CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus review: A reliable, durable, portable SSD

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in General Discussion edited April 2022
The CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus is a speedy SSD with an impressive 2TB capacity designed for on-the-go iPad and Mac workflows.

The CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus
The CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus


CalDigit makes amazing accessories for Mac and iPad, recently releasing a line of Thunderbolt 4 accessories including the TS4 dock and the Element hub.

While they make headlines for their docks, they also offer several storage solutions. The CalDigit Tuff Nano has been around for a few years, and now the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus joins the lineup.

Portable storage

Out of the gate, one of the best parts of the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus is its packaging. It arrives in a plastic box that can double as a storage option.



This reduces waste and provides an extra accessory for your drive.

Holding the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus box
Holding the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus box


The box's label can be removed and replaced with one of your choice. These cases can be clearly labeled and organized on a shelf for quick access for heavy media users.

Open the box, and CalDigit includes both a USB-C to USB-C cable and a USB-C to USB-A cable. This can be unnecessary, but it's helpful to keep the second cable in the case should you ever need it for other devices.

CalDigit Tuff Nano and USB-C cable in the case
CalDigit Tuff Nano and USB-C cable in the case


The Tuff Nano Plus is a hair over four inches long, two inches wide, and a little over half an inch thick. With the rubber bumper, it weighs 0.22 pounds all-in.

CalDigit uses an all-aluminum enclosure for the Tuff Nano Plus wrapped in a rubber bumper. The bumper covers the corners as well as the USB-C port.

The CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus without the cover
The CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus without the cover


You can remove the cover at any time for a sleeker appearance, though you do sacrifice some of the durability. The Tuff Nano Plus has an IP67 resistance rating with the protective bumper attached.

IP67 means it is sealed off entirely from dust and can be submerged in one meter of water for up to 30 minutes. The USB-C port must be sealed for that water resistance to hold.

As a bus-powered USB-C NVMe SSD, it's perfectly suited for mobile workflows. All current Macs have adopted USB-C as have the iPad Air, iPad mini, and iPad Pro. Regardless of which device you use, the Tuff Nano Plus will work.

Tuff Nano versus Tuff Nano Plus

In many ways, the CalDigit Tuff Nano and Tuff Nano Plus are the same. They have a very similar metal design with a colorful rubber bumper around the outside and are bus-powered over USB-C.

Both have the same IP67 resistance and come preformatted in HFS+. Where they differ is in speed, size, and capacity.

CalDigit Tuff Nano and Tuff Nano Plus
CalDigit Tuff Nano and Tuff Nano Plus


The Tuff Nano Plus is just slightly longer than the Tuff Nano due to the new internal NVMe media. CalDigit only offered the Tuff Nano in 512GB and 1TB configurations, while the Tuff Nano Plus comes in 2TB.

Finally, that updated NVMe SSD and larger capacity result in slightly faster speeds. The Tuff Nano was advertised at 1055 MB/s read speed, while the Tuff Nano Plus is advertised at 1088 MB/s.

2TB capacity on the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus
2TB capacity on the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus


As the differences aren't huge, CalDigit continues to offer both versions. The smaller capacities in the Tuff Nano and the higher capacity Tuff Nano Plus.

Format as needed

Out of the box, CalDigit has formatted the Tuff Nano Plus in Apple's HFS format. This has been Apple's go-to file format for years before it started transitioning to APFS.

APFS was designed specifically for the flash-based storage in its latest Macs but can be used with external drives. We ran speed tests both in the default HFS+ format and APFS.

Speed test results when formatted HFS+
Speed test results when formatted HFS+


Formatted as HFS+, our CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus scored an 828 MB/s write speed and a 738 MB/s read speed. That's just shy of the advertised 1088 MB/s maximum read speed.

Speed test results when formatted APFS
Speed test results when formatted APFS


When we reformatted the drive as APFS, the write score jumped to 921 MB/s while the read score stayed nearly identical at 740 MB/s. This score is higher than we saw on the standard CalDigit Tuff Nano.

Should you buy the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus?

When we reviewed the CalDigit Tuff Nano back in 2019, we loved it. It was exceptionally compact and fast.

Since then, many more portable SSDs have made their way to market.

Box for the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus
Box for the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus


It's much more competitive than it was back then, and users have many more choices to choose from. Despite that, CalDigit remains at the top of our recommendation list.

The updated CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus is faster while also offering a larger storage size. Users who need a lot of storage on the go needn't look any further.

Box for the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus
Box for the CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus


Pros
  • Ultra-fast NVMe SSD media
  • Protective rubber exterior
  • Carrying case included
  • Great read and write speeds
  • IP67 resistance
Cons
  • Not many color choices
  • Larger than the Tuff Nano

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

You can pick up the new CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus portable SSD from Amazon for $319 for 2TB.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    ravnorodomravnorodom Posts: 694member
    Hello editor: the Amazon link is not working. It takes you back to this page.
  • Reply 2 of 13
    rundhvidrundhvid Posts: 122member
    CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus scored an 828 MB/s write speed and a 738 MB/s read speed. That's just shy of the advertised 1088 MB/s maximum read speed.

