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

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by timothy on Friday February 12, 2016 @05:47AM 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.

94 of 141 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

LOL ... by gstoddart · 2016-02-12 06:01 · Score: 3, Funny

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.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
1. Re:LOL ... by sconeu · 2016-02-12 06:02 · Score: 1
  
  Git off my lawn!
  I spent $3200 for 32MB once.
  Also spent close to $1000 for a 1GB SCSI drive.
  
  --
  General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
2. Re:LOL ... by gstoddart · 2016-02-12 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
3. Re:LOL ... by known_coward_69 · 2016-02-12 06:19 · Score: 1
  
  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
4. Re:LOL ... by ausekilis · 2016-02-12 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  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.
5. Re:LOL ... by rubycodez · 2016-02-12 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  fucking Cisco, quoted us $1400 for a 256MB flash memory arguing it was "tested and cisco certified". Fucking thing was DOA, of course they slapped their logo sticker on a piece of shit $5 stick
6. Re:LOL ... by The-Ixian · 2016-02-12 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  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...
  
  --
  My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
7. Re:LOL ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 07:03 · Score: 1
  
  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. Basically, computer prices have come way way way down, even a decked out Mac Pro is cheap by comparison.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
8. Re:LOL ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  my first PC had a 40MB hard drive in it. It was so large I had to run a special driver to access all of it. That was almost a decade before Linux was even a glimmer in Linus' eye. My first computer had a whopping 48K soldered onto the motherboard and was the most it would support.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
9. Re:LOL ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 07:09 · Score: 1
  
  What speed did arliners fly at when you bought your 16MB of RAM?
  Faster in every way than today.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
10. Re:LOL ... by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-02-12 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
11. Re:LOL ... by The-Ixian · 2016-02-12 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
12. Re:LOL ... by rubycodez · 2016-02-12 07:23 · Score: 1
  
  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
13. Re:LOL ... by rubycodez · 2016-02-12 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  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)
14. Re:LOL ... by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-02-12 07:26 · Score: 2
  
  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 or Cheryl Tiegs would ring your doorbell in the next 5 minutes and demand to have hot, sleazy sex with you.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
15. Re:LOL ... by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-02-12 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
16. Re:LOL ... by pr0fessor · 2016-02-12 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  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...
17. Re:LOL ... by IgnitusBoyone · 2016-02-12 07:36 · Score: 1
  
  This is amazing. I have been educated. I was going to mod you up, but apparently my points ran out.
  
  --
  Momento Mori
18. Re: LOL ... by dunkelfalke · 2016-02-12 07:58 · Score: 1
  
  A spectrum?
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
19. Re:LOL ... by whathappenedtomonday · 2016-02-12 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  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 ...
  
  --
  I hope I didn't brain my damage.
20. Re:LOL ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  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 drop in the bucket of a relatively large project that directly supported 5000 employees. Those are nothing compared to the cluster of Crays by another group. Those guys have all the bragging rights.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
21. Re:LOL ... by whathappenedtomonday · 2016-02-12 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  A pr0n business with 5000 employees plus R&D department?! Come on!
  jk
  
  --
  I hope I didn't brain my damage.
22. Re: LOL ... by The-Ixian · 2016-02-12 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  This ... so much this..
  As mentioned above, I bought 256K sticks for my 286... 1 at a time over months as I saved up lawn mowing money... then it turned out it was really just throwing money down the drain as the 286 couldn't really utilize it (except as a RAM drive... which is what I ended up using it for).
  
  --
  My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
23. Re:LOL ... by Mal-2 · 2016-02-12 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  You couldn't convert a PC into an XT. The original PC had five widely spaced expansion slots. The XT had eight in the same spacing we still have to this day. I believe the original PC was also limited to 256kB on the motherboard, and everything else had to go on an expansion card.
  
