Toshiba TR200 SSD Review (240GB/480GB/960GB)


The SSD Review uses PCMark 8’s Storage test suite to create testing scenarios that might be used in the typical user experience. With 10 traces recorded from Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office and a selection of popular games, it covers some of the most popular light to heavy workloads. Unlike synthetic storage tests, the PCMark 8 Storage benchmark highlights real-world performance differences between storage devices. After an initial break-in cycle and three rounds of the testing, we are given a file score and bandwidth amount. The higher the score/bandwidth, the better the drive performs.



Toshiba TR200 240GB PCMARK 8


Toshiba TR200 480GB PCMARK 8


Toshiba TR200 960GB PCMARK 8

In PCMark 8 the TR200 achieved the following average throughput results: 184.91MB/s, 194.46MB/s, and 196.43MB/s.

Toshiba TR200 PCMark 8 Comparison

These scores place the Toshiba TR200 at the end of the pack. There we can see a fairly large performance improvement over the TL100 at the 240GB capacity and, overall, results are similar to the previous TR150, albeit, slightly lower.


For our last benchmark, we have decided to use PCMark 8 Extended Storage Workload in order to determine steady state throughput of the SSD. This software is the longest in our battery of tests and takes just under 18 hours per SSD. As this is a specialized component of PCMark 8 Professional, its final result is void of any colorful graphs or charts typical of the normal online results and deciphering the resulting excel file into an easily understood result takes several more hours.

There are 18 phases of testing throughout the entire run, 8 runs of the Degradation Phase, 5 runs of the Steady State Phase and 5 runs of the Recovery Phase. In each phase, several performance tests are run of 10 different software programs; Adobe After Effects, Illustrator, InDesign, Photoshop Heavy and Photoshop Light, Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint and Word, as well as Battlefield 3 and World of Warcraft to cover the gaming element.

  • PRECONDITIONING -The entire SSD is filled twice sequentially with random data of a 128KB file size. The second run accounts for overprovisioning that would have escaped the first;
  • DEGRADATION PHASE – The SSD is hit with random writes of between 4KB and 1MB for 10 minutes and then a single pass performance test is done of each application. The cycle is repeated 8 times, and with each time, the duration of random writes increases by 5 minutes;
  • STEADY STATE PHASE – The drive is hit with random writes of between 4KB and 1MB for 45 minutes before each application is put through a performance test. This process is repeated 5 times;
  • RECOVERY PHASE – The SSD is allowed to idle for 5 minutes before and between performance tests of all applications. This is repeated 5 times which accounts for garbage collection; and
  • CLEANUP – The entire SSD is written with zero data at a write size of 128KB

In reading the results, the Degrade and Steady State phases represent heavy workload testing while the recovery phase represents typical consumer light workload testing.


As you can see, performance is recorded in terms of Bandwidth and Latency. Bandwidth (or throughput) represents the total throughput the drive is able to sustain during the tests during each phase. Latency, at least for the purposes of PCMark 8, takes on a different outlook and for this, we will term it ‘Total Storage Latency’. Typically, latency has been addressed as the time it takes for a command to be executed, or rather, the time from when the last command completed to the time that the next command started. This is shown below as ‘Average Latency’.

PCMark 8 provides a slightly different measurement, however, that we are terming as ‘Total Storage Latency’. This is represented as being the period from the time the last command was completed, until the time it took to complete the next task; the difference of course being that the execution of that task is included in ‘Total Storage Latency’. For both latency graphs, the same still exists where the lower the latency, the faster the responsiveness of the system will be. While both latency charts look very similar, the scale puts into perspective how just a few milliseconds can increase the length of time to complete multiple workloads.

For a more in-depth look into Latency, Bandwidth, and IOPS check out our primer article on them here.


These results show the total average bandwidth across all tests in the 18 phases. In this graph the higher the result the better.

Toshiba TR200 PCMark 8 Extended Comparison - AB


These results show the average access time during the workloads across all tests in the 18 phases. In this graph the lower the result the better.

Toshiba TR200 PCMark 8 Extended Comparison - AL

When comparing to other similar SSDs in PCMark 8, the Toshiba TR200 stands out, but not in a good way. Based on our results, the DRAMless TR200 seems to have the same inconsistent performance profile that we have seen in other DRAMless SSDs. The 480GB model even spiked up to 9.5ms for its average latency in the heavy workload phase, which actually exceeds the latency we have seen from a WD Blue WD10EZEX 1TB desktop hard drive, although the average throughput from the WD Blue HDD is only about 13MB/s. Once the recovery section comes into play, it seems the TR200 is able to fair better, but still, results are behind all the other SSDs in the comparison testing pool.

One comment

  1. blank

    I find it a little bit amusing, how small is that flashdrive controller. It is smaller than just the SATA data connector! I know its size is nothing new, and it would not look out-of-place in a mSATA module. But that little controller package, connected to eight memory packages (each three times its size), on that 2.5″-class board, is a funny sight.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *