Toshiba announces entry-level OCZ TL100 family of SSDs

[Shawn Knight]

Toshiba a couple of weeks ago rolled out a new family of OCZ-branded solid state drives – the XV500 series – targeting mainstream desktop and notebook owners interested in replacing their tired (and slow) spinning hard drive.

Now, Toshiba is addressing the entry-level market with its new OCZ TL100 family. Offered in capacities of 120GB and 240GB, both drives dish up sequential read and write speeds of up to 550MB/sec and 530MB/sec, respectively. Random read speeds on the two drives are identical at up to 85,000 IOPS, as are random write speeds at up to 80,000 IOPS.

In addition to its higher capacity, the 240GB should be a bit more durable as it’s rated for 60 TBW (total bytes written) with an average of 54GB per day. The smaller 120GB SSD can only do half that at 30TB or 27GB/day.

Both 7mm drives utilize Toshiba’s TLC (triple level cell) NAND flash and come backed by a three-year advanced warranty program. They also both consume a maximum of 1.6 watts and come with OCZ’s SSD management software. It’s unclear, however, which controller is running the show.

As for pricing, the 120GB TL100 will set you back just $44.99 while the larger drive commands $67.99. Toshiba hasn’t yet said when the drives will go on sale although I suspect they’ll drop in time for the holidays.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/66484-toshiba-announces-entry-level-ocz-tl100-family-ssds.html

 

[Wendy Oltman]

With those prices the TLC performance will be rock bottom and really should just be purchased for users going from HDD to SSD. Even a slower TLC drive will show the access time and power saving benefits of any SSD.

 

[Uncle Al]

Would also go well for laptop users that want to fill that 2nd drive compartment for faster storage

 

[yRaz]

With those prices the TLC performance will be rock bottom and really should just be purchased for users going from HDD to SSD. Even a slower TLC drive will show the access time and power saving benefits of any SSD.

I'd really like to meet the person who says "550MB/s just isn't fast enough." No consumer will notice anything above that. There are only a few workstation and enterprise applications I can of think that would require anything faster.

Anyone who thinks they actually need something faster than that needs to get their priorities straight. We're already at the point with SSD's where boot and load times are in the tenths of a second range. If you think you can feel the different between half a second and 2/10ths of a second on something like an M.2 drive you're full of yourself.

 

[Tibeardius]

"If you don't agree with me then you're crazy"

Please no.

 

[yRaz]

"If you don't agree with me then you're crazy"

Please no.

Care to provide a counter argument or is that all you've got?

 

[Tibeardius]

Care to provide a counter argument or is that all you've got?

I'm not arguing your point. I'm arguing that you're really bad at communicating. You think that people who want faster storage in their PC have their priorities wrong while admitting to never actually having met someone with those needs before. You sir are the one who is full of yourself.

 

[VitalyT]

"If you don't agree with me then you're crazy"

Please no.

The reversed version is closer to the point:

You are crazy, so please don't argue with me!

LOL

 

[yRaz]

I'm not arguing your point. I'm arguing that you're really bad at communicating. You think that people who want faster storage in their PC have their priorities wrong while admitting to never actually having met someone with those needs before. You sir are the one who is full of yourself.

I actually have met people who do need things like M.2 drives which is why I say faster drives are only useful in workstation and enterprise applications. As someone who does lots of video and photo editing, large page files help a ton with increasing the speed of image processing. For the average consumer who does gaming, you really can't notice the difference in the speed of a 500MB/s SSD or a GB/s+ M.2 drive.

For consumers the boot times are in the half second range. For me, when I game, load screens are essentially just a flash on the screen and I see no freezing what-so-ever when moving from area to area in an openworld RPG. The idea that there is a perceivable difference in load times in the 10ths of a second range is ludicrous. I'm not saying faster drives aren't necessary, I'm saying that in everyday computing faster drives are useless.

 

[EClyde]

On 10/2015 I reviewed and evaluated the OCZ Trion 100 2.5" 240GB SATA III which was their entry level budget SSD. Unless OCZ is discontinuing the Trion line the TL's are going to be extra budget and I for one won't put my data on the cheapest of everything.

 

[bluto 2050]

I actually have met people who do need things like M.2 drives which is why I say faster drives are only useful in workstation and enterprise applications. As someone who does lots of video and photo editing, large page files help a ton with increasing the speed of image processing. For the average consumer who does gaming, you really can't notice the difference in the speed of a 500MB/s SSD or a GB/s+ M.2 drive.

For consumers the boot times are in the half second range. For me, when I game, load screens are essentially just a flash on the screen and I see no freezing what-so-ever when moving from area to area in an openworld RPG. The idea that there is a perceivable difference in load times in the 10ths of a second range is ludicrous. I'm not saying faster drives aren't necessary, I'm saying that in everyday computing faster drives are useless.

On my OCZ vector 180 SSD in a Haswell Core i5 desktop PC Windows 10 boots in a few seconds ( just long enough for me to rember why I turned on the PC. ☺)
It's plenty fast for me and it runs at decent SATA 6 speeds and like you say I don't belive anthing outside of specific demanding professional use and professional content creation/editing will be any different from one SSD to another .

OTOH folks should at least check for power loss data protection. . My OCZ Vector 180 has PFM + power loss data protection for at rest stored data and data outside of the SSD cache and I belive some of the better SSD can go the extra step and can protect SSD cache data from power loss all which presumably would be a good redundancy to an APC type power back up device for folks working with content , critical and or valuable data .

 

[bluto 2050]

On 10/2015 I reviewed and evaluated the OCZ Trion 100 2.5" 240GB SATA III which was their entry level budget SSD. Unless OCZ is discontinuing the Trion line the TL's are going to be extra budget and I for one won't put my data on the cheapest of everything.

Folks should at least check for some power loss data protection and I wouldn't go below the Vector 180 I have or the new XV 500 .

. My OCZ Vector 180 has My OCZ Vector 180 has PFM + power loss data protection for at rest stored data and data outside of the SSD cache and some more expensive SSD probably do both . power loss data protection for at rest stored data and data outside of the SSD cache and some more expensive SSD probably do both .

 

[EClyde]

Folks should at least check for some power loss data protection and I wouldn't go below the Vector 180 I have or the new XV 500 .

. My OCZ Vector 180 has My OCZ Vector 180 has PFM + power loss data protection for at rest stored data and data outside of the SSD cache and some more expensive SSD probably do both . power loss data protection for at rest stored data and data outside of the SSD cache and some more expensive SSD probably do both .

Good pertinent information

 

[bluto 2050]

Good pertinent information

Effectively after reading up a little just now I'm thinking the new OCZ VT180 that replaces the Vector 180 like I have would be the prefered OCZ product for me ofc YMMV as far as OCZ product goes .

OTOH for critical work an enterprise or similar SSD with full data loss protection might be good for some folks rather than the partial (at rest ) data protection I have .