OCZ Octane 512 GB Review: Meet Indilinx's Everest Controller

Status
Not open for further replies.

ksampanna

Distinguished
Apr 11, 2010
1,284
0
19,360
28
[citation][nom]theuniquegamer[/nom]I think in 2 to 3 years we can get a affodable and fast 1tb ssd in market[/citation]

Fast yes, affordable no. My guess is atleast 5 years for a 1 TB ssd to be under $100
 

EDVINASM

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2011
247
0
18,690
2
Still comparing Crysis 2 to everything that moves? I had WD Blue in RAID 0 for quite a while and was relatively happy. Before Christmas however, I have replaced them with just simple, SATA 300 Intel 320 SSD 80Gb. Boy what a difference! No more HDD scratchy sounds, no heat from them, no vibrations, no annoying ticks when idle, silent.. Speed wise PC boots up within 30 sec, and I am only running Intel i3 2100 with no OC. To those who are holding onto HDD I would say unless capacity is the key - sell it off for an SSD. Especially now that HDD prices are skyroketting it is proving easier and easier to do the swap.
 

nebun

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
2,841
0
20,810
19
[citation][nom]ksampanna[/nom]Fast yes, affordable no. My guess is at least 5 years for a 1 TB ssd to be under $100[/citation]
it's so much fun to dream....don't expect prices to drop that much....that's what people people said about CPUs a few years back, yet nothing has changed.... another example is the mid and top end video cards....since manufacturing techniques have improved and have become more efficient one would think that the products would be cheaper....that's not the case....it's called demmand....people demand faster components and will pay a premium price for it, why would manufacturers drop the prices?...they still have to make a profit
 

mayankleoboy1

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2010
2,497
0
19,810
18
[citation][nom]theuniquegamer[/nom]I think in 2 to 3 years we can get a affodable and fast 1tb ssd in market[/citation]


yeah.
and in 2 to 3 years we can get a 20 core intel 9999 X edition for $50.
and gtx990X2 for just $100.
 

buzznut

Splendid
[citation][nom]edvinasm[/nom]Still comparing Crysis 2 to everything that moves? I had WD Blue in RAID 0 for quite a while and was relatively happy. Before Christmas however, I have replaced them with just simple, SATA 300 Intel 320 SSD 80Gb. Boy what a difference! No more HDD scratchy sounds, no heat from them, no vibrations, no annoying ticks when idle, silent.. Speed wise PC boots up within 30 sec, and I am only running Intel i3 2100 with no OC. To those who are holding onto HDD I would say unless capacity is the key - sell it off for an SSD. Especially now that HDD prices are skyroketting it is proving easier and easier to do the swap.[/citation]

And I recommend folks hold onto their current hard drives and get a boot SSD. 80GB may be enough for you, but a lot of us have bigger storage needs. Its gonna take about a year for the hard drive market to recover, so hang on to those mechanical drives.
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
1,272
0
19,310
15
[citation][nom]theuniquegamer[/nom]
I think in 2 to 3 years we can get a affodable and fast 1tb ssd in market[/citation]

[citation][nom]mayankleoboy1[/nom]yeah.and in 2 to 3 years we can get a 20 core intel 9999 X edition for $50.and gtx990X2 for just $100.[/citation]

I do believe that 3-5 years from now we will see a huge increase on performance accompanied by a huge drop in price (compare with today's prices and performance)

Then we will probably have SATA 4 on the market and the "right price/GB/TB" will be on SATA 3 SSD's.

With that in mind, I have always build my systems a generation "behind" which is always more than "a few" generations of whatever I had built last, I have always double or triple my previous built performance for around the same money invested on it.

(plus/minus a few new "tricks" that probably were not on the previous built that could raise my budget
200 dollars or so)

Is is possible to get an 1TB SSD for around $100-$200 dollars in 3-5 years?
I believe it will be.
just don't expect to also be the faster SATA 4, you will have to "compromise" by been a little "behind"
in speed.








 

tetracycloide

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2010
36
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]that's what people people said about CPUs a few years back, yet nothing has changed[/citation]
AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego 2.4GHz circa 2005 - $475.99 inflation adjusted to 2011 ~$548.22
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz circa 2007 - $279.99 inflation adjusted to 2011 ~$304.10
Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz circa 2011 - $219.99

I'm sorry, you were saying?
 

grody

Distinguished
Nov 10, 2009
202
0
18,710
8
I'm not sure why this product is being released. If its performance degrades so much, and the Vertex 3 is the same price and doesn't suffer from such an issue, who exactly is going to buy this? Seems like they are released a beta product on the public.
 

stevelord

Distinguished
Mar 17, 2010
167
0
18,680
0
I am not seeing anything special here either. Crucial M4 series still seems like the best option out there for speed, reliability and price. I use them at home and several at work and they've all been great.
 

nebun

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
2,841
0
20,810
19
[citation][nom]tetracycloide[/nom]AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego 2.4GHz circa 2005 - $475.99 inflation adjusted to 2011 ~$548.22Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz circa 2007 - $279.99 inflation adjusted to 2011 ~$304.10Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz circa 2011 - $219.99I'm sorry, you were saying?[/citation]
they are still expensive....they can by sold for a lot less....here is another example....when stores have theses so called specials around 60% off retail prices they are still making a profit....so a cpu that's around 300 dollars could be sold at 180 dollars and the company would still make a profit....like said before, we empower the companies you set such high prices
 

tipmen

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2008
244
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]they are still expensive....they can by sold for a lot less....here is another example....when stores have theses so called specials around 60% off retail prices they are still making a profit....so a cpu that's around 300 dollars could be sold at 180 dollars and the company would still make a profit....like said before, we empower the companies you set such high prices[/citation]

Its called R&D... It allows progress but is also adds the "high prices" If you say getting i5 2500k is too pricey then think again.
 
