• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Digital Foundry: Switch Loading Times - Cartridges vs MicroSD vs Internal Storage

L

LelouchZero

Member
Source

Which is fastest? Tom puts Nintendo Switch loading times to the test, where speeds differ between cartridge, internal storage, and MicroSD while testing Zelda: Breath of the Wild.
Click to expand...

SD Cards Tested:
Sandisk Ultra 16GB UHS-1
Sandisk Extreme Plus 64GB UHS-3

Legend of Zelda Breath of The Wild - Great Plateau loading times
Switch Cartridge - 35:45 seconds
Internal 32GB - 30:42
Sandisk 16GB Ultra MicroSD - 34:07
Sandisk 16GB Extreme Plus - 34:27

Legend of Zelda Breath of The Wild - Kakiriko Village
Switch Cartridge - 27:05 seconds
Internal 32GB - 24:09
Sandisk 16GB Ultra MicroSD - 26:21
Sandisk 16GB Extreme Plus - 26:41

Tom discovered that the Switch's Internal 32GB storage loaded the game the fastest.
 
Seems very similar across the board, surprised the 32gb flash memory wins out though.

Breath of the Wild is the only Switch game I've played with extensive loading, FAST RMX for instance takes around 3 seconds to both boot the game and load tracks.
 
I mean, Nintendo is selling Zelda 70 euros digitally while retail sells it for 50.

This isn't acceptable and I'll gladly tolerate 2 more seconds from the cart of load...
 
If you buy games digitally, just put your most played game on the internal memory.

Zelda is the obvious choice right now, there is a LOT of difference in loading times.
 
Been waiting for some more tests before buying a mem card. Guess I will just go for the Sandisk Ultra since it makes hardly any difference getting the Extreme.
 
Negligible. But since we bellyached for a hundred pages about frame dips in BotW that add up to maybe 1% of the total playtime, I'm certain we will do the same about this.
 
People have spent more time discussing what storage to use best than they will likely ever safe while finishing BotW. Heh.
 
So the Switch just limits the UHS-3 card to UHS-1 speeds, right? Which would be why they look near the same.

Good though that the internal is a bit faster than that (the Wii Us eMMC seemed pretty slow), and that the carts don't fare poorly.
 
The question is, judging by those benchmarks, why is there seemingly a cap on the potential read speeds on MicroSD?

There's also the matter of the SD card speeds. The fact neither of these Sandisk SDs can overtake Switch's on-board storage suggests there's a speed cap. Also, it doesn't matter what the rated read bandwidth is on the SD package. Whether that's 80MB/s on the 16GB model, or 90MB/s on the 64GB model, it's clear Switch isn't making the most of either. As long as it's a minimum of UHS-1, you get roughly the same loading times, or even slightly better, as a much faster rated card.
Click to expand...
 
With how much faster internal is, it's a shame they didn't go for more space. It's pretty paltry considering how big some of the games will get. Guess it might be better to transfer you currently played game to internal and swap whatever is there to SD with each game. You can do that, right? Hmmm...the save files though :/
 
I believe Thraktor showed or speculated that the game cards should be capable of some pretty incredible read speeds, which surprises me how in Zelda they actually fall behind the SD cards ever so slightly. I wonder if for the Zelda card pressings they chose a cheaper 16GB module that's not as fast as what the Switch game card bus would allow?
 
I wish he'd tried a 40-45MB/s one. The 80-90MB you have to look for specifically. Basic ones have slower read speeds.

I want to know if I need an 80/90MB card or a lower one is fine. This doesn't tell me what the real limit is for load times.
 
Ricerocket said:
Results are

Buy larger storage, don't invest in speed for MicroSD because he think's the speed is capped.
Click to expand...

I'm glad I went with the 128gb sandisk ultra instead of the 64gb extreme. I figured read speed is what's important with load times anyways.

Also those times are close enough to be negligible for me with this game.
 
Sword Of Doom said:
I'm glad I went with the 128gb sandisk ultra instead of the 64gb extreme. I figured read speed is what's important with load times anyways.

Also those times are close enough to be negligible for me with this game.
Click to expand...
Well what is there to really write anyway outside of download and saves. I opted for the 200gb ultra instead of the 128 extreme.
 
mrklaw said:
I wish he'd tried a 40-45MB/s one. The 80-90MB you have to look for specifically. Basic ones have slower read speeds.

I want to know if I need an 80/90MB card or a lower one is fine. This doesn't tell me what the real limit is for load times.
Click to expand...

On amazon the sandisk ultra at that size was probably as cheap as any other SD card.
 
martino said:
but can we expect cartridge performance to improve over time with other games ?
Click to expand...

Probably if publishers are willing to put faster memory in the cards, which would raise manufacture costs some. Pennies on the dollar, but if you're making millions if game cards those pennies add up. I think the cards could potentially read up to 150mb/s or something like that (need to look it up again).
 
I wonder how big the difference in loading times would be when comparing a class 10 micro SD card to lower class ones. Hope someone will test that shit out later.
 
I installed Zelda into the internal memory, and played already 100 hours of it, so looks like i did the right thing, good to know micro sd are even faster than cartridges since i have a Toshiba exceria 128gb which i wanna use.
Though i thought cartidges were faster than that, for example people were talking about how Switch will have slower loading time compared to PS4 and XB1, that won't be true since PS4 and XB1 internal 2.5' hard drives have about 100mbs read speed, which is even faster than micro sd like mine which arrive at 80/90mbs at best, of course cartidges are still faster than blue ray disks, but PS4/XB1 won't read the game from them since they install everything into the hard drives
 
Timeaisis said:
Good to see that SD is about on par with cart times.
Click to expand...

The opposite would have been quite surprising, and a major concern for any game that relies on streaming data such as open-world games, like Zelda. Devs would have needed to make their games with the lowest common denominator in mind, so it would have limited all other mediums.
 
Kinda curious how multi-platform games like I Am Setsuna load on the system, to be honest. Discussion in the 'Switch taken apart' thread did briefly touch on how the Switch cartridge and SD cards might perform both relative to each other and the other consoles.
 
Yup, my 200GB SanDisk Ultra is perfect for the system.

Those loading times are weird though, i don't recall ever waiting for 30 seconds or more to load the game.
 
I'm kind of surprised cart's are slowest. Figured those would end up being quickest. Not that it seems to matter much anyways, the differences are reasonably small between the available options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Digital Foundry: Pragmata Switch 2 Review vs PS5/Xbox Series S - Another Ambitious Capcom Port
2
91
2K
Ryseer replied
Switch 2 Loading Speed Test: SD Express vs. Internal Storage vs. Game Card
17
12K
Juja replied
Digital Foundry: Tomb Raider Definitive Edition Switch 1/Switch 2 Review - Big Downgrades vs PS3/PS4
2
54
2K
LordOcidax replied
Resident Evil 7 - PS4 vs Switch 2 vs PS5 graphics comparison
30
1K
Ryseer replied
Digital Foundry: Indiana Jones and the Great Circle - Switch 2 Review - Ray Tracing and DLSS on Switch 2
2 3 4
169
299
kevboard replied
Top Bottom