Added 2nd SSD, now getting BSODs

[jsbailey]

So I'm a bit baffled. I currently have a 120GB Crucial RealSSD with only Windows and a few other programs on it. It previously held most of my high-end games, but I recently got a 2nd 120GB OCZ Vertex 3. My plan was to leave Windows on the Crucial, and put all games on the Vertex 3. This has not gone so well.

Originally I did this without reformatting. But I kept getting BSOD's when trying to use the Steam client or play Steam games. So I thought maybe it was because I had installed the Vertex 3 without reformatting and maybe the hardware change threw Windows for a loop. So I reformatted and wiped everything (except my 1TB Media drive). I again installed Windows on the 1st SSD and am *trying* to install games on the Vertex3 but am still getting a lot of BSOD's when dealing with Steam. At first, I assumed it was Steam only, but I've notice I'm now also getting them when trying to install other games on the drive and access any files/folders on the drive.

Thanks for reading (sorry I'm long winded) and I appreciate any help.

Setup:

Main Drive: Crucial RealSSD C300 128GB SATA III SSD
Other Drives: WD 1TB 7200 RPM Traditional Drive, OCZ Vertex 3 120 GB SATA III SSD
CPU: Intel i7 2600k
MOBO: ASUS P67 Sabertooth
RAM: 8GB G.SKILL Ripjaws DDR3 1600
GPU: EVGA GeForce GTX 570
OS: Windows 7 64-bit

 

[nanaki333]

update the firmware.

 

[jsbailey]

Already at most recent version.

 

[RavenSEAL]

OCZ isn't exactly well known for reliability. Like mentioned above, I'd update the firmware and contact steam support just for the giggles. If that doesn't already work, then it sounds like maybe the SSD is bad.

 

[jsbailey]

OCZ isn't exactly well known for reliability. Like mentioned above, I'd update the firmware and contact steam support just for the giggles. If that doesn't already work, then it sounds like maybe the SSD is bad.

I'm starting to fear the latter. My 60 day return/replace period expired two days ago from Newegg. I'm going to see if they'll cut me some slack and send me a new one. Otherwise I'll have to hope OCZ will send me a new one.

Guess I should've researched more. I didn't realize OCZ wasn't well regarded in the SSD market.

 

[nanaki333]

you running the most recent mobo bios and drivers? also, i know it sounds silly, but are you using a cable rated for sata3? it may be something really simple like the cable

 

[Obsoleet]

Get rid of the OCZ! There are warnings all over the net and any forum about how those drives are. I was also a victim... get rid of the drive.

 

[BFG10K]

It sounds like a faulty SSD.

 

[Rvenger]

+1, bad SSD


What does the BSOD say?

 

[Obsoleet]

OP you're gonna struggle and struggle with this until you buy an Intel, Samsung or Crucial drive. If you really want peace of mind get an Intel and pay a high price for it. If you want pretty much everything Intel offers and a little lower price get Samsung. If you can save some money on one, get a Crucial.

Otherwise I'd stay out of the SSD game.

 

[Helicobacter]

No surprise there ( see http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...h-of-testing-13-Vertex-3-s-with-2.15-firmware ).

 

[groberts101]

No surprise there ( see http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...h-of-testing-13-Vertex-3-s-with-2.15-firmware ).

yeah.. well you want to hear something kinda funny here? as much as all the bashers want to say that the SSD itself is defective in cases like the thread pointed out here? The dude in that thread has been able to work one on one with most of these siyuations and regain COMPLETE STABILITY. So there are many system configs out there(bios,drivers,power mgmt implementations) that simply don't agree with Sandforce's firmware code on ocassion.

But that has little relevance to the bulk of systems/users running these drives as there are HUGE numbers being used and enjoyed across the world right now. Not to mention, these things are among the fastest and most popular controllers out right now with many mfgrs using them in their product lineups. If they didn't sell and were total junk as many will have you believe?.. they wouldn't be so popular and vendors wouldn't be taking chances on them. They are well worth it if you run the latest hardware, drivers and firmware from the mfgrs.

And as nanaki already pointed out(and he actually has firsthand experience on a supposedly "faulty drive"(which he actually fixed in the end) to back up his advice unlike many others who around here who jump in just to brand bash).. there can be more than just one cause of issue on some config's with such a capable drive. All the systems I personally use and know of that use these drives are fully content with them.

And don't let all the FUD'ers scare you unless you have mission critical workstation or something that you simply cannot afford to take the time to work through an issue if it did actually arise. Stay with something "slow and steady" and move on with your life.

and PS. for every one of these "failure links"?.. I can post 2 more "success links" to contradict all the "Sandforce experts" around here. Wait!.. here's one now!.. with a 16 x VERTEX 3/RAIDED IMPLEMENTATION? whoa... crazy stuff. He must'a got all the good one's, I guess. LOL
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...ance-thanks-to-Vertex3-drives-(4-400MB-Second)

 

[bryanW1995]

Apparently, the OP was just "unlucky". Good luck with your "I love OCZ" crusade.

 

[groberts101]

Apparently, the OP was just "unlucky". Good luck with your "I love OCZ" crusade.

Love is far too strong a word to use next to OCZ.. LOL

and right back at ya on yours too bud.

PS. if the OP wants actual help rather than all the.. "personal interpretations" being added?.. head over to their forums. They will straighten you out.

Then you can come back over here and tell most that they didn't know as much as they thought they did about these controllers. You'll of course still be pissed for all the hoops you just had to jump though to get there.. but "fixed up" you'll be nonetheless. :thumbsup:

 

[bryanW1995]

Sorry, that was rude. I just truly don't get your lack of disgust with OCZ, even when there is overwhelming evidence that they're not as reliable as many other ssd's. Certainly sandforce didn't do them any favors, but it's also about the corporate culture. Many of these ssd manufacturers have quality reputations to maintain; intel, samsung, crucial, corsair to name but a few. However, OCZ doesn't have to worry about that, if an OCZ product breaks most people probably just say "meh, I was warned, I'll RMA it". If an m4 or 320 series breaks, it's major news however, and the owner is probably pretty upset since he paid more for quality.

 

[groberts101]

You want my honest opinion here? I'll give it openly and with complete candor on this rare occasion BUT I'm not going to debate it.. and it is what it is.. based on personal experience with over 10k spent on the testing of and "breaking of more than one brand of SSD"(Intel included). Sometimes even on purpose as that's the easiest way to see where some hardware limitations lie.

OK.. here it is. CMOS/HARDWARE/DRIVER COMPATIBILITY.

Simple as that and not all controller designs are the same in this regard as far as base codes/inherrent design limitations go. This is often why one mfgrs hardships are nearly immediately mirrored by all others using those same controllers despite the variations between forum/reviewer reports(think.. "release date" and "vendor availability" variables being mixed in there too) as sales volume ofetn skews the picture even further. Not many "net detectives" put all the pieces together and cross reference well enough to take notice either.

Also keep in mind that the end-users "interpretation" as to the actual