G

Guest

Guest
"AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego 2.4GHz circa 2005 - $475.99 inflation adjusted to 2011 ~$548.22"

Man where were you buying your athlon 64s, i cant remember what i paid. But it certainly was under 200, i dont buy $200+ processors. I bought 3 A64s and 2 A64x2s and none of them were 200 let alone 476.

I can find a athlon 64x2 3800+ in my newegg history from 2006 for 154, they were not expensive. (dont remember where i bought the others, so cant check exactly what i paid)
 

mildgamer001

Distinguished
Jul 5, 2011
600
0
19,010
5
[citation][nom]grody[/nom]I'm not sure why this product is being released. If its performance degrades so much, and the Vertex 3 is the same price and doesn't suffer from such an issue, who exactly is going to buy this? Seems like they are released a beta product on the public.[/citation]
um, core 2 duo's are around 150-180$ online in many places still, thats pretty high for somewhat old components... and a core 2 quad was like 300$ when i looked.
 

bluekoala

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2008
333
0
18,810
8
[citation][nom]theuniquegamer[/nom]I think in 2 to 3 years we can get a affodable and fast 1tb ssd in market[/citation]
The prices dropped about 50 cents per GB in the last year. That's roughly 25% less.
Next year if they drop another 25%, they will be roughly 1.20$ per GB
I'm being optimist by saying you will be able to get a decent SSD at around 90 cents per GB.
A year later, we can maybe look at 85Cent per GB on average.
And then another year after that, 65 Cents.
1 TB at 65 cents is 650$
Unless there's a huge surge in flash memory production, I don't see a 1TB SSD for less than 500$ in the next 3 years.
By the way, I don't see the sandisk SSD's on here. They seem to be the best deal around price wise.
 

tetracycloide

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2010
36
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]they are still expensive....they can by sold for a lot less....here is another example....when stores have theses so called specials around 60% off retail prices they are still making a profit....so a cpu that's around 300 dollars could be sold at 180 dollars and the company would still make a profit....like said before, we empower the companies you set such high prices[/citation]
You're conflating the retail space with the manufacturing space here to make a point that would not otherwise stand. When a retail store sells at 60% off retail prices it has absolutely nothing to do with manufactuers and what profits they may or may not be making and everything to do with retail strategy. They're either loss-leading or trying to move excess inventory. Either way they're not making a profit on the item being sold they're recovering the loss some other way or just writing off the loss. Just because some retail store offers a sale of 60% off doesn't mean that every item on the market sold at 100% MSRP was a 40% profit for the retail outlet. Which, again, is not the manufacture anyway so even if you point stood it wouldn't demonstrate what you're attempting to argue.
 

tetracycloide

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2010
36
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]asdlfjlk2jkl2lk2l[/nom]"AMD Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego 2.4GHz circa 2005 - $475.99 inflation adjusted to 2011 ~$548.22"Man where were you buying your athlon 64s, i cant remember what i paid. But it certainly was under 200, i dont buy $200+ processors. I bought 3 A64s and 2 A64x2s and none of them were 200 let alone 476.I can find a athlon 64x2 3800+ in my newegg history from 2006 for 154, they were not expensive. (dont remember where i bought the others, so cant check exactly what i paid)[/citation]
$476 was the list price on newegg in early July 2005 for a 4000+ and the San Diego had only been released less than two months earlier in Mid April.
The 64x2 3800+ was released around August of 2005 for around $350. So they were pretty expensive parts when they came out. Tom's even mentioned the expense explicitly in their review in August 2005 even though they were themselves the newer 'cheaper' x2's after the first gens were like $550+. If you got one in 2006 for any price it was cheap because it was old.
 

freggo

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2008
2,019
0
19,780
0
[citation][nom]theuniquegamer[/nom]I think in 2 to 3 years we can get a affordable and fast 1tb ssd in market[/citation]

True, but by then folks will need a minimum of 750MB for the OS etc and demand at least 5 TB from a boot drive to be acceptable :)

My first hard disc was 5MB in size (yes, 5MB... not a typo). And I could not believe how much faster it was with it's huge storage capacity compared to the 360k 5 1/4" floppy disks I was using up to then.

Bottom line, no matter how big and cheap the next generation SSDs will be, it will always be too small and too expensive. We just want more from Moore's law :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
I don't see a reason to upgrade to an SSD for a few more years. I only restart my PC once or twice a month when critical updates need to be installed. Having 12gb of ram most of my stuff stays open and running 24/7. Even without an SSD, I can boot from my 500gb F3 in about 45 seconds to working desktop.
 
[citation][nom]shuffman37[/nom]I don't see a reason to upgrade to an SSD for a few more years. I only restart my PC once or twice a month when critical updates need to be installed. Having 12gb of ram most of my stuff stays open and running 24/7. Even without an SSD, I can boot from my 500gb F3 in about 45 seconds to working desktop.[/citation]

I assume you meant 750GB, not 750MB and either way you are wrong, plain and simple. No time soon will an OS use that much storage. In fact I think Windows 8 will use less storage space than Windows 7 does so please explain how an OS will use that much storage space. It will probably take us a minimum of 15 years for something like that and I don't think 15 years is enough for that increase in storage requirements.

Octane is just too expensive for it's performance. I might pay half of it's current price for that performance, maybe a little more than half.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts