Product comparison · 2 card readers

Ewent EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black vs Integral USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL

Add a product
  • 15specifications compared
  • 10differ
  • 5identical
  • 12known for one product only

Key differences

The Integral USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL has 4,520 Mbit/s more data transfer rate than the Ewent EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black (5000 Mbit/s vs 480 Mbit/s). The Ewent EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black has 9.5 mm more depth than the Integral USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL (24.5 mm vs 15 mm). The Integral USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL has 28 mm more height than the Ewent EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black (40 mm vs 12 mm). Interface: USB 2.0 on the Ewent EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black, USB 3.2 Gen 1 (3.1 Gen 1) Type-A/Type-C on the Integral USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL.

  • Data transfer rate
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:480 Mbit/s
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:5000 Mbit/s
  • Depth
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:24.5 mm
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:15 mm
  • Height
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:12 mm
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:40 mm
  • Weight
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:32 g
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:52 g
  • Package width
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:80 mm
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:100 mm
  • Package depth
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:140 mm
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:15 mm
  • Package height
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:20 mm
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:130 mm
  • Package weight
    • EW1049 card reader USB 2.0 Black:40 g
    • USB3.0 CARDREADER TYPE-C MULTI SLOT SD MSD CF MS RETAIL:63 g

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only (off)
Comparison of EW1049, INCRMULTI3.0-C
27 specifications
Performance2 differ
Compatible memory cardsDiffersMMC, MS Duo, MS Micro (M2), MS PRO, Memory Stick (MS), MicroSD (TransFlash), RS-MMC, SDCF, MS Duo, MS PRO Duo, MicroSD (TransFlash), SD
InternalNoNo
Data transfer rateDiffers480 Mbit/s5000 Mbit/s
Product colourBlackBlack
Plug and PlayYesYes
Number of memory card slotsKnown for one4Unknown — not stated by the source
Ports & interfaces1 differ
InterfaceDiffersUSB 2.0USB 3.2 Gen 1 (3.1 Gen 1) Type-A/Type-C
Weight & dimensions3 differ
Width70 mm70 mm
DepthDiffers24.5 mm15 mm
HeightDiffers12 mm40 mm
Cable lengthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source0.3 m
WeightDiffers32 g52 g
Packaging data4 differ
Quantity per pack1 pc(s)1 pc(s)
Package widthDiffers80 mm100 mm
Package depthDiffers140 mm15 mm
Package heightDiffers20 mm130 mm
Package weightDiffers40 g63 g
Package typeKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceHanging box
System requirementsidentical
Windows operating systems supportedKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceWindows 10, Windows 11
Mac operating systems supportedKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceYes
Linux operating systems supportedKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceYes
Operational conditionsidentical
Operating temperature (T-T)Known for oneUnknown — not stated by the source0 - 60 °C
Other featuresidentical
Compliance certificatesKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceCE, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), RoHS, UKCA
Warranty periodKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source5 year(s)
Logistics dataidentical
Master (outer) case widthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source310 mm
Master (outer) case lengthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source400 mm
Master (outer) case heightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source180 mm

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More card reader comparisons

All card reader comparisons