    Not in my book!
    twokatmewurahara
  • Reply 3 of 13
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,291member
    Was this a paid endorsement? If not, one might expect a comparison with competing products.
    No, it wasn't. Paid endorsements are marked with "sponsored content" or similar language to distinguish them from the staff's editorial opinions.

    It's a pity you didn't bother to read the entire article before commenting. Had you done so, you would have noticed a whole section devoted (generally) to competing products, as well as drive speed and other stats you could compare yourself against whatever you think of as "competing products." Reviews do not typically list all the possible competing products that tick all of these boxes (fast/ruggedized/2TB/IP67/dustproof/carrying case/USB-C), you're confusing that with a "compared" article, which is another category.

    CalDigit is a very reputable company that makes some of the best Thunderbolt hubs on the market, and their other products are equally highly regarded. Thus there wasn't any need for a head-to-head rundown of competitors -- if you want the best all-around ruggedized 2TB external storage drive, buy this one. That's the view of the reviewer, and he's correct in that view.

    I concur that either Andrew or someone else should have corrected the auto-correct (which is almost certainly where that error came from) on the HSF/HSF+ error -- which has since been corrected -- but I suspect AI staff would agree with me that if the readers clicked on more of the ads instead of blocking them, perhaps they could manage to hire a full-time proofreader ... just sayin' ...
    muthuk_vanalingamdewme
  • Reply 4 of 13
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,291member
    rundhvid said:
    CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus scored an 828 MB/s write speed and a 738 MB/s read speed. That's just shy of the advertised 1088 MB/s maximum read speed.

    Not in my book!
    Congrats on winning this week's "cherry-picking data to be a whiner" award! In the very sentence you quoted, it says 1088 MB/sec is the maximum read, not average read speed. 828 MB/sec isn't wildly off what one would expect for average HFS+ read speed, a key bit of info you "conveniently" left out. The average read speed jumped to 921 MB/sec, which is -- as I'm sure you'll agree -- a) the way any ssd should be formatted and b) much closer to the advertised max.

    I frankly have no idea why HFS+ formatting was even considered as part of the review, and I agree that "just shy" was the wrong phrase to put there, and something like "Given the HFS+ formatting, it's a great average read speed" would have been much better. But by leaving out a key bit of relevant info in your complaint, you're as guilty of a poor turn of phrase as he is, don't you think?
  • Reply 5 of 13
    rundhvidrundhvid Posts: 122member
    chasm said:
    rundhvid said:
    CalDigit Tuff Nano Plus scored an 828 MB/s write speed and a 738 MB/s read speed. That's just shy of the advertised 1088 MB/s maximum read speed.

    Not in my book!
    Congrats on winning this week's "cherry-picking data to be a whiner" award! In the very sentence you quoted, it says 1088 MB/sec is the maximum read, not average read speed. 828 MB/sec isn't wildly off what one would expect for average HFS+ read speed, a key bit of info you "conveniently" left out. The average read speed jumped to 921 MB/sec, which is -- as I'm sure you'll agree -- a) the way any ssd should be formatted and b) much closer to the advertised max.

    I frankly have no idea why HFS+ formatting was even considered as part of the review, and I agree that "just shy" was the wrong phrase to put there, and something like "Given the HFS+ formatting, it's a great average read speed" would have been much better. But by leaving out a key bit of relevant info in your complaint, you're as guilty of a poor turn of phrase as he is, don't you think?
    Read before posting @chasm !
    —distinguish between READ vs WRITE.
    The damn thing only accomplished 68% of stated READ speed.
    edited April 2022 urahara
  • Reply 6 of 13
    fred1fred1 Posts: 1,112member
    chasm said:
    Was this a paid endorsement? If not, one might expect a comparison with competing products.
    No, it wasn't. Paid endorsements are marked with "sponsored content" or similar language to distinguish them from the staff's editorial opinions.

    Maybe not a paid endorsement by CalDigit, but I have to wonder why the article only gives a link to Amazon and no other reseller. And I don’t mean just on AI, but almost everywhere I look. I even see many article, here and elsewhere, that list the latest prices *on Amazon*. Yes, AI has a very helpful Price Comparison which lists other resellers, but in terms of advertisements posted as articles, Amazon is almost always the only one listed. 
  • Reply 7 of 13
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    fred1 said:
    chasm said:
    Was this a paid endorsement? If not, one might expect a comparison with competing products.
    No, it wasn't. Paid endorsements are marked with "sponsored content" or similar language to distinguish them from the staff's editorial opinions.

