Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Data Storage Upgrades

OCZ Toshiba Breaks 30 Cents Per GB Barrier With New Trion 150 SSD (hothardware.com) 141

Posted by timothy from the please-keep-racing-to-the-bottom dept.
MojoKid writes: OCZ's Trion 150 SSD is an update to the company's Trion 100, which was the first drive from OCZ to feature TLC NAND and all in-house, Toshiba-built technology. As its branding suggests, the new Trion 150 kicks things up a notch over the Trion 100, thanks to some cutting-edge Toshiba 15nm NAND flash memory and a tweaked firmware, that combined, offer increased performance and lower cost over its predecessor. In testing, the Trion 150 hits peak reads and writes well north of 500MB/sec like most SATA-based SSDs but the kicker is, at its higher densities, the drive weighs in at about 28 cents per GiB. This equates to street prices of $70 for a 240GB drive, $140 for 480GB and $270 for a 960GB version. It's good to see mainstream solid state storage costs continuing to come down.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OCZ Toshiba Breaks 30 Cents Per GB Barrier With New Trion 150 SSD More

OCZ Toshiba Breaks 30 Cents Per GB Barrier With New Trion 150 SSD

Comments Filter:

  • LOL ... (Score:3, Funny)

    by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @02:01PM (#51495515) Homepage

    Wow, I once spent over $600 for 16MB of RAM for a PC. And that was considered a good deal.

    You kids today have no idea how jarring it is to see a 16GB memory stick as a prize in a Cracker Jack box or in the express checkout at a convenience store.

    Imagine my surprise to now see 2TB drives for under $100.

    No go on with your fancy cheap memory ... back in my day we had steam powered memory made out of iron rings ... luxury, we used to dream of 30 cent gigabytes (no, really, we did).

    If my lawn had grown proportional to storage over the last few decades, I'd have a lawn the size of Jupiter or something stupid, and wouldn't know to tell you to get off it in the first place.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sconeu ( 64226 )

      Git off my lawn!

      I spent $3200 for 32MB once.
      Also spent close to $1000 for a 1GB SCSI drive.

      • And I'm sure there will be people who signed invoices for thousands of dollars for a 5MB drive LONG before your fancy 1GB SCSI.

        I have always said I'd love to see 1GB of iron core memory (look it up for all you youngins), and I'm pretty sure it would mangle the Earth's magnetic field or something epic.

        • In the early 80s a friend had his business run on an HP mini-something. At his house I saw the whopping 5MB disk drive the size of a very large 78 LP record player cabinet (you'ld have to remember the early 50s.) I only recall he said it cost over $10,000.

        • biggest mag core memory for one machine I remember was for fully decked out IBM 370 model 165, 3 megabytes. ( the low end was 512M)

          CDC has a thing called ECS that up to CDC 6000 series could hook to and transfer to from their own core, 500K of 60 bit "words" which would be about 3.5MB

          • hey where did "4" go, that was the number of CDC mainframes that could hook to Extended Core Storage (and in later years that went to solid state with different name)

        • This is amazing. I have been educated. I was going to mod you up, but apparently my points ran out.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by KGIII ( 973947 )

          The closest I ever came was $400 for 4 MB of EDO. I could have paid a little less but I went with the better named brand. Heh, we had to test our memory back then too. I don't think I've run a mem test in... Wow... A long time? It's right there when I boot my OS but I haven't bothered in years. I actually can't recall personally having had to RMA a stick in the past ten years. It might even be longer than that.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
        I got a deal on ten 1GB scsi drives - $950 each. I also bought (bulk discount!) two $25K video cards and 2 $8K CPU upgrades. You don't even want to know what the price was on some dual SMP servers I bought were. OK, you probably do - I bought 10 of these monsters at $60K each, outfitted with 8 1GB scsi drives each and 2GB of RAM. The 3-channel SCSI controllers were $2K alone. I also bought a bunch of 486 workstations way way back that ran $10K each for 64MB of RAM, 2MB of VRAM and 21 inch monitors. Basical

        • Let me guess what that kinda gear was used for ... pr0n?

          Don't get me wrong,I just can't think of anything else with a ROI that would justify such expenses back in the days ...

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
            Which gear? There were at least 4 sets there. And considering the ROI, that gear in 1 scenario reduced the workload by a factor of 54. 1 employee in 1 week could do more work that took 54 weeks prior to the purchase of said gear. So, you figure 20 folks did 20 years of work in roughly 6 months. Yeah, there's no ROI there to speak of. The gear I'm speaking of was 2 Indigo workstations with upgraded CPUs and Z-Buffer graphics cards used for R&D. The return was pretty immense on those. The 10 servers were

            • A pr0n business with 5000 employees plus R&D department?! Come on!

              jk

            • The gear I'm speaking of was 2 Indigo workstations with upgraded CPUs and Z-Buffer graphics cards used for R&D

              Mmmm! The first computer I really lusted after!

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
                They were sweet, for quite a while nothing could touch them in the areas they were good at that I had access to. Heck, until the Octanes came around for a demo. Those things were pretty awesome. I picked up an Indigo back in the early 2000s for $100 just to support some software I had. It was a sad day when it left for the donation pile.

