Reviewed in the United States on July 31, 2021
I've run this hard drive through the wringer with loads of speed tests, file transfers (small and large files). Read on for some in-depth rabbit-hole findings and some comparisons with other drives.
TLDR
Overall a solid drive. But if you have a need for speed, go for a Thunderbolt 3 SSD instead. It will NOT hit the max 2000 MB/s speed. It will max out around the same top speed as the other USB 3.2 Gen 2 drives (1000 MB/s)! Go for the regular extreme pro at a cheaper price, or instead, build your own. However, stay away from the Samsung T7. But I'll save that review for another day.
SIDE NOTE
As a video editor, I demand high sustained performance out of my drives. I'm giving this item 3 stars because, despite being more than fast enough, I think I got a faulty unit. It struggles with sustained loads and sometimes renders Final Cut Pro frozen after prolonged periods of editing. I've never had this happen on any SSDs before, much less SanDisk ones. I made sure it wasn't my computer or software wigging out. Hence, faulty drive! Not a big deal, a simple Amazon return or SanDisk RMA would fix it.
REVIEW
Build quality - EXCELLENT. The combination of the plastic/rubber outside with an aluminum frame not only gives this drive better durability, but also great feel in the hand. Feels significantly more substantial than the regular, non-Pro (portable) version, and provides peace of mind over something like the Samsung T5/T7.
Heat - the drive does run warm, but when compared to its counterparts (and even internal nvme SSDs in an enclosure), it's the coolest. It does, however, stay warm even when idle.
Speed - I was able to clock an average of 900 MB/s on both read and write, which is higher than both the Extreme Portable and Samsung T7 that averaged about 700-750. I was able to transfer an 85GB project folder to it in 1min 53sec and back in 2min 21 sec. Really good! But about the same as the cheaper drives.
However, it will NOT hit the advertised 2000 MB/s on 99.9% of computers.
Read on to learn about why that is. Otherwise, skip to the conclusion.
1. WHY THIS DRIVE IS NOT HITTING MAX SPEED
FIRST, let's clear up Bits and Bytes
You may know that 1 byte = 8 bits.
Hence, 1 Gigabyte (GB) = 8 Gigabits (Gb).
And of course, 1 Gigabyte (GB) is also 1000 Megabytes (MB)
Note the difference in capitalization (GB vs Gb).
When converted, 2000MB/s (or 2 Gigabytes per second) is equal to about 16 GigaBITS/s. And its competitors are hitting about 1000MB/s, which is 8Gb/s.
So, theoretically, you'd need a port that supports 20Gb/s to run that 16Gb/s speed. Which brings us to USB and Thunderbolt.
2. SPEED DESIGNATIONS
I'm going to separate these by bandwidth or max speed because there are multiple renames of the same thing.
5Gb/s or "Gen 1" - USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 1, USB 3.2 Gen 1
10Gb/s or "Gen 2" - USB 3.1 Gen 2, USB 3.2 Gen 2
20Gb/s "or Gen 2x2" - USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, or any other 2x2 USB spec (they exist)
40 Gb/s - USB 4.0
40 Gb/s - Thunderbolt 3 and 4 (or "TB3 and TB4")
I'll be referring to the simplified nicknames like "Gen 1" since I am SO not typing out "USB 3.1 Gen 1" for the rest of this review.
Also, we are not discussing the physical port types in this review (Type-C, Type-A). The only thing you need to know is that USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 REQUIRES a USB-C port. So if you have the "fat USB" or Type A ports, it will never exceed 10Gbps.
3. HOW TO ACHIEVE MAX SPEED
NOTE, for you to achieve ANY device's max speed, all "links" in the chain must share the same standard. For example, a 10Gb/s port will only hit 5Gb/s on an SSD capped at USB 3.0. The device, the cable, AND the computer must all support the same exact specification. I call this the "Strong Link Policy."
"What is Gen 2x2?"
USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 is a "DUAL-LANE" or "TUNNELED" USB process. Meaning it requires 2 lanes of data going at 10Gb/s both ways, upstream and downstream, to reach the max 20Gb/s.
Think about it like a 4 lane highway (2 lanes x 2 directions = 4 lanes TOTAL), with each lane blocked off by walls, so there are no on or off ramps, only entrances and exits at the beginning or end.
"What about Thunderbolt?"
Thunderbolt requires an Intel controller to reach max speed at every level. Same as USB, the Strong Link Policy to work. Otherwise, Intel has required computers to have backwards compatibility with USB 3.2 Gen 2 (max 10Gb/s) devices, so there's a "slow lane" in case there is no TB controller.
Since this hard drive is a USB drive and NOT Thunderbolt, it will NOT reach its max speed with a TB port. It still works on TB ports because of backwards compatibility, capping out at 1000MB/s. This lines up with my testing which was about 900MB/s transfer.
