Pros: Price per capacity, this is one of the top 5 or 6 drives on the market; similar to the Kingston V300 240GB, Crucial M500 240GB, SanDisk Ultra-II 240GB, and Corsair Force LS 240GB. Formatted capacity is 223.57GB - or roughly a 6.9% loss from raw. Basic everyday performance is not too shabby, either. On a near empty drive, reads and writes compare similarly to other drives of this capacity at ~525MB/s read, and ~500MB/s write (formatted NTFS @ 16Kb block). However, when the data becomes larger, performance drops quickly... see cons below. Updating firmware via downloadable OCZ SSD Guru software was super simple. Click the Maintenance tab, then click the Update button. That's it! There is also Over Provisioning and TRIM support built into the SSD Guru package, if you so need it. This SSD is built on the latest triple-level NAND flash tech, aka TLC. This allows for higher density, but sometimes at the expense of performance! OCZ has a fantastic ShieldPlus warranty program. They cover return shipping cost and do advanced replacement service should you have a warranty claim. Most manufacturers would never do that!

Cons: For only a couple dollars, you can get another 10-16GB more capacity by going with the Crucial BX100, SanDisk Ultra Plus, Adata SP920, or Samsung 850 Evo. The Trion 100 is a poor performer compared to other SSD's in this capacity. The effective speed is cut in half when the drive has reached >60% capacity. Also, during larger (2GB+) write jobs, performance suffers a major blow. For that reason, I would not use this drive for large data. I think it's best served as an O.S. drive only. There are no accessories included with the drive (no bracket, no SATA cable, no hardware.)

Overall Review: This SSD is targeted at the very budget conscious casual PC user that is looking to upgrade an older machine from a conventional HDD (while using SATA 3 6gbps). You're not going to find this SSD at the top of any benchmark lists. The only list it will top is GB/$. I personally would feel better off with the OCZ ARC 100 that uses the Barefoot 3 controller, or a competitor like Samsung 850 Evo, Sandisk Ultra-II, or Crucial M500 - All are fantastic SSD's for this bracket. I updated the firmware from 11.1 to 11.2 just prior to reviewing this product. At time of this review, I have 61 power-on hours and 31 power cycles on this drive. I have written a total of 194.87GB of data to the drive. From my research, this is first OCZ labelled SSD that is purely a Toshiba made product, including the new Toshiba A19 flash controller driving it. Thank you to Newegg.com and OCZ/Toshiba for providing the review sample! If you found my product review helpful in your search, please check Yes below. Thanks!

Pros: Price......$73-$80 Slim 7mm form factor OCZ is now a Toshiba Company OCZ supported forum visited by OCZ

Cons: No in the box cloning software. OCZ is a brand name that needs resurrecting True, the Trion 100 sits where it cannot be seen but the design on case is dull

Overall Review: I have never owned any OCZ branded item until the Trion 100. Years ago I considered the company for purchase of a PSU and memory but eventually went with a different vendor. OCZ ultimately floundered and was bought buy Toshiba ( a brand I trust and have purchased several times ). What appears to be of critical importance to any SSD is the flash controller. OCZ's is labeled as Toshiba controller technology. An internet search reveals very little beyond that but drilling down I found that it appears that the controller is in actuality a Phison. Phison has been in the market for over 11 years and supply other SSD manufacturers I installed the Trion 100 in my 3 year old budget Acer laptop which came with a 5400 RPM 340GB HD. I don't like doing clean installs of an OS. I decided to clone my drive. Since there was no cloning software included I went to the OCZ website and found a download of Acronis True Image Cloning Software available for customers. I chose to use other software to clone the drive. I did download SSD Guru OCZ's software which allows the user a drive overview as well as the ability to Tune and Maintain the Trion 100. The user can check for firmware upgrades or secure erase the drive from within SSD Guru...basic essential tasks. My WEI disk data transfer rate score was boosted from 5.9 to 7.9. I didn't need to run any other benchmark to know the Trion 100 qualifies as a major speed upgrade. I did run ATTO though too see if OCZ's speed claims were accurate and they are. OCZ claims a Max Sequential Read of Up to 550 MBps and a Max Sequential Write of Up to 520 MBps. ATTO confirms that close enough for me not to quibble. The cost of the drive per GB is about .34 cents. Some guys won't give the Trion 100 a fair shake IMO because it isn't one of the sexy brands available As long as the Trion 100 doesn't fail (I can think of no reason why it should) and it is used for the purpose I believe it was designed, namely, replacing a mechanical HD I recommend the Trion 100 with no reservations

Pros: *Good price for a medium capacity budget ssd. *3 year warranty. *great stamina , see other thoughts. *access latency is great; 0.15ms read, 0.04ms write. *performance is good if you deal in primarily easy compressible data (majority of users). *firmware update from within windows. *garbage collect inherent to the ssd worked very well to keep performance at max.

