External 128 GB SSD with USB Type-C interface

When I started writing this review, I spent a while wondering which section to put it in: SSDs or flash drives. In the end, I settled on the first option, since it really is more like an external SSD than a flash drive.
You'll find out why in the review, which also includes a look at the device and some testing.


Some time ago, a manager from the Orico official store got in touch and offered me something to review. I hadn't had a “flash drive” like this before, so I thought, why not? Of course, I initially wanted at least the 512 GB version, but it turned out they were out of stock and only the 128 GB model was available. A bit disappointing, but what can you do?

It was shipped by Mist Express, but to my great surprise, after clearing customs it somehow ended up not at one of their pickup points, but at a Ukrposhta branch...
The packaging is excellent. The drive comes in its own box, which was then wrapped in an extra layer of cardboard, covered in soft film, and placed in a bubble-wrap envelope.


The technical specifications are listed on the back of the package. In brief:
Name - NVMe SSD
Model - GV100
Case material - ABS plastic + aluminum
Dimensions - 96 x 30 x 9.9 mm
Interface - USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-C
Storage type - 3D NAND Flash
Capacity - 128 GB, 256 GB, 512 GB, 1 TB



The packaging gets top marks: neat and sturdy.


The package includes:
1. The drive
2. Manual
3. USB-C to USB-C cable
4. USB-A to USB-C cable

I was especially pleased to see the last item, since the drive doesn't have a built-in connector, and I didn't have a USB-A 3.0 to Type-C adapter. The cables are short, and it would probably be more accurate to call them extended adapters. In my opinion, that's actually better, since the “flash drive” is fairly bulky and won't fit everywhere.


The first thing this case brought to mind was a cigar cutter. All it needs is a blade :)


The manufacturer's name is on one side; the model name, capacity, and other information are on the other.
A USB Type-C port is on one end, with an indicator LED aperture next to it. The LED indicates the operating mode as follows: -
Steady light - idle
Short flashes - safe to remove
Long flashes - reading/writing.

USB flash drives can usually be plugged into a computer without any extra cables or adapters. This one needs a cable, like an external HDD/SSD enclosure, so I don't think it's accurate to call it a flash drive.


When I connected it to the computer, a pop-up appeared saying the drivers had been installed and everything should work. All tests were run on Windows 7 x64, using a computer with a Core-I3-5010U processor and 12 GB of RAM.


The drive is formatted as NTFS, with 119 GB of formatted capacity available.


As is customary when testing USB storage devices, the first test was H2testw, which lets you check two useful things at once:
1. Whether the stated capacity matches the actual capacity.
2. Sequential write/read speeds across the entire capacity.

I had no doubts about the first point—Orico is certainly no fly-by-night outfit—but the second was quite interesting.
Write speed immediately climbed to 230-250 MB/s, stayed there for about 10-15 seconds, then gradually dropped, reaching a more modest 72 MB/s by the end of the test.
Read speed stayed roughly constant at 185 MB/s.


Next up was the SSD-Z utility, but it didn't give me much information, and it wouldn't show SMART data at all.


I also ran its built-in benchmark, just in case.


Next, of course, is CrystalDiskMark, which most users are more familiar with. I'm a little skeptical of its results, but it may be useful for comparing with other devices tested using the same program.
I ran several tests, connecting directly to the computer and through a USB hub. The results didn't differ much, but the speed was still a little higher with a direct connection.
Speed with test file sizes of 1 and 32 GB.


AS SSD Benchmark. Again, while the read speed looks fine, the write speed is lagging, at around 62 MB/s in sequential mode.


Anvil's benchmark shows pretty much the same thing. There's a small margin of error, but write speed still didn't even reach 70 MB/s.


Of course, I also ran the ever-popular HD Tune Pro.
First, the file test in two modes, starting with a random data pattern.


Then with a zero pattern. The test file was the same size in both cases: 50 GB. I ran the test several times, and in some runs the high write speed held at around 240 MB/s for the first 2–3 GB.


I also tested the entire capacity using the same program. The read graph is a little uneven, but stays around 230–240 MB/s.


The write graph, on the other hand, looks like a picket fence. This test is run on an unpartitioned drive, i.e. without a file system. Here too, you can see that the peak speed is 250 MB/s, but the average is around 64 MB/s.


The last utility-based test is more of an extra: it's an old program called USB Flash Benchmark. I ran it a couple of times and noticed that while the read graph barely changed between two consecutive runs (the solid and dashed lines), the write graph differed during the first half of the test (with file sizes up to 128 KB).


I also checked how it performed in Windows Explorer.
When writing a relatively large file, the displayed speed was initially high—sometimes 250, sometimes over 400 MB/s—but the actual speed was much lower.


Next, I tried writing files to a drive that was already partially full. Sequential speed was 70 MB/s, but when writing a large number of smaller files (100 folders containing photos of various sizes), speed dropped to 25 MB/s.


The case gets warm during use, but out of curiosity I measured the current draw in different modes:
1. Idle
2. Writing through a long cable. The voltage dropped to 4.57 V, but writing continued normally and nothing disconnected.
3, 4. Writing and reading when connected via USB 3.0
5, 6. Writing and reading via USB 2.0. I sometimes see people ask why a USB tester needs USB 3.0 support. This is exactly why: devices can draw different currents in different modes.


Next came a futile attempt to open the device. Either the internals are glued in place or something else is going on; all I managed to do was bend the aluminum case. In the end, I tried using utilities to find out what was inside and learned only that the controller is made by JMicron. What's behind it is unknown.


Later, though, I found out that it uses an SM2263XT controller and Intel TLC flash memory.


CrystalDiskInfo initially didn't detect this drive. I downloaded the latest version, and it showed the drive's properties.


After publishing the review, I ran tests in Windows 10. The results were somewhat different from those in Windows 7, so I decided to add them here.


This was the only test program that showed write speeds similar to those in the earlier Windows 7 tests.


I used this test program during the review, but an older version. Here, I ran the test with both the old version, for a more accurate comparison, and a newer one. In the latter case, the test file was 5 GB.


HD Tune Pro also showed a better result than in Windows 7.


Conclusions.
The flash drive (if you can call it that) delivered fairly decent, though not outstanding, read speeds, but sequential write speed was only around 60–70 MB/s. Of course, right at the start of a write, the speed briefly jumps to 230–240 MB/s, but only for a very short time. The same goes for the period after the write finishes, so averaged out, I’d still say the actual speed is the 60–70 MB/s mentioned above.
You could ask: what’s the difference between this and an ordinary USB flash drive? In my view, it comes down to handling small files—ordinary flash drives are often slower.

As for the design and everything else.
I have no complaints about the packaging or what’s included: everything you need is there, namely two cables. That means you can connect the drive to either an “old-fashioned” USB port or a newer Type-C port. As you saw in the photos, the drive itself has a socket, which makes it look more like an external hard drive than a flash drive, which usually has a plug built in.
The case is large but very sturdy and neatly finished. I’d probably remove the ring section, though—it makes an already large case about one and a half times longer.

It’ll be $51.75 for Black Friday.

That’s all from me. I hope you found this information useful, and as always, I’d be glad to hear your questions or just your comments.