How-To Geek recommends copying the files elsewhere, quick-formatting the drive—usually as exFAT—and copying everything back. The underlying flash-maintenance explanation is supported by Micron’s description of NAND storage, but the formatting recommendation comes without model-specific benchmarks or independent confirmation of a speed improvement.
Understanding the difference between the filesystem Windows manages and the flash memory the device manages helps explain both the slowdown and the limits of that proposed fix.
Why writing can become slower
Flash storage cannot endlessly replace old data in place without erasing memory. Micron explains that NAND erases entire blocks and that its controller uses garbage collection to reclaim blocks containing invalid or stale data.
When a block also contains data that must be retained, that valid data needs to be preserved before the block can be erased and reused. This creates maintenance work beyond simply storing the new file.
According to How-To Geek, a fresh USB drive can initially draw on clean blocks, whereas subsequent writes may require more reclamation work. That is a plausible explanation for slower writes after substantial use. It does not establish that every copy operation produces another permanent reduction in speed.
The distinction between reading and writing is useful here. Reclaiming space is part of making room for new data; reading an existing file does not itself require that space to be erased. Consequently, this mechanism is more relevant to saving files, updating portable applications, or writing backups than to playing an already-stored video. It does not establish that all possible read-performance problems are unrelated to the device’s condition.
Repeated use alone therefore does not diagnose the problem. The explanation identifies work a controller may need to do, rather than a predictable speed-loss schedule for every USB stick.
What SSD controllers and TRIM actually do
How-To Geek attributes an SSD’s advantage over a cheap USB stick partly to its more capable controller. Micron’s technical overview confirms the importance of controller firmware: it handles garbage collection, error correction, and wear leveling, which distributes writes and erasures across memory blocks.
These are distinct jobs. Garbage collection makes storage reusable. Wear leveling helps prevent particular areas from wearing out disproportionately. Neither implies that the memory has unlimited endurance.
There is also a separate communication problem: the operating system and the device need a way to agree that previously written data is no longer needed.
The storage industry organization SNIA defines TRIM as a method by which an operating system informs a storage device that blocks are no longer in use and no longer require logical-to-physical mapping resources. Related functionality exists under different protocol names, including ATA TRIM, NVMe Deallocate, and SCSI UNMAP.
That definition corrects an important implication in How-To Geek’s explanation: TRIM communicates that data is disposable; it does not promise immediate erasure. Reclaiming the underlying flash remains device-management work.
How-To Geek reports that common simple USB flash drives lack this capability. Its reporting does not establish support for any particular model, so users should not assume that a command path available to an internal SSD also works for their USB stick.
Why exFAT does not guarantee a speed reset
Windows sees a filesystem that describes files and their allocated storage. The flash controller manages the physical memory underneath it. Recreating the former does not, by itself, establish what maintenance the latter will perform.
Microsoft’s exFAT specification describes filesystem structures such as boot regions, file allocation tables, and the cluster heap where file data resides. It also describes initialization of boot-sector structures during formatting. Those are filesystem operations, not a promise that every previously used NAND block becomes freshly erased.
Microsoft identifies support for very large files and storage devices as an exFAT design goal. That makes exFAT relevant to how a removable drive stores files, but it supplies no basis for treating exFAT as a cure for controller-related write slowdowns.
How-To Geek suggests that copying the files back in one operation gives the controller an opportunity to improve their organization. Without measurements for a named device, that remains an attributed recommendation rather than a demonstrated restoration of original performance.
The same limitation applies to leaving a stick connected overnight. How-To Geek suggests idle time may let its controller perform maintenance, but it supplies no model-specific behavior or completion indicator. There is no supported universal waiting period.
What to do with a slow USB stick
Do not format a working drive solely because it has been used repeatedly. The evidence supports a possible write-performance mechanism, not a mandatory maintenance schedule.
If you choose to try How-To Geek’s backup-and-format approach, protect the data first. Keep a separate, verified copy of everything you need, and confirm the intended removable drive before any destructive operation. The published suggestion is a quick format, not a full format; How-To Geek advises against the latter because of additional wear. Neither procedure is demonstrated here to restore sustained write speed.
Replacement may be reasonable when the drive’s actual performance no longer meets your needs. However, the evidence does not identify a use count, age, or speed threshold at which replacement becomes necessary, and formatting should not be presented as reversing physical wear.
For a drive used mainly to read stored files, reclaiming flash blocks may have little relevance to the task. For one used repeatedly to write backups or application data, controller behavior deserves more attention—and a formatting promise deserves less confidence than measured performance for the particular device.