Cons: *Does not come with the latest firmware 11.2 which ocz deems important. Update had negligible negative performance loss. *3 bad blocks found at the end of my testing by viewing smart data thru ocs’s ssd guru. But this is pretty common with modern nand cells to have some fail initally. *could not secure erase using ocz’s ssd guru Version: 1.3.1571 from within windows. *was easy to create a linux based boot flash drive using ssd guru from within windows but drive locked message came up when trying to secure erase the ssd from the flash drive. No option to sleep/hibernate to unlock the ssd. I know from past experience that I had to unplug the sata power connector / wait 10 seconds then re-connect which did unload the drive and allow the secure erase to proceed.

Overall Review: Used as ssd 1.7 / atto and ccleaner wipe free space (never use wipe free space option on purpose unless there is deleted data you want over-written on the ssd as it writes useless data to every accessible nand cell putting un-needed wear on the ssd) to hammer the snot out this drive and test performance. An intel z77 motherboard / i5 cpu based mid range system was used for testing along with great quality sata cables. Long testing series made short; 10 runs of as ssd and atto, two runs of ccleaner wipe free space. Due to the over-provisioning (240gb capacity (223.57gb)) and excellent garbage collection algorithms writes only took an approx. 10% hit after the abuse I dished out to the ssd. After 7 hours of idle time in the desktop I got these numbers; Atto disk benchmark (easily compressed data) 4K file size read 338MB/s write 244MB/s Transfers maxed out at the 128K file size reads 563MB/s writes 514MB/s As ssd (not compressible or not easily compressible data) Sequential reads 522MB/s writes 141MB/s 4k reads 32MB/s writes 87MB/s 4k-64k reads 373MB/s writes92MB/s Total score 878 Quite happy with the way the drive performed and a great user experience within windows.

Pros: Nice looking drive Setup was a snap Just follow enclosed instructions Large enough to run windows 10 and many other programs on one drive Ran this drive for over 14 hours and it still works perfectly. Did this just because of the reviews I read here. But if your drive fails OCZ will replace it at no charge for its warranty period.

Cons: Did not come with screws or sata cable or any software, but for $80.00 its no biggie considering the low cost speed upgrade compared to disc harddrive

Overall Review: This drives Speeds came in below a Samsung 850 pro, but hey for almost half the price you get a nice speed increase for cheap money. The test program I used was DISKmarkX64. I've been using SSD's for many years now and I'd much rather utilize them for the speed they offer. I use hard drives to store my music and picture files on and backups. I use my fastest SSD as my C drive to run just windows and any heavy duty work program on. The slower SSD's I use for everything else games, utilities, low profile work programs ect ect ect

Pros: Fast Sata III,

Cons: none

Overall Review: Ive had this drive for about 2 weeks now, and no issues at all, im running windows 8.1 on this drive, i will Update if i have any issues in the future, but so far, No Problems!

Pros: • Simple, recyclable packaging • 3 year warranty (probably how long you will use this drive until you upgrade to a larger drive) • Nice outer design • 2.5” ultra-slim • Fast boot times: Cold to usable in around 60 seconds. (Bios: 25 seconds, Windows boot: 15 seconds, human logging in: 5 seconds, load common apps and start Outlook: 15 seconds) • Performance: read times close to as advertised (see other comments), but write is nowhere near the max.

Cons: • Slim form-factor may not fit all laptops or builds, which may require an adaptor. Hard to knock it for this though. • Performance: read times close to as advertised (see other comments), but write is nowhere near the max

Overall Review: I have been using SSD drives for many years now, starting with a lowly 30GB model from OCZ. Over the years, SSD drives have become a commodity with two main factors differentiating brands: raw performance and reliability. Performance continues to improve and will breathe new life into a 6-10 year old computer. Reliability is an absolute: it is either reliable or a miserable failure. Testing for performance is easy and unfortunately, testing for reliability is a long process that will only reveal weakness after some time, with catastrophic results. This drive performs well and operates with no errors detected or perceived. Only time will tell. Until then, this drive is as solid as any other. • I had no issues with this drive. I laid down an image of my current mechanical drive on top of this SSD, booted and tested. All went well. Machine is normally used for software development where disk swapping is a regular occurrence. The system appears responsive and faster than ever. Life is good. • Performance numbers for a Dell Precision M6700 (2013 model) with 16GB mem, Intel Core i7-3520M CPU 2.90GHz, running Windows 7 Pro 64-bit. Windows Experience Index went from 5.9, with a mechanical drive, to 7.8 with this SSD. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 499.401 MB/s Sequential Write : 310.827 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 379.235 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 273.752 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 22.085 MB/s [ 5391.8 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 38.711 MB/s [ 9450.9 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 198.277 MB/s [ 48407.4 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 126.536 MB/s [ 30892.5 IOPS] Test : 1000 MB [C: 60.9% (271.7/446.1 GB)] (x5) Date : 2015/11/08 17:05:46 OS : Windows 7 Professional SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64) • According to CrystalDiskInfo, the temperature of the drive is around 40C, which seems hot, but it’s not too bad when compared to a similar system with a different brand SSD, running at 44C. • Oddly, this brand new drive has had over 500 hours powered on, as reported by S.M.A.R.T.