  --
  How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
24. Re:LOL ... by macs4all · 2016-02-12 10:10 · Score: 1
  
  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!
25. Re:LOL ... by macs4all · 2016-02-12 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  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.
26. Re:LOL ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 10:32 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
27. Re:LOL ... by macs4all · 2016-02-12 10:46 · Score: 1
  
  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...
28. Re:LOL ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
29. Re:LOL ... by macs4all · 2016-02-12 12:12 · Score: 1
  
  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!
30. Re:LOL ... by yuhong · 2016-02-12 16:30 · Score: 1
  
  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.
31. Re:LOL ... by KGIII · 2016-02-12 17:56 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
32. Re:LOL ... by armanox · 2016-02-13 00:12 · Score: 1
  
  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....)
  
  --
  I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Huh? by wwalker · 2016-02-12 06:03 · Score: 3

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.
1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 06:37 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  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.
2. Re:Huh? by moosehooey · 2016-02-12 07:06 · Score: 2
  
  They decided to keep using the OCZ trademark. So they inherit the bad publicity along with the good.
3. Re:Huh? by The-Ixian · 2016-02-12 07:12 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Yeah, honestly, if they had just rebranded to Toshiba and dropped OCZ completely, I would never have dug any further and just assumed that the venerable Toshiba hard drive division was making a push into the SSD market.
  
  --
  My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
4. Re:Huh? by avandesande · 2016-02-12 07:57 · Score: 2
  
  Tell me more about this 'good' OCZ publicity :-)
  
  --
  love is just extroverted narcissism
5. Re:Huh? by im_thatoneguy · 2016-02-12 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  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....
6. Re:Huh? by thegarbz · 2016-02-12 22:46 · Score: 1
  
  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.
Re:Nice ad. by sims+2 · 2016-02-12 06:03 · Score: 3, Informative

Amazon: $69.99 http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ...

--
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Re:This equates to street prices of $70 for a 240G by sims+2 · 2016-02-12 06:06 · Score: 1

It weighs about 51 grams.

--
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Re:LOL 5MB HP Disk by BoRegardless · 2016-02-12 06:18 · Score: 1

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.
Yawn... by Lumpy · 2016-02-12 06:19 · Score: 2

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

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
1. Re:Yawn... by avandesande · 2016-02-12 07:58 · Score: 1
  
  I consider Intel first tier and Samsung second... I won't mess around with anything else.
  
  --
  love is just extroverted narcissism
2. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  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 to me. That makes the SSD market unique in that it makes no sense to focus on anything other than the very top quality offerings.
3. Re:Yawn... by The-Ixian · 2016-02-12 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  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.
  
  --
  My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
4. Re:Yawn... by avandesande · 2016-02-12 10:32 · Score: 1
  
  Early SSD of any type sucked
  
  --
  love is just extroverted narcissism
Clean-up on aisle 5, whipslash by ThatsNotPudding · 2016-02-12 06:20 · Score: 1

Thanks for the ad, timothy.

I thought the 'new bosses' were going to get rid of this kind of garbage.
Re:Nice ad. by Holi · 2016-02-12 06:21 · Score: 1

But it's not actually available yet. 1 to 2 month shipping. Bummer

--
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Re:LOL 5MB HP Disk by olsmeister · 2016-02-12 06:21 · Score: 1

Which is around $30,000 in today's dollars.
Ummmm by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 06:24 · Score: 1

The price is great and very tempting! But, I just can;t trust my data to OCZ. I just can't do it.
1. Re:Ummmm by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 06:36 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  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.
2. Re:Ummmm by moosehooey · 2016-02-12 07:05 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  They decided to continue to use the same trademark. They get the bad publicity along with the good.
3. Re:Ummmm by HornWumpus · 2016-02-12 07:25 · Score: 2
  
  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.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
4. Re:Ummmm by zwarte+piet · 2016-02-12 09:14 · Score: 1
  
  Brilliant!
5. Re:Ummmm by thegarbz · 2016-02-12 22:49 · Score: 1
  
  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 data I don't know about.
6. Re:Ummmm by thegarbz · 2016-02-12 22:52 · Score: 1
  
  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 changes later you should be called out for your silly flawed assumption too.
Re:Nice ad. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 06:27 · Score: 1

240GB SSD's have been in the $70-80 range for a while now. I bought some from NewEgg back in March 2015 for under $80, and most brands have matched or beaten that price in the months since then.
120GB = $40
240GB = $70
480GB = $130
960GB = $250
The rate seems to be baselined with the120GB drives at $40, and each doubling of capacity averages double the price, minus ten dollars. For now.
Re:Nice ad. by greenfruitsalad · 2016-02-12 06:32 · Score: 1, Troll

it doesn't matter. it's TLC and lasts only 250 overwrites. they claim it'll last 3 years (30TB of writes for the 120GB) but the average jane user, who fills up 90% of the drive (with selfies) in the first 6 months and then cornholes the remaining 10% for the next few years, will most likely suffer data loss. i'd steer clear.
this is almost as bad as the recent Sandisk z400s which only lasts 281 overwrites. shitty disposable crap.
Re:Nice ad. by greenfruitsalad · 2016-02-12 06:36 · Score: 1

s/almost as bad as/worse than
Re:Nice ad. by Bengie · 2016-02-12 06:39 · Score: 2

High end TLC is good for 10k-60k write cycles. Get what you pay for.
You had me at Hello by drinkypoo · 2016-02-12 07:04 · Score: 1

You had me at "OCZ Toshiba Breaks"

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Too many bad experiences with OCZ by The-Ixian · 2016-02-12 07:05 · Score: 1

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.

--
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Re:"OCZ breaks" by Gr8Apes · 2016-02-12 07:10 · Score: 2

No kidding. OCZ is one of the brands I won't buy. It's Corsair and Samsung all the way.

--
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
How is OCZ these days? by hackertourist · 2016-02-12 07:20 · Score: 1

They're firmly on my 'avoid like the plague' list. Has their being bought by Toshiba resulted in any improvement?
1. Re:How is OCZ these days? by PRMan · 2016-02-12 07:50 · Score: 2
  
  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".
  
  --
  Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
They're still doing it wrong. by Joce640k · 2016-02-12 07:45 · Score: 4, Insightful

"increased performance and lower cost"
I'd settle for "same performance, same cost, improved reliability".

--
No sig today...
1. Re:They're still doing it wrong. by jandrese · 2016-02-12 10:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  You can get that by switching from OCZ to virtually any other brand.
  
  --
  
  I read the internet for the articles.
2. Re:They're still doing it wrong. by ohnocitizen · 2016-02-12 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  Is the reliability that bad? Looking to buy a new SSD, and reliability and cost are my top concerns.
3. Re:They're still doing it wrong. by flatulus · 2016-02-12 14:55 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Is the reliability that bad? Looking to buy a new SSD, and reliability and cost are my top concerns.
  OCZ had a bad spell a few years ago and were the "king of unreliability". My employer deployed Vertex2 drives. We had a few field failures, but not really all that many. But the brand got blasted in user reports and reviews - one article rated it the most unreliable SSD, head and shoulders above (below?) all others.
  IIRC, OCZ went bankrupt and was purchased by Toshiba. They (Toshiba) chose to keep the OCZ brand (putting it on a 12-step plan) rather than using their own name on consumer products (like how Crucial is actually Micron, but they keep the names separate).
  So I wouldn't necessarily hold the "new" OCZ responsible for the "old" OCZ's missteps.
4. Re:They're still doing it wrong. by thegarbz · 2016-02-12 22:39 · Score: 1
  
  Why? Do you have some hard data showing current gen SSDs have poor reliability?
5. Re:They're still doing it wrong. by thegarbz · 2016-02-12 22:40 · Score: 1
  
  You can get that by switching from OCZ to virtually any other brand.
  Do you have hard data on current gen OCZ SSDs since the Toshiba takeover to backup your statement? Or are you just regurgitating a 5 year old meme?
6. Re:They're still doing it wrong. by armanox · 2016-02-12 23:54 · Score: 1
  
  I've got a OCZ Vertex 2 and an Agility 3 that have shown no issues for their life (the Agility has been in my desktop its whole life (3 years IIRC) and the Vertex was the OS drive for a file server for two years prior to it coming to me. I replaced the Vertex with an Intel SSD because I needed to expand, and the Intel was on an incredible sale). There again, I have yet to have any SSD that I've purchased fail (out of Intel, OCZ, and recently added a PNY to my collection).
  