                • They were sweet, for quite a while nothing could touch them in the areas they were good at that I had access to. Heck, until the Octanes came around for a demo. Those things were pretty awesome. I picked up an Indigo back in the early 2000s for $100 just to support some software I had. It was a sad day when it left for the donation pile.

                  I'm jealous! I never got closer to owning one than playing with one running a 3D CAD application at a tradeshow I went to, circa 1979-80. I remember it had this cool, squishy 3D "trackball" that you could push and pull-on to make the wireframe representation of a Corvette or something zoom in and out impossibly fast (for that time).

                  I'm not sure I could have ever put one out on a trashpile. It is cool-enough looking just to keep around as "geek art". Kind of like nuvo-art-deco...

                  • Re: (Score:1)

                    by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
                    You might be able to pick one up for next to nothing now. Unfortunately, I don't know if you can still get the latest copies of IRIX or anything else, since SGI is gone now. They were completely free downloads at one point. My disks are also gone.

                    • You might be able to pick one up for next to nothing now. Unfortunately, I don't know if you can still get the latest copies of IRIX or anything else, since SGI is gone now. They were completely free downloads at one point. My disks are also gone.

                      Well. Considering my iPhone probably has more compute power, it probably wouldn't be as impressive as my memory paints it.

                      But there for awhile, they were definitely lust-worthy. And timelessly beautiful, too!

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by armanox ( 826486 )

                      You could still get IRIX from SGI as of two years ago. Don't know if you still can. (I'm running an Octane here as a server....)

    • back in 1988 or so we had a lab full of Mac's in school and the teacher's computer was the only one with a hard drive. it was 80MB. i had a commodore 64 at the time and thought how awesome it would be to have that much and how it would last me my entire life I'm still alive

      • back in 1988 or so we had a lab full of Mac's in school and the teacher's computer was the only one with a hard drive.

        But at that time, most schools had a Corvus Omninet network, or at least an AppleTalk network using "Share" in the Chooser to mount remote volumes.

    • No go on with your fancy cheap memory ... back in my day we had steam powered memory made out of iron rings ... luxury, we used to dream of 30 cent kilobytes (no, really, we did).

      FTFY. Now get off my lawn.

      • Yep, back in the 80s the idea of owning a gigabyte of hard drive space was fucking ludicrous...you might have well dreamed of owning your own Space Shuttle. No one had a clue as to what you would possibly do with that much space.

        And of course the idea of having a whole gigabyte of RAM was something we used to laugh about hilariously. I mean, the idea was just ridiculously insane. It was more likely that Kelly LeBrock [google.com] or Cheryl Tiegs [google.com] would ring your doorbell in the next 5 minutes and demand to have hot, slea

    • I spend almost $400 for 4 x 256KB SIMMs at one point for my 286... then realized that it could not address anything above 640K anyway...

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by yuhong ( 1378501 )

        During the DRAM shortage in 1988, right? It is funny how the shortage came out just after OS/2 1.0 was released at the end of 1987.

    • Yeah, I remember buying a tube of 16-pin DIP memory chips for an IBM AT clone...1 meg of memory for ~$300 if I remember correctly. And there wasn't a goddamn thing you could do with it except make a big ass disk cache. Yes, a 1M disk cache, enough for roughly 2 cat pictures today.

      And I think I paid ~$200 for the math co-processor, which was even more useless. Talk about tits on a boar, it did nothing at all for anything I ran but it did fill the empty socket nicely.

      • But you could play Eye of the Beholder III with the math co-processor...

        I had to play that game on my friend's 386 because my 286 didn't have one.

        • If I recall correctly it was supposed to be useful for Sim City, but I might be mistaken. There were one or two games that used it but hell if I remember what they were.

      • ?!

        Oh come on, we all loved (or craved) it while running Fractint, and prior to that we knew what they were for after seeing AutoCADs "remove hidden lines" feature on a math co-pro system!

        • Ah, Fractint....I'd forgotten all about that. :)

          What a blast we had with that. It still took forever to render a zoom, but exploring the Mandelbrot was one of the cool things you could do with a PC back then.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Wolfrider ( 856 )

            --If you're running Debian or Ubuntu, check out ' xfractint ' and ' xaos ' -- you'll thank me later. ;-)

    • I've spent over $100 on a 4MB stick of ram before but I think the first hard drive I purchased that wasn't pre-installed was closer to 30 dollars a GB than 30 cents it was a 5GB for around $150 and my first computer a CMD64 well wasn't much of a computer compared to any modern smart phone...

  • Huh? (Score:4)

    by wwalker ( 159341 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @02:03PM (#51495541) Journal

    My "disable ads" check-box isn't working again.
    OCZ? No thank you.
    Breaks 30 cents per GB? Ha-ha. You could get Samsung Evo 1Tb for around $290 for a few weeks now.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      OCZ? No thank you.

      I know that we are supposed to be all "Get off my lawn!" around here, but try to get with the name changes.
      OCZ is Toshiba these days. Thinkpad is Lenovo, Motorola changed name to Freescale and got bought by Philips that changed name to NXP.

