• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Team Group T-FORCE Vulcan Z 2 TB 2.5" SSD

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
28,776 (3.74/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
Team Group's T-Force Vulcan Z SSD comes at amazing pricing for a solid-state drive. It's just $120 for the 2 TB version, and it uses TLC flash, not QLC. Our in-depth review shows that performance is solid, even though the drive is DRAM-less, the very large SLC cache definitely helps.

Show full review
 
Just checked @W1zzard , and it's currently at $160 on Amazon that you linked.

At 160, there is a lot better available.
 
There's a error on the specification chart page one of the review.

TBW should read 1,600 TWB. 600 would be under even QVO.

It's a good value for the provided endurance but they need to launch higher capacity models. For the consumer SSD market 4TB and especially 8TB drives are quite expensive per TB. Enterprise U.2 drives clock in at around $600 for 8TB and have fantastic features, endurance, and performance compared to SATA drives. M.2 SSDs of 8TB capacity that use TLC on the consumer end starts at $1,200.
 
Just checked @W1zzard , and it's currently at $160 on Amazon that you linked.

At 160, there is a lot better available.
Newegg has it on sale for $120.
 
kind of an epicfail tbh.

lesson learnt: dramless sata is no good. sata needs dram to be good, while dramless nvme can work.
if your system can make use of nvme/m.2, you should probably use those. there's better cheap(-ish) m.2s these days than there are sata.
 
the only thing close to ~120 USD for a 2TB 2.5" SATA SSD is a Patriot P210 over here. Every other brand is selling their 2TB 2.5" SATA SSD more expensive than a Kingston NV2 2TB. Even Kingston's own 2TB SATA 2.5" SSD is more expensive than their own 2TB NV2. The best part, I can get a KC3000 2TB cheaper (from a reputable shop) than I can get a Samsung 2TB QVO, unless I buy that QVO from a dodgy looking shop. Meanwhile the 2TB MX500 is in between the NV2 and the KC3000 in pricing.
 
Thanks for the review.

TeamGroup has a penchant for this 128L SK Hynix flash. They use it on the Cardea Z330 & MP33 Pro NVMe SSDs as well. It's good NAND, so it surprises me that it's so inexpensive.
 
Wow not many MLC nand based drive(s) left.

Also is my sight going? I did not notice the Solidigm P44 on the list?
 

On this page it calls it a Kyoxia SSD when describing the SATA 6Gbps interface. Just a typo!
 
Well, it gets my ''At least better than DRAMLESS QLC'' award, basically same as ''Better than Dell''.
 
There is also the TeamGroup CX2 at $99, i wonder how close is in performance:

Product Specifications​

ModelCX2
InterfaceSATA III 6Gb/s
Capacity2TB
VoltageDC +5V
Operation Temperature0°C ~ 70°C
Storage Temperature-40˚C ~ 85˚C
DRAM CacheNO
Terabyte Written2TB - 1,600TBW
PerformanceCrystal Disk Mark:
2TB Read: Up to 540MB/s Max ; Write: 490MB/s[4]
Dimensions100(L) x 69.9(W) x 7(H) mm
Humidity0°C ~ 55°C / 5% ~ 95% RH,non-condensing
Vibration20G (non-operating)
Shock1,500G
MTBF1,000,000 hours
Operating System
  • Windows 11 / 10 / 8.1 / 8 / 7
  • MAC OS 10.4 or later
  • Linux 2.6.33 or later
Warranty3-year limited warranty
 
"The Kioxia Exceria SATA uses the SATA 6 Gbps interface. It is compatible with any older SATA standard, but will in such a case work at reduced performance."

Huh? Is this Kioxia one or Teamgroup one?
 

On this page it calls it a Kyoxia SSD when describing the SATA 6Gbps interface. Just a typo!
"The Kioxia Exceria SATA uses the SATA 6 Gbps interface. It is compatible with any older SATA standard, but will in such a case work at reduced performance."

Huh? Is this Kioxia one or Teamgroup one?
Fixed
 
I fail to see the value of this, when some NVMe drives with 5 years warranty are $65/TB after tax in the EU (and probably cheaper elsewhere).
 
I fail to see the value of this, when some NVMe drives with 5 years warranty are $65/TB after tax in the EU (and probably cheaper elsewhere).
Lots of systems out there without m2/nvme. But… I love m2/nvme purely for the simple beauty of cable management and how tidy it looks.
 
Lots of systems out there without m2/nvme.
If there's a PCIe slot you can put in a NVMe drive with an adapter that costs $5. You can even boot from it, if you don't mind a bit of messing around. But yeah, not everyone wants to do that.
 
If we are talking bargain-basement drives, I'd love to see a review of the Silicon Power A55 series. Their 2 TB version is selling for $98.99 on Amazon stateside.
 
If there's a PCIe slot you can put in a NVMe drive with an adapter that costs $5. You can even boot from it, if you don't mind a bit of messing around. But yeah, not everyone wants to do that.
Not without bios modification, I couldn’t easily boot to one in pcie adapter on my secondary pc which is x79
 
How can the Windows boot time on this drive be possible? It seems ridiculously long for a SATA SSD.
 
How can the Windows boot time on this drive be possible? It seems ridiculously long for a SATA SSD.
No idea .. I was surprised too ..

Here's the raw data .. the first three runs it was low, then it went up and never decreased again
Startuptime Duration: 9.56 s
Startuptime Duration: 9.59 s
Startuptime Duration: 9.70 s
Startuptime Duration: 22.56 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.53 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.52 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.39 s
Startuptime Duration: 33.06 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.81 s
Startuptime Duration: 34.13 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.66 s
 
No idea .. I was surprised too ..

Here's the raw data .. the first three runs it was low, then it went up and never decreased again
Startuptime Duration: 9.56 s
Startuptime Duration: 9.59 s
Startuptime Duration: 9.70 s
Startuptime Duration: 22.56 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.53 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.52 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.39 s
Startuptime Duration: 33.06 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.81 s
Startuptime Duration: 34.13 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.66 s
That sounds like maybe it's a firmware bug. It's very odd indeed.
 
No idea .. I was surprised too ..

Here's the raw data .. the first three runs it was low, then it went up and never decreased again
Startuptime Duration: 9.56 s
Startuptime Duration: 9.59 s
Startuptime Duration: 9.70 s
Startuptime Duration: 22.56 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.53 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.52 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.39 s
Startuptime Duration: 33.06 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.81 s
Startuptime Duration: 34.13 s
Startuptime Duration: 32.66 s
@Wooden Law - Black , any ideas?
 
Yeah, no, too expensive for what you get.

I would rather buy a M.2 drive. We should be seeing 4TB SSD drives @ $80 bucks by now. meh.
 
Back
Top