  --
  I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
Re:Nice ad. by parkinglot777 · 2016-02-12 07:52 · Score: 1

Look at the GP (from AC) question...

Show me a place where you can buy the 240gb version for $70.
Didn't say anything about shipping. sims2 has answered the question.
$270 for a 960GB version by YrWrstNtmr · 2016-02-12 07:57 · Score: 1

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?
Re:Nice ad. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-02-12 08:05 · Score: 1

That's not how dynamic wear leveling works.
the math co-processor, which was even more useless by whathappenedtomonday · 2016-02-12 08:41 · Score: 1

?!
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!

--
I hope I didn't brain my damage.
Re: Nice ad. by tnk1 · 2016-02-12 08:56 · Score: 2

OP's implication with that question is that you couldn't get it for that price from anywhere. The implication is that this is not a real thing you could get.
However, if Amazon is listing that item for that price, then someone has set a price and is going to be shipping it. The rest is nitpicking. I wouldn't call something that takes two months to ship to be "unreal". I'd call it "backordered".
Re:This equates to street prices of $70 for a 240G by tnk1 · 2016-02-12 08:58 · Score: 1

I actually thought the response was funnier.
Re:the math co-processor, which was even more usel by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-02-12 09:05 · Score: 1

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.

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I only read OCZ breaks by zwarte+piet · 2016-02-12 09:12 · Score: 1

old news
Re:Nice ad. by Mal-2 · 2016-02-12 09:28 · Score: 1

That was going to be my point. I see Patriot SSDs running at $70 for the 240 GB variant on Newegg all the time lately.

--
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Re:LOL 5MB HP Disk by jandrese · 2016-02-12 10:08 · Score: 1

Still have the 40MB SCSI-1 drive in the Mac LC. Amazingly it still works. Everything before that was floppies, many of those no longer work.

--

I read the internet for the articles.
Re:Nice ad. by twistedcubic · 2016-02-12 10:45 · Score: 1

And Mushkin has a 1TB SSD for $230 at Newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/...
Re:Nice ad. by dmesg0 · 2016-02-12 11:13 · Score: 1

Crucial/Micron BX200 is 65$ for 240gb
http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-...
It's a much better MLC drive, with SM2246EN controller.
No reason to buy 2D TLC at all (unless it's sold for dirt cheap prices, e.g. 0.20$/GB like on last Black Friday).
Either buy MLC or 3D TLC now.
Crucial is doing a $500 4TB SSD by AbRASiON · 2016-02-12 11:58 · Score: 1

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.
Seagate ST-225 by hankwang · 2016-02-12 20:31 · Score: 1

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

--
Avantslash: low-bandwidth mobile slashdot.
1. Re:Seagate ST-225 by HornWumpus · 2016-02-13 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  No. It was about 1988-1990. ST-225s were 20 MB drives.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Re:Nice ad. by smallfries · 2016-02-12 20:51 · Score: 1

Not worth getting. For $15 more you can get a 1TB Samsung EVO 1TB - better reliance and better performance.
(while we're trading amazon ads on slashdot: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-... )
I picked one up at a similar prices in a sale a few months back. It has my entire Steam library on it, and all of games have the shortest loading delays that I've ever experienced. Lovin it.

--
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
They aren't exactly the first to reach this price by kungfuj35u5 · 2016-02-13 04:55 · Score: 1

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.
Re: Nice ad. by cthulhu11 · 2016-02-13 16:00 · Score: 1

These are far from obscure.
Re:Nice ad. by Shirley+Marquez · 2016-02-13 16:11 · Score: 1

You can't buy the Trion 150 anywhere yet. But meanwhile the street price of the previous generation has hit $70: http://www.microcenter.com/pro... And if you want more capacity, how about the 960GB version for $220: http://www.microcenter.com/pro...
I'm sure that this is partly because they're clearing out the old ones to make way for the new. But it's still a deal if you need a drive right now and don't need the performance irmprovement of the next generation.
Re:the math co-processor, which was even more usel by Wolfrider · 2016-02-15 18:04 · Score: 1

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

--
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??