OCZ Demonstrates New Vertex 4 SSD at CeBIT 2012

[tecmo34]

OCZ Technology shows off its new Vertex 4 based on the Indilinx Everest 2 Controller at CeBIT 2012.

OCZ Demonstrates New Vertex 4 SSD at CeBIT 2012 : Read more

 

[cknobman]

OCZ is like the "General Motors" of SSD's. Use cheap components gussied up to look nice with a bunch of crap marketing. Consumers buy their new shiny toy only to realize a very short while later that they really bought cheap crap.

 

[alex3064]

caught up to 830

 

[burnley14]

I'm ignorant on the full specification list, but it seems like this will only be marginally better than the Vertex 3 line. Not worth paying for a full upgrade anyway.

 

[willard]

Will be interesting to see if their Everest II controller can match Sandforce. Other than that, SSDs have totally stagnated. Wake me up when SATA IV is available and we can start seeing actual performance gains in consumer drives again.

 

[scook9]

This should have LSI/SandForce a little worried.... OCZ was pretty much the sandforce champion in the market

 

[mikeangs2004]

The Indilinx Barefoot Eco SSD (Adata Nobility) is down to 70% after a year of use. This means it will not last very long.

 

[shqtth]

Why call it vertex 4? When I think Vertex i think BSOD

Why not call it Octane 2?

 

[izmanq]

why go faster, current SSD is already a lot lot lot faster than traditional hard drive, while we need something that a lot lot lot cheaper

these days, there are no longer company that think for consumer need, they only think how to maximize profit

 

[Device Unknown]

I believe they should be focusing on capacity at a marginal price not performance. SSD's above 120Gb are still out of reach for most consumers. When a company starts releasing 512Gb SSD's for around $400 USD, then that's the company I will support.

 

[phump]

The specified specifications? Really?

 

[matt_b]

I would have liked to see at least a 10-15% performance increase over Vertex 3. The amusement I get is how fast SATA II and then III became saturated with the SSD boom. SATA III literally was outdated before it launched because of these things (PCI-E 2.0 and 3.0 still have plenty of life left though). This move was inevitable however with the purchase of Indilinx, sorry Sandforce. Here's to hoping the launch for these is a tad better than the Agility/Vertex 3 launch.

 

[shin0bi272]

The real question here is how long will we be using the 3.5" and 2.5" drive format? The future is pci-e cards for drives. Not only will you have ever increasing bandwidth (as video card demands increase) but you will also be able to either use or eliminate the bays for 3.5" drives in your case. The only people who might have an issue with pci-e based SSDs will be those that want to do tri or quad SLI/Crossfire with their cards and dont have enough room. Also as pci-e speeds increase and controller speeds increase pci-e 1x might even be fast enough for an SSD (1GB/sec in pci-e 3.0). Lastly at some point when either that new PCM memory that IBM developed becomes standard or the flash becomes cheaper/faster/smaller, we will be able to have 256 or 512gb on a single memory chip and that will bring the price of SSDs down. Since your average home user will have a hard drive between 500gb and 1tb that will most likely be the butter zone for SSDs as well.

 

[Miharu]

showed sequential read/write speeds of 366.94 MB/s and 305.26 MB/s and up to 80,000 IOPS for 4k random reads.

Seem quite poor.
I remember Vertex 3 - SATA III running at 550MB/s and 500MB/s.
So what wrong?
Seem better hardware but the performance is totally missing.
Did I miss something?

 

[CaedenV]

[citation][nom]Miharu[/nom]Seem quite poor.I remember Vertex 3 - SATA III running at 550MB/s and 500MB/s.So what wrong? Seem better hardware but the performance is totally missing.Did I miss something?[/citation]
those are max theoretical speeds, not actual use speeds (kinda like how ATA133 drives had a burst speed of 120MB/s which they advertised, but in reality they averaged ~15-30MB/s). The reality of it all is that most SSDs are only working at 1/2 their rated speed most of the time. It is only when they are working with data that is compressible that they are able to really fly. These new drives may be equally fast (or even a little slower) on paper, but that does not have any bearing on real world performance. If the average and minimum speeds are better then it could be much faster than the previous gen drives, but we will have to wait and see the benchmarks.

 

[Guest]

Unlike current Sandforce controllers that typically experience a write performance hit with incompressible data, I believe the Indilinx Everest 2 will exhibit similar levels of performance regardless of the nature of the data stream...
http://www.storagereview.com/ocz_everest_2_performance_preview

 

[Soda-88]

[quotemsg=9351209,16,515213]those are max theoretical speeds, not actual use speeds (kinda like how ATA133 drives had a burst speed of 120MB/s which they advertised, but in reality they averaged ~15-30MB/s). The reality of it all is that most SSDs are only working at 1/2 their rated speed most of the time. It is only when they are working with data that is compressible that they are able to really fly. These new drives may be equally fast (or even a little slower) on paper, but that does not have any bearing on real world performance. If the average and minimum speeds are better then it could be much faster than the previous gen drives, but we will have to wait and see the benchmarks.[/quotemsg]
that's only true for sandforced based drives

if people who moan about poor performance read the article, they'd see the drive was in IDE mode instead of AHCI which can severely gut the performance of SSDs

 

[ewood]

[citation][nom]izmanq[/nom]why go faster, current SSD is already a lot lot lot faster than traditional hard drive, while we need something that a lot lot lot cheaper these days, there are no longer company that think for consumer need, they only think how to maximize profit[/citation]

that is the entire point of a company. they need to sell what customers want not what they need because many people buy what they want which is often much different from what they need. do i really need a samsung 830? not a chance. did i buy one because i wanted one? yes

 

[__-_-_-__]

reliability?

 

[Guest]

OCZ doesn't have much wiggle room on the pricing. The NAND the SSDs are built on will dictate the final price, and right now it's still expensive compared to HDD platters.

 

[kikiking]

nice... three hours left?

http://www.ocztechnology.com/vertex4/