVMe drives they could theoretically be much faster than your SATA rigs, although I don't know if USB 3.whatever becomes a bottleneck
  • Reply 11 of 13
    lorin schultzlorin schultz Posts: 2,739member
    MacPro said:
    MacPro said:
    But doesn't the SATA interface in the drive limit transfer speeds to around 500-ish mb/s?
    If you add a bare SSD to the adapter I posted the link to there is no 'in the drive' component, just the connector, and the SSD.  The SSDs own limitations are a given whatever the useage.   That's what I love about this setup, no power supply, no boards ... nothing to go wrong. The Manufacturer's stated speed is: 
    • USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) adapter cable with USB-C connector for 2.5” SATA drives.
    I have seven such bare SSDs, two with the $18 USB-c and five with USB3 that cost $9.  I use them on PCs and Macs.  All my Macs run NTFC for Mac so all these SSDs are interchangeable for data transfer.
    I phrased my remark poorly. What I meant is that there's still a SATA interface between the drive and the adapter, which limits transfer speed to a theoretical maximum of 600MB/s.

    That's still fast and the adapter is a great idea. It's just not as fast as NVME alternatives and isn't the same as a "native" USB3.1G2 interface.
  • Reply 12 of 13
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 2,972member
    MacPro said:
    MacPro said:
    But doesn't the SATA interface in the drive limit transfer speeds to around 500-ish mb/s?
    If you add a bare SSD to the adapter I posted the link to there is no 'in the drive' component, just the connector, and the SSD.  The SSDs own limitations are a given whatever the useage.   That's what I love about this setup, no power supply, no boards ... nothing to go wrong. The Manufacturer's stated speed is: 
    • USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) adapter cable with USB-C connector for 2.5” SATA drives.
    I have seven such bare SSDs, two with the $18 USB-c and five with USB3 that cost $9.  I use them on PCs and Macs.  All my Macs run NTFC for Mac so all these SSDs are interchangeable for data transfer.
    That’s a SATA-III interface, which would top out at around 550Mbps. Not sure what this is, but it’s nearly twice as fast (but not as fast as most NVMe).
  • Reply 13 of 13
    swat671swat671 Posts: 20member
    "Two cables are included: one for "pure" USB-C connections, and another to connect to USB-A ports at the expense of performance."

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but why does the connection make any difference? USB Type A, B, or C shouldn't make any difference to speed. (Power delivery, yes, but not speed of the data connection.) USB 3.1 Gen 2 SHOULD be the same over type A OR type C. 
Sign In or Register to comment.