And because TB is ALSO a dual lane process, it CANNOT physically be split to support Gen 2x2. It has to run "All or Nothing" and do 20Gb/s both lanes, both ways. Again, highway with walls! Except this time there's a gatekeeper that asks for ID. No ID? You go in the slow lane.
"What about USB 4?"
It doesn't require a Thunderbolt controller. Right! But it also is a dual-lane process. Meaning it also needs 2 lanes of 20Gbps both ways to support its max 40Gbps. Main difference between USB 4 and TB is that it is not required to provide a higher power spec, displays, or PCIe support, it's required only to support data, hence the "gatekeeper" is not as strict. However, the USB-IF (the peeps who make this stuff up), since they love confusion, allow alternative configurations (min. spec is 20Gb/s).
Why not just use one lane of 20Gb/s? Well it can't. Because of the Strong Link Policy. While USB 4 allows 20Gb/s over one lane, every single link in the chain has to support USB 4. Hence, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 is not allowed since it uses PCIe tunneling (2x 10Gbps each way) while USB 4 (1x 20Gbps each way) does not.
"But that doesn't make any sense? Isn't USB 4 supposed to support all previous USBs?"
You are totally right. It IS supposed to. That makes sense. But that's not how the USB-IF defined it. They like to confuse people, you see? Who put them in charge?? Definitely not mathematicians...or anyone with logic...
USB 4 "can" support Gen 2x2. But it is not "required" to. It is "optional" for device manufacturers to integrate.
If your port supports Thunderbolt 3/4, it is not capable of supporting ANY USB spec that requires 2x2 lanes. Intel won't allow it. It's all or nothing. You can give up TB in exchange for 2x2, but you end up with a less useful, more expensive port with less marketing power.
This is why M1 Mac ports are called "Thunderbolt / USB 4" ports (rather misleading). It will support FULL Thunderbolt 3 speed on its own, and full USB 4 speeds on its own, but not USB 3 Gen 2x2, because it has a TB3 controller, the gatekeeper that only allows max USB speeds at 10Gb/s.
4. CONCLUSION
It's a well-built, fast drive. But your host computer must support USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 or (dual-lane) USB 4.0 to run at that 2000MB/s speed. Unless you have a specific Gen 2x2 USB port - which you can find boards for custom-built PCs - it's not on most (if any) mainstream computers - then this drive will not hit its advertised speed. It's a marketing tactic. Companies know this, and most of them go out of their way to hide the USB spec on their computer's Thunderbolt ports because of this. SanDisk is getting away with it because they added "Requires compatible devices capable of reaching such speed" in their product description.
Instead, I'd recommend getting a full-fledged Thunderbolt 4/3 SSD for insane speeds, since TB is a less stupid standard, just keep in mind that TB-only SSDs won't work on regular USB ports.
For most practical purposes, USB 3.2 Gen 2 at 10Gb/s is fast enough. I can edit 4-5 streams of 4K 10bit h.264 off of it just fine without proxies or ProRes. But higher-bitrate video, like RAW, 6K, 8K and beyond, I would recommend a faster TB drive. Otherwise, save some money and go with the other SSDs, like the Extreme Portable, or build your own.
Getting this drive makes sense if you are building (or have) a PC that supports it, and you're willing to give up Thunderbolt, or you'd rather hold out just in case your future computer has a multi-lane USB 4.0 port. In that case go for it!
UPDATE: I've since gotten a M1 Max MacBook Pro. Unfortunately, this review & conclusion still stands. The new "Thunderbolt 4" ports work the same as the previous models. Even with the top of line chipsets, Intel & USB-IF's stupidity renders this drive to cap out at 10Gb/s. Only a fully Thunderbolt or fully USB 4 workflow in every link in the chain is required to hit 40Gb/s and the speeds in between.
UPDATE: Apple has also since released the M2 series of MacBooks, which change nothing with its ports compared to M1 (non-Pro), so still Thunderbolt 3 and USB 4. Lame.
UPDATE: USB-IF announced they are rolling out USB 4 Version 2. It's said to support higher power delivery, up to 80Gbps+, be compatible with optional Thunderbolt features (displays, docks, etc.), be backwards compatible with USB 3.2 and below, and have a less-stupid naming scheme. Whether or not backwards compatibility supports Gen 2x2 remains unknown. BUT, Thunderbolt is rumored to be supported, but as an optional integration, up to the device manufacturer (ew). Just figure out your naming scheme, PLEASE.
EDIT: Fixed Typos, added M1 Pro/Max/Studio Update
EDIT 11/2022: Added M2 MacBooks update, updated USB specs, cleared up some things, and removed my recommendation to the Samsung T7. I've since edited on it and found it unreliable for sustained load.
As of right now, there are STILL no computers that sacrifice Thunderbolt for USB 3.2 2x2. Big surprise...