Pros: Very affordable drive with large capacity If you need a large, fast drive and are on a budget, this drive may be for you Passes Trimcheck TRIM validation test I like this drive’s aesthetics, but white/silver/blue doesn’t match my rig’s colors (black) Synthetic benchmarks can be hit or miss with SSD, but 4k random writes ~108MB/s, reads ~46 MB/s

Cons: There are other SATA drives out there with a similar capacity that are a bit more expensive but are faster and more reliable. SanDisk Extreme Pro 480GB seems to be a leader of the pack. Samsung EVO and even OCZ Vector are also more performant. By the stats published on AnandTech, they have more throughput, less latency, and consume less power than the Trion in heavy workloads. The Trion didn’t fall too far behind the pack in under light-load and random I/O scenarios (how it will be used most of the time). The graphs comparing this drive to others sometimes seem condemning, but the drive holds its own at its price point.

Overall Review: The major fabricators of flash chips are: Hynix, Intel, Micron, SanDisk, Samsung and Toshiba. About 2 years ago OCZ was acquired by Toshiba. Seems like OCZ once again has a banner to fly above their disks, although apparently the Trion was designed by Toshiba. OCZ has been increasing since 2014, but they have a ways to go to catch Samsung. The larger capacity you chose, the more performance you might be able to squeak out of the Trion SSD drives’ speed slows down as they get filled up – don’t run this drive up against the wall for best performance SSDs can use the empty space for TRIM (Windows 7+, Linux 2.6+) and although they build in extra space for the parity bit cells, the OS can leverage the empty space to create better performance when it needs to write data Keep in mind SSD data integrity can be compromised if the device does not receive power for months – so SSDs may not be a practical portable storage device

Pros: I tried to hold off to extensively test this SSD and so far it hasn’t failed after just over a month. Will update my review if anything changes. The verdict: This is an overall 3.5 Egg rating, with understanding its targeted market- and performance trade-offs. > The $50 price is competitive. (Some lower performance is traded for lower production costs and higher theoretical durability. See Cons and OTs.) > Speeds are somewhat as advertised, but again, see cons. > My low-end 3rd Gen. Core i3 Dell laptop reboots to the Windows 10 login screen in under 8 to 10 seconds. To me, that is extremely fast. > Hopefully the drive will far outlive the 3-year warranty, given the touted 30 terabytes (27GB/day), 1.5m hour lifespan. > Has a slim 7mm form factor and weighs only 1.7 ounces (48g). Great for a superlight/ultrabook build. > OCZ’s SSD Guru software for monitoring, firmware updates. > Total drawn power is 4.8W, idling at 0.83W. > TRIM support (as expected) > Not made in China. > Attractive brushed aluminum housing. > Acceptable test results at 100MB (Theoretically, anything under 3GB should be close to advertised speeds, though this is not the case. See Cons.) : CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 Shizuku Edition x64 * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Seq. Rd: 469.823 MB/s Seq. Wrt.: 413.028 MB/s Rndm Rd 512KB: 364.464 MB/s Rndm Wrt. 512KB: 270.027 MB/s Rndm Rd 4KB (QD=1):18.569 MB/s [4533.3 IOPS] Rndm Wrt. 4KB (QD=1): 31.151 MB/s [7605.2 IOPS] Rndm Rd 4KB (QD=32): 87.703 MB/s [21411.9 IOPS] Rndm Wrt. 4KB (QD=32): 67.266 MB/s [16422.5 IOPS] Test : 100 MB [C: 37.9% (42.2/111.4 GB)] (x5) OS: Win 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) > Performance starts to diminish at 500MB Sequential Read: 493.293 MB/s Sequential Write: 365.561 MB/s Random Read 512KB: 359.173 MB/s Random Write 512KB: 177.842 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1): 19.912 MB/s [ 4861.4 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1): 39.474 MB/s [ 9637.3 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32): 242.287 MB/s [ 59152.2 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32): 104.462 MB/s [ 25503.4 IOPS] Test : 500 MB [C: 56.2% (62.6/111.4 GB)] (x1)

