Mixed Random Read/Write Performance

The mixed random I/O benchmark starts with a pure read test and gradually increases the proportion of writes, finishing with pure writes. The queue depth is 3 for the entire test and each subtest lasts for 3 minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. As with the pure random write test, this test is restricted to a 16GB span of the drive, which is empty save for the 16GB test file.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write

The 240GB Trion 150 once again shows surprising improvement compared to both its predecessor and its larger siblings, and all capacities handle the mixed random workload as well as any budget TLC drive.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write (Power)

The Trion 150 shows less variation in power consumption across capacities, and better efficiency than the competition.

The 240GB Trion 150's relatively impressive score is due mostly to the good performance on the pure write phase at the end of this test. The larger capacities don't benefit quite as much at the end, but do score slightly higher on the other portions of the test.

Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance

The mixed sequential access test covers the entire span of the drive and uses a queue depth of one. It starts with a pure read test and gradually increases the proportion of writes, finishing with pure writes. Each subtest lasts for 3 minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The drive is filled before the test starts.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write

The 240GB Trion 150 is barely slower than its predecessor on the mixed sequential test, but the larger capacities perform much better and are close to matching the slowest MLC drives.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write (Power)

The Trion 150 continues to show improved power efficiency compared to the Trion 100, and once again manages to beat the other planar TLC drives.

Quite differently from the mixed random test, on this test the 240GB Trion 150's score is hurt by the performance on the pure write phase. All three capacities manage to show a performance spike at the end of the test, which is absent from the worst scoring drives.

Sequential Performance ATTO, AS-SSD & Idle Power Consumption
Comments Locked

79 Comments

View All Comments

  • nathanddrews - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    https://youtu.be/iAwagCwJj-g

    I can't speak for DanNeely, but my DVD/Blu-ray server alone is 32TB now (~4TB free after duplication). Other miscellaneous storage: ~10TB. I wouldn't bother converting the video server over to SSDs, but my other devices I certainly will when the price is right. To be honest, my storage needs have slowed a lot in the past year. Once I can start backing up UHD Blu-ray discs, that will change, but not a lot. I'll just replace existing DVD or Blu-ray backups with the UHD versions. There are only a handful of new movies each year that are worth buying anyway IMO.
  • bji - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    Jesus man you buy alot of movies. 32 TB is around 640 Blu-Ray backups if my math is correct. At a minimum of $10 per Blu-Ray (which is almost certainly an under-estimate), you're talking $6,400 just in the media alone. 32 TB of SSD is probably peanuts for someone with your budget :)
  • xrror - Saturday, April 2, 2016 - link

    RedBox and/or Blockbuster Video. Also many public libraries have movies in their collection. Just saying ;)
  • bji - Sunday, April 3, 2016 - link

    Whatever. Enjoy your hoarding of content you'll likely never watch again just because it feels so good to rip content producers off. Oh and then why don't you come to Anandtech and whine about how expensive the storage is for your ripped off goods. Not you specifically of course, but there are people who do both of these things. Despicable.
  • BurntMyBacon - Monday, April 4, 2016 - link

    @bji: " Enjoy your hoarding of content you'll likely never watch again just because it feels so good to rip content producers off. Oh and then why don't you come to Anandtech and whine about how expensive the storage is for your ripped off goods."

    Sadly, this is too often the case. While I don't support MPAA / RIAA practices of treating everyone like a criminal, people who do this make it hard for them to trust anyone. In the end, it is the honest consumer that suffers as measures taken by studios to prevent these actions generally only make things more inconvenient for those who don't make a practice of bypassing them. Given that I like my entertainment to be entertaining and not frustrating, I've elected to drop movie watching almost completely until such a time as I enjoy it again. However, that gives no justification to rip them off.
  • bji - Monday, April 4, 2016 - link

    What? A moral viewpoint on the internet? Didn't April Fools pass already? :)
  • mkaibear - Sunday, April 3, 2016 - link

    It's not unreasonable.

    Speaking personally I subscribe to Amazon Prime so I don't buy a lot of TV or movies but I do generally pick up a few each year.

    Supernatural, Bones, Castle, The Flash, Arrow, plus a few miscellaneous TV series, plus maybe five movies per year means I'm racking up thirty to forty Blu-rays per year, and I've got a 3.5 year old so don't get anything like enough time to watch telly compared to what I used to. In a different situation I could easily see myself tripling that! 640 brs is only about 5 years' consumption at that point.
  • BurntMyBacon - Monday, April 4, 2016 - link

    @bji: "32 TB is around 640 Blu-Ray backups if my math is correct. At a minimum of $10 per Blu-Ray (which is almost certainly an under-estimate), you're talking $6,400 just in the media alone."

    Well he did say:

    @nathanddrews: "... my DVD/Blu-ray server alone is 32TB now (~4TB free after duplication)."

    So its more like 28TB (used) / 2 (duplication) = 14TB or something like 280 Blu-Ray backups by your math. You're talking $2800 at your specified minimum price of $10. Still quite the budget, but less than half of what you stated.

    @bji: "32 TB of SSD is probably peanuts for someone with your budget :)"

    He isn't the one (at least up to this point) complaining about the price of SSDs. He is simply stating a personal use case that uses large amounts of storage, presumably in an attempt to show the people in this thread that there are legitimate reasons someone may need more than just the 256GB SSD storage in their Macbook Pro retina. Certainly such a use case is not the common user, though.

    Another point of interest is that he never stated over what time period he acquired said collection. $280 a year for 10 years is a lot more palatable than $2800 in a single year. That's still more movies than I'll probably watch in my lifetime, but movies aren't my thing. If they were, I'd have to consider that, regardless of my yearly budget, a $230 1TB (rounded) Trion SSD is worth about 23 movies by your stated minimum pricing. To replace his 32TB array (not sure if he uses raid or another form of duplication) would cost about $7360. That's worth more movies than he could theoretically store without duplication (using your stated minimum pricing).
  • Lolimaster - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    I got 4x 6TB WD Blacks.

    Movies (BD rips)
    Anime (BD rips)
    Manga
    adult anime manga and mangazines :P
    some popcorn
  • Lolimaster - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    +Nintendo DS, 3DS, Wii, PSP, roms and PC games (I delete what i complete, easy to get if want to play them again).

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now