OCZ Vertex is Even Faster in Limited Edition SSD

[Marcus Yam]

Do you have the need for speed?

OCZ Vertex is Even Faster in Limited Edition SSD : Read more

 

[kelfen]

If my memory is correct these are faster than intel's sdds

 

[jisamaniac]

Correct kelfren. OCZ has always had the faster SSD drives.

 

[liquid0h]

For my budget, the price still isn't worth it. Tempting though...

 

[jrocks84]

In terms of write speed, yes, but not until now in terms of read speed I believe.

 

[helevole]

“The new Vertex Limited Edition SSD is our fastest, multi-level cell (MLC), performance-based drive"

read/write/IOPS values like that, and its not even SLC? to another poster from below a previous article: "It´s Soopah!"

 

[ricin]

Supposedly awesome new drive, but on old transport technology (SATA II). That's about an idiot move right there.

 

[salimbest83]

wonder when sata 3 will be mainstream

 

[the_krasno]

It will be cheaper to buy 2 of the 100GB drives and make them run in RAID 0, also they will perform a lot better.

 

[gladiator_mohaa]

I was just thinking that Krasno.

 

[vant]

Why do people care about sequential speeds so much? It's the random speeds we need plastered on banners. I don't transfer 1GB files every hour, neither do most consumers.

 

[rick2689]

[citation][nom]kelfen[/nom]If my memory is correct these are faster than intel's sdds[/citation]

Nice pun. Good stuff.

On another note - who actually buys these things? Is it that much to wait 10 more seconds for something to load? How valuable is someone's time that uses these? I had an SSD by OCZ that was rated at 150mb/s and 90mb/s. It was noticeably slower than my 1.5TB barracuda drive. I don't like how these drives degrade much faster. I know they'll last longer and all and are more durable but who throws their computer in a river or tosses grenades at it? Maybe someday they'll get cheaper.

 

[Annisman]

Wonder how these compare to my OCZ Vertex Turbo.

 

[rbarone69]

[citation][nom]rick2689[/nom]Nice pun. Good stuff.On another note - who actually buys these things? Is it that much to wait 10 more seconds for something to load? How valuable is someone's time that uses these? I had an SSD by OCZ that was rated at 150mb/s and 90mb/s. It was noticeably slower than my 1.5TB barracuda drive. I don't like how these drives degrade much faster. I know they'll last longer and all and are more durable but who throws their computer in a river or tosses grenades at it? Maybe someday they'll get cheaper.[/citation]

When you're paying good money for a team of developers working on large programming projects waiting that little extra time adds up when half your day is spent waiting on compile times.

 

[anamaniac]

Meh.
I'm more interested in Gen 3 Intel x18-m drives.
Also, why aren't more mainstream SDD's 1.8"? Intel's 80GB x18-m costs $200, comes with a 2.5" bracket, costs less than their 80GB x25-m, and is comparable in performance.

 

[eklipz330]

wow... $4/gb... prices are coming down ^_^

i remember late 08... it was about $10/gb

 

[JeanLuc]

[citation][nom]jisamaniac[/nom]Correct kelfren. OCZ has always had the faster SSD drives.[/citation]

You need to look beyond the basic read/write speeds and look at the 4k results to gauge how good an SSD is and in that regards Intel's SSD are miles ahead of the competition.

[citation][nom]salimbest83[/nom]wonder when sata 3 will be mainstream[/citation]

SATA is mainstream anyone who bas built or bought a PC in the last 3 years should have SATA 3Gbs.

 

[climber]

[citation][nom]JeanLuc[/nom]You need to look beyond the basic read/write speeds and look at the 4k results to gauge how good an SSD is and in that regards Intel's SSD are miles ahead of the competition.SATA is mainstream anyone who bas built or bought a PC in the last 3 years should have SATA 3Gbs.[/citation]
SATA 3.0 is 6Gb/s, SATA 2.0 is 3Gb/s, salimbest83 was more than likely referring to SATA 3.0. That being said, this drive can't beat the current SATA 2.0 read/write speeds of the interface so don't worry.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

I'm thinking the OCZ press release is full of marketing hype.

 

[JamesSneed]

@JeanLuc - Probably true but these are very close to maxing out the Sata 2.0 bandwidth. Like you said Sata 2.0 is 3Gb/s or in another words 286MB/s. These these drives are hitting 270MB/s read speads. With a bit of encoding overhead factored in the sequential reads could already be limited by the Sata II controler. Im personally holding out on SSD's for price and Sata 3.0 drives.

 

[kencolestud69]

It would be nice if there was a poll about how many of Tom's Hardware readers have SSD's and if they really notice a significant improvement that justifies the cost.

 

[Lunatic Magnet]

[citation][nom]rick2689[/nom]Nice pun. Good stuff.On another note - who actually buys these things? Is it that much to wait 10 more seconds for something to load? How valuable is someone's time that uses these? I had an SSD by OCZ that was rated at 150mb/s and 90mb/s. It was noticeably slower than my 1.5TB barracuda drive. I don't like how these drives degrade much faster. I know they'll last longer and all and are more durable but who throws their computer in a river or tosses grenades at it? Maybe someday they'll get cheaper.[/citation]

They make a tremendous difference in systems with moderate to slow hardware. Hard drives have been the slowest evolving piece of hardware in terms of speed. Throw them in a RAID an array and things get even better.

Saying that, the price is still a bit high. Over the next year or two the prices should drop some more making it a very tempting purchase.

 

[JeanLuc]

[citation][nom]climber[/nom]SATA 3.0 is 6Gb/s, SATA 2.0 is 3Gb/s, salimbest83 was more than likely referring to SATA 3.0. That being said, this drive can't beat the current SATA 2.0 read/write speeds of the interface so don't worry.[/citation]

AMCC doesn't refer to the different SATA generations as 1.0 2.0 or 3.0, they label according there interface speed so what you call SATA 2.0 is actual SATA 3 as is 3 Gb's and what you call SATA 3.0 is actualy SATA 6 as it's 6Gb's.

That's a good idea as it avoids confusion so when SATA 6 is more common place it's clear as to what generation is being discussed otherwise if you say SATA 3 someone might think your talking about SATA 3Gb's i.e the second generation rather then SATA 6Gb's.

 

[Guest]

But who wants to buy a Limited Edition? I thought the whole problem for the SSD market was to increase volume production to bring down cost per unit and make the price attractive. I'm not much of a fan of 'collectors editions', especially in consumer products. Aside from the premium cost, they're also going to have problems when it comes to after-sales support, such as replacements under warranty, or persuading OCZ to spend the time fixing any firmware bugs in the controller when there are only a small number of customers

 

[tsnor]

These SSDs use the sandforce controller. Enterprise class error recovery. Excellent write-up here:
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3747

The controller uses advanced write avoidance, so if all works as designed the MLC flash will last a long long time. And performance is great.

The author says both that there is risk buying a brand new controller and "there are only a limited number of these drives being made - 5,000 to be exact. Once they're all gone, that's it."