      I bet you think car brands still mean anything too.

    • My reaction:
      "Wow 30c a GB! How much does that work out to be for 1TB... wait a second... that's the same price that Samsung 1TB drives have been at for ages....

    • OCZ? No thank you.

      Why?

      And before you say something about reliability ask yourself what the reliability figures of OCZ drives post Toshiba takeover are. If you're basing your view on stories from 5 years ago then your view is outdated.

  • Yawn... (Score:3)

    by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @02:19PM (#51495655) Homepage

    The barrier the broke is boring as I have purchased better brands for the same price or less recently.

    They broke the OCZ barrier, Crucial has been there for a while.

    http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-... [amazon.com]

    OCZ is way behind the price points of pretty much all the big boys.

    • I consider Intel first tier and Samsung second... I won't mess around with anything else.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I consider Intel first tier and Samsung second... I won't mess around with anything else.

        That's my view, exactly.

        OCZ used to have horrible quality problems with their SSD firmware. With so many other vendors on the market, I see no reason to take the gamble that OCZ might have started caring about quality recently.

        With Intel being the overall quality leader, and Samsung being the quality-per-dollar leader, why consider any other vendor? The quality of storage devices is far, far, more important than the quality of any other component. Losing my data is by far the worst thing that can happen

      • Except that early on, if you used the Intel storage drivers on Windows 7 with an Intel SSD, the drive would end up burning out faster than an OCZ.

        I spent so much time with Intel support on this and the final resolution was for them to tell me to use the stock Windows storage driver.

        So my experience with Intel SSDs are almost as bad as OCZ.

  • Thanks for the ad, timothy.

    I thought the 'new bosses' were going to get rid of this kind of garbage.

  • Ummmm (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The price is great and very tempting! But, I just can;t trust my data to OCZ. I just can't do it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      While the OCZ name might still carry a stigma, remember that it's not your father's OCZ. After the Toshiba acquisition they are using completely new designs.

      • Re:Ummmm (Score:5, Insightful)

        by moosehooey ( 953907 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @03:05PM (#51495949)

        They decided to continue to use the same trademark. They get the bad publicity along with the good.

        • Yes publicity is one thing. But making conclusions based on flawed assumptions is quite another.

          On the one side we have no reason to trust OCZ, they are just another SSD brand.
          On the other when someone says they can't trust it without any experience or knowledge about post Toshiba takeover OCZ then they are drawing an incorrect conclusion based on flawed data and it should be pointed out to them. After all they may be giving up the best SSD based solely on their own ignorance.

          Or maybe they have some recent

      • So what? I still hold the ST-225 debacle against Seagate.

        For those that don't remember: Seagate had a warehouse full of reject drives (failed testing), some genius listed them as good inventory for the SEC. Some other genius followed the first great decision by shipping them, thinking they would recognize the revenue and get their bonuses before the returns rolled in.

        Bottom line they shipped 100% bad drives to the market for months. You could exchange forever and never find a good one.

        • Brilliant!

        • Do you have a link about this story? I Googled a bit, but I get nothing that sounds like a major scandal.

        • So what? I still hold the ST-225 debacle against Seagate.

          And so you should. Seagate is still the same company and there's no reason to believe that their corporate culture has changed in a way to prevent this from occurring in the future.

          OCZ on the other hand is just a name. Different company, different management. When takeovers happen the parent company culture is often absorbed. There's no reason to believe that OCZ are still unreliable.

          Now if Seagate got bought by WD, and you still held the ST-225 debacle against them several years and major technological cha

  • You had me at "OCZ Toshiba Breaks"

  • That brand is dead to me. I had issue after issue with the Vertex II and RMA'd that thing at least 3 times. The last time, I didn't even take the new one they sent me out of the box, I just threw it in a drawer.

    I know, things change... but I am happy with my Samsung SSDs.

  • They're firmly on my 'avoid like the plague' list. Has their being bought by Toshiba resulted in any improvement?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by PRMan ( 959735 )

      I, for one, will never find out.

      There are too many other SSD brands to be happy about.

      I agree though. Just call it Toshiba and drop the OCZ. It's like calling your food product "Black Plague".

  • hmm....The 960GB Sandisk Ultra II in the PC under my desk was $220 when I bought it 4 months ago. Today, $250 at Newegg.
    This price point is revolutionary news because why?

  • So the rumours go anyhow, it was at CES.
    That's only 3.5x more expensive than I need it to be, for me to seriously consider moving to SSDs in my FreeNAS machine.
    (HDD's are awkwardly hot, noisy, power greedy, when you run 6 of them and have an unfortunately exceptionally good set of ears)

    Regardless, I do believe that thrashes the OCZ drive in this article. Although it's so strangely cheap, one must wonder if it wasn't a mistake or there's something NQR about it.

  • Sandisk has an mlc based SSD of an identical $/capacity price point. The title is a bit misleading as it implies OCZ is somehow the first flash manufacturer to do this.

Slashdot Top Deals

We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan

Close