Sign in to follow this  
Adam_a

OCZ Trion 100 Series SSD Review

Recommended Posts

The Trion 100, OCZ’s first drive to feature Toshiba’s TLC NAND, is the company’s most affordable line of SSDs to date, allowing consumers to purchase a solid-side drive for as low as $57. This certainly brings even more mainstream accessibility to the SSD market and thus will sway a lot of economically-minded people to move in that direction. Like all OCZ drives, Trion 100 features the company’s new ShieldPlus program, which sets the bar for consumer-grade SSD warranty programs. Consumers with a potentially defective drive simply have to provide OCZ support with the SSD’s serial number with no original purchase receipt required. If the drive is faulty, consumers will have a new one shipped to them immediately as well as a paid return shipping label.

OCZ Trion 100 Series SSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the slow general showing for this product, my hope is that OCZ will bring some firmware improvements to this controller architecture which is quite obviously a Phison S10 from its firmware version format. I noticed in this review Phison finally fixed their lack of QD scaling the database and server testing phases (vs the Corsair and Patriot S10-based products), so changes appear to be underway.

Any plans to update the results with the new 11.2 firmware which was released recently? It appears to be mostly related to sleep mode bugs, but their description of "unresposiveness under heavy I/O" may be improvements in general latency which could make push this controller into a more competitive realm vs its main competition (SMI-based drives) at the entry level. Even a general statement here as to whether you saw any significant differences in non-published testing would be greatly appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm primarily wondering if the firmware update improved its peak / max ms scores under IOMeter 4k write latency tests. Considering these don't occur on the S10-based drives with MLC, this appears to be a symptom of the controller's handling of TLC refreshes and garbage collection, or possibly flushing of its SLC cache.

When testing drives like these (with SLC caches), it would also be helpful to see a 250GB Crucial MX200 (or Micron M600) included for comparison to a higher class MLC-based drive which also includes SLC cache flushing transitions in its operation. Another useful comparison would be the SMI-based ADATA SP550 which is a SLC-TLC hybrid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome thanks, I'm most interested to see if it improves the smaller models as they have less SLC cache and performed substantially worse than the 960GB drive. If you could provide me with your IOMeter profile used for that test, I could also test the drive that I have as well and report if I see differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this