SanDisk introduces 32GB Extreme III CompactFlash card

SanDisk's 30MB/s Extreme III line of flash cards keeps growing -- the company just announced the 32GB Extreme III CompactFlash card for $299. Pretty steep, but if you're shooting high-speed RAW images or filming an HD masterpiece, we bet your ears just perked up. Out in October, we're told.

[Giles @ Sep 11th 2008 8:03AM]

32MB? how about 32GB like the card says...

[Chris @ Sep 11th 2008 8:04AM]

Nah, 32MB looks cooler.

[D-shan @ Sep 11th 2008 8:21AM]

Awesome Engadget editing strikes yet again...sheesh.

[rndmnme @ Sep 11th 2008 8:23AM]

It's engadget retro, 1999 edition.

[Chuckles McGee @ Sep 11th 2008 9:23AM]

$300 is a tad steep for 32MB

[Wwhat @ Sep 11th 2008 9:50AM]

NASA just ordered 5000 of them thinking they were 32MB for $300.

[j_g_puff @ Sep 11th 2008 10:17AM]

$300 is the price you pay to put all your eggs in one basket.

Give me 16 2GB cards any day.

[trimmm @ Sep 11th 2008 8:05AM]

32GB not 32MB

[yossi @ Sep 11th 2008 8:05AM]

they mean 30mb/s as in the speed, although a 32mb flash card is still impressive, for 1998!

[Ross @ Sep 11th 2008 8:05AM]

haha, lol. 32MB :P

[innesm @ Sep 11th 2008 8:27AM]

/they mean 30mb/s as in the speed/

30 milli-bits per second? That's rubbish.

[Adam @ Sep 11th 2008 8:54AM]

This story seems like it is from 2000 or something

[DJ @ Sep 11th 2008 8:09AM]

haha yeah, 30mB/s for the entire 32mb flash card. Sweet!

[Wwhat @ Sep 11th 2008 10:01AM]

That's a whopping 22 floppies you know!

[MisterLas @ Sep 11th 2008 8:09AM]

WOOHOO! FINALLY A 32 Meg!!!!

[Ralph @ Sep 11th 2008 8:10AM]

32MB will barely hold one or two raw images. Lucky for us the picture has it right.

[ups @ Sep 11th 2008 8:12AM]

32MB?? wow!!!!!

and twice in the text!

[dag @ Sep 11th 2008 8:22AM]

Wow!!! The whole content of the card is transferred in a second!! hehehe

[Passarinhuu @ Sep 11th 2008 8:15AM]

32MB?!?!?!??! WTH ENGADGET!!!! GET YOU SH** STRAIGHT! ARHG HGHERHGHRQWEE"EDASDFOODAOSDOASOADAPSDP
FAIL! QJUQWUEDAJSDNHASJDAJSDJASJDA FAIL FAIL FAIL!!! muhahahahahah muahahahha muahahahahha


please stop, you have made your point

[Awwman @ Sep 11th 2008 8:21AM]

Oh COME ON people. 9 comments about a giant typo and not a single one is funny? You suck, people.

Here are some pointers for next time:
- ASCII porn
- Something with time machines, probably referencing Back to the Future 2
- iPhones suck for not having[...]
- http://youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU

[eiki @ Sep 11th 2008 9:10AM]

thank Gecko layout engine for Firefox 3 bring mo' speedy, I managed to vacate the rickroll before the music started, yay!

[loner @ Sep 11th 2008 9:12AM]

How come you know so much? Maybe you've done them all in the past? Hmmmm ;)) hahahaha! loser!

The mistake was said twice, one in the email notification, one in the content of the article itself.

If they laughed at it, let them be. I suggest you go get a life. Not just the things you mentioned. ;) Just my two cents though.

[loner @ Sep 11th 2008 9:14AM]

How come you know so much? Maybe you've done them all in the past? Hmmmm ;)) hahahaha! loser!

The mistake was said twice, one in the email notification, one in the content of the article itself.

If they laughed at it, let them be. I suggest you go get a life. Not just the things you mentioned. ;) Just my two cents though.

[Andrew @ Sep 11th 2008 12:06PM]

32GB SILLY!

[blizz419 @ Sep 11th 2008 8:23AM]

LMAO 32MB dont think youve had your coffee (or amphetamines which ever you prefer lol) yet

[chibits @ Sep 11th 2008 8:28AM]

Nice, my ipod nano just go an 32gb upgrade.
who needs the new nano?!

[chibits @ Sep 11th 2008 8:28AM]

i mean my ipod mini... damn

[Josh Bradshaw @ Sep 11th 2008 8:27AM]

Its a 32MB card with transfer rates of 30GB/s!!!
That's awesomely fast!... now work on the capacity
I kid... silly engadget!

[Evan R. @ Sep 11th 2008 8:29AM]

It took me a second... you guys almost got me.

[Marty @ Sep 11th 2008 8:39AM]

Ha! Any advance on 32MB? 32KB perhaps? Nice one guys, you made everyone pay attention!

[r3n @ Sep 11th 2008 8:38AM]

At least the got the picture right.

...right?

[face @ Sep 11th 2008 9:01AM]

It wouldn't work on the Red, write speed is too slow, and inconsistent

[kevin @ Sep 11th 2008 10:03AM]

Very true if this card is as pokey as their 16 GB version. Just for kicks we tried to use one as a hard drive running XP (this was before SSD's were readily available). It was painful and pretty much unusable.

[Ethan @ Sep 11th 2008 9:00AM]

Oh how I wish I was.

[rob @ Sep 11th 2008 9:46AM]

You fixed the title but not the preceding text or the tags for the article. In the future someone will find this, miss read it and the stock price will drop 80% because of this lack of effort in correcting the MB appendage to GB.

[Kevin Song @ Sep 11th 2008 10:19AM]

Yo, you forgot to fix the text in the paragraph and the tags......

[deep_lhc @ Sep 11th 2008 10:39AM]

me = engadget editor = half current salary.

32MB?

[Eric @ Sep 11th 2008 10:44AM]

Extreme III is not UDMA! So speed is not its forté. The Red camera, the Nikon D3 or Canon 1D Mark III cameras will not benefit from any speed benefits that the Extreme IV cards would give.

They should be doing Extreme V cards now, instead of going backwards with four-year-old technology.

[Guy Barwood @ Sep 11th 2008 11:04AM]

30MBps probably ends up being more like 20MBps write in practice (their 15MBps SD card gives me 11MBps write sustained).

RED needs pretty much the fastest CF cards around to sustain its full record capabilities, and I be this can't handle it. More like a 300x card for RED...

[christinafaith @ Sep 11th 2008 2:13PM]

This is a photographer's dream. I will definitely be picking on up. Convenience is worth the $300.

[Robert @ Sep 11th 2008 10:29PM]

Note: it is 32 GB, not 32 MB -- the article is off by a factor of 1000! (30 MB/s is the data rate, not the capacity). Oops! Look at the picture.