Cons: I have not personally experienced any serious, deal-breaking cons (such as data loss or worse). Yet, this is not a perfect 5-Egg drive. > No native encryption support. (Not really a con, understandably a likely budgetary decision to target consumers.) > High reported failure rates are intimidating, dissuasive. > As transferred byte size increases, performance declines. PCWorld [OTs, #1] notes a 3GB SLC cache, while Anandtec’s breakdown [OTs, #4] indicates 1.8GB. This refers to limitations on how much written data can buffer to the high speed memory interface before redirecting to the slower write speeds seen below in the 1GB and 4GB tests. > CON: The 1GB test: (See bottleneck note at the bottom of OTs!) Seq. Rd.:488.923 MB/s Seq. Wrt: 74.047 MB/s Rndm Rd. 512KB: 353.179 MB/s Rndm Wrt. 512KB: 110.995 MB/s Rndm Rd. 4KB (QD=1): 18.778 MB/s [ 4584.4 IOPS] Rndm Wrt. 4KB (QD=1): 35.068 MB/s [ 8561.4 IOPS] Rndm Rd. 4KB (QD=32): 231.403 MB/s [ 56494.9 IOPS] Rndm Wrt. 4KB (QD=32): 81.891 MB/s [ 19992.8 IOPS] Test : 1000 MB [C: 56.1% (62.5/111.4 GB)] (x1) > 4GB results were only marginally worse (maybe evidence of a bottleneck elsewhere): Seq. Rd: 491.654 MB/s Seq. Wrt.: 69.900 MB/s Rndm Rd 512KB: 340.560 MB/s Rndm Wrt. 512KB: 81.682 MB/s Rndm Rd 4KB (QD=1):18.644 MB/s [4551.7 IOPS] Rndm Wrt. 4KB (QD=1): 40.769 MB/s [9953.3 IOPS] Rndm Rd 4KB (QD=32):221.346 MB/s [54039.5 IOPS] Rndm Wrt. 4KB (QD=32): 46.120 MB/s [11259.7 IOPS] Test: 4000 MB [C: 55.6% (61.9/111.4 GB)] (x1)

Overall Review: At first glance, this Trion lineup seems a rightful thorn in Toshiba’s (OCZ rebranded) side [1]. The hybridized drive’s trade-off sacrifices performance for lower price and higher theoretical durability. Yet, would I recommend the Trion? Yes and no. It may appeal to those on a strict budget, yet high reported failure rates carry risk. Slower write speeds in testing are a valid concern. Even my 1GB test results were downright depressing. Which 1GB of data is not much these days. OCZ clearly markets this as a low-cost, capable SSD. In practice, it is- only with one critical caveat: anyone benchmarking or copying gigabytes of data is sure to be disappointed. However, as a *system drive* hosting an OS, I have few complaints in light of the less than 5 second boot times, responsive system and no moving parts that can malfunction. It’s an SSD and not a NAS server to which I frequently copy many GBs of data. Even at 4GB, read speeds nearly saturate SATA. Overall, the SSD market itself is too saturated with reputable, proven products [2] [3] to one to settle for inferior performance. Cost per GB continues to fall. I would not currently recommend a Trion, given its own failures and inferiority. However, in the future, given fewer reported drive failures, I would keep a close eye on OCZ pushing for affordable high capacity drives. Other companies may be forced to lower costs or OCZ itself may beat them out. Consumers would win either way. Even if OCZ had little or no influence, it appears Toshiba is testing the waters with its first OCZ SSD with all Toshiba components. This drive has much potential, as does Toshiba acting as OCZ 2.0. If they "get it right" then it could be a game-changer. But as it stands with this Toshiba-driven Trion 100, unless buying one primarily as an operating system drive (or something not writing intensive) then I would say to shop around first. It is unlikely this is the exact SSD you end up with. [1] See. PCWorld calling the Trion 100 "An affordable SSD with a problem." [2] Other [mostly] sub-$70 options: For OCZ, I’d recommend the superior Vector ($79), Vertex 460A, ARC 100. Otherwise, Crucial BX100 and BX200 (240GB), Samsung EVO, SanDisk Ultra II ($56), etc. [3] See PCGamer's "The best SSD for gaming" [4] See Anandtech’s “Bringing Toshiba to the Retail” [Note about test setup] Formerly, I thought there may be a bottleneck testing on my Dell Laptop. Tests on my Core i7 Skylake desktop with DDR4 RAM were somewhat faster. 50MB Sequential: Read 525.2MB/s, Write 447.7MB/s. 1GB Sequential: Read 547.6 MB/s, Write [no change]