    Maybe not a paid endorsement by CalDigit, but I have to wonder why the article only gives a link to Amazon and no other reseller. And I don’t mean just on AI, but almost everywhere I look. I even see many article, here and elsewhere, that list the latest prices *on Amazon*. Yes, AI has a very helpful Price Comparison which lists other resellers, but in terms of advertisements posted as articles, Amazon is almost always the only one listed. 
    Probably an affiliate link, where AI gets commission.  Pretty standard.
  • Reply 8 of 13
    fred1fred1 Posts: 1,112member
    crowley said:
    fred1 said:
    chasm said:
    Was this a paid endorsement? If not, one might expect a comparison with competing products.
    No, it wasn't. Paid endorsements are marked with "sponsored content" or similar language to distinguish them from the staff's editorial opinions.

    Maybe not a paid endorsement by CalDigit, but I have to wonder why the article only gives a link to Amazon and no other reseller. And I don’t mean just on AI, but almost everywhere I look. I even see many article, here and elsewhere, that list the latest prices *on Amazon*. Yes, AI has a very helpful Price Comparison which lists other resellers, but in terms of advertisements posted as articles, Amazon is almost always the only one listed. 
    Probably an affiliate link, where AI gets commission.  Pretty standard.
    Exactly my point. A paid endorsement. 
  • Reply 9 of 13
    uraharaurahara Posts: 733member
    fred1 said:
    crowley said:
    fred1 said:
    chasm said:
    Was this a paid endorsement? If not, one might expect a comparison with competing products.
    No, it wasn't. Paid endorsements are marked with "sponsored content" or similar language to distinguish them from the staff's editorial opinions.

    Maybe not a paid endorsement by CalDigit, but I have to wonder why the article only gives a link to Amazon and no other reseller. And I don’t mean just on AI, but almost everywhere I look. I even see many article, here and elsewhere, that list the latest prices *on Amazon*. Yes, AI has a very helpful Price Comparison which lists other resellers, but in terms of advertisements posted as articles, Amazon is almost always the only one listed. 
    Probably an affiliate link, where AI gets commission.  Pretty standard.
    Exactly my point. A paid endorsement. 
    Paid endorsement <> affiliated link on Amazon
  • Reply 10 of 13
    nicholfdnicholfd Posts: 824member
    Sounds like another sub-par USB-C drive, maybe NVMe inside, but doesn't even perform to the USB-C specs.  Crappy, over priced hardware that doesn't perform.
  • Reply 11 of 13
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    fred1 said:
    crowley said:
    fred1 said:
    chasm said:
    Was this a paid endorsement? If not, one might expect a comparison with competing products.
    No, it wasn't. Paid endorsements are marked with "sponsored content" or similar language to distinguish them from the staff's editorial opinions.

    Maybe not a paid endorsement by CalDigit, but I have to wonder why the article only gives a link to Amazon and no other reseller. And I don’t mean just on AI, but almost everywhere I look. I even see many article, here and elsewhere, that list the latest prices *on Amazon*. Yes, AI has a very helpful Price Comparison which lists other resellers, but in terms of advertisements posted as articles, Amazon is almost always the only one listed. 
    Probably an affiliate link, where AI gets commission.  Pretty standard.
    Exactly my point. A paid endorsement. 
    Not the same thing.
  • Reply 12 of 13
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,357member
    nicholfd said:
    Sounds like another sub-par USB-C drive, maybe NVMe inside, but doesn't even perform to the USB-C specs.  Crappy, over priced hardware that doesn't perform.
    This bugs me too. I've been reading that many NVMe drives, maybe portable drives and not DIY drives and enclosures, are giving significantly poorer performance on M1 Macs than Intel Macs. It's something to do with Apple not supporting a protocol these drives and and PCs use.

    Maybe I missed where AI mention what Macs were used. I see portable NVMe drives claiming 2000+ Mbps and getting much less than that on an M1 Mac. I know in many cases the rating is the theoretical maximum but in reality these drives don't quite make that. Some fall down so bad on an M1 Mac you gotta wonder WTF.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    nicholfdnicholfd Posts: 824member
    macgui said:
    nicholfd said:
    Sounds like another sub-par USB-C drive, maybe NVMe inside, but doesn't even perform to the USB-C specs.  Crappy, over priced hardware that doesn't perform.
    This bugs me too. I've been reading that many NVMe drives, maybe portable drives and not DIY drives and enclosures, are giving significantly poorer performance on M1 Macs than Intel Macs. It's something to do with Apple not supporting a protocol these drives and and PCs use.

    Maybe I missed where AI mention what Macs were used. I see portable NVMe drives claiming 2000+ Mbps and getting much less than that on an M1 Mac. I know in many cases the rating is the theoretical maximum but in reality these drives don't quite make that. Some fall down so bad on an M1 Mac you gotta wonder WTF.
    I have two portable NVME USB-C drives - one Crucial & one WD.  Both perform very close to the full performance the USB-C bus speed on M1 Macs (MacBook Pro & Mac mini.)

    I believe the issue you are referring to was with Thunderbolt (not USB-C) NVMe drives.
    edited April 2022
Sign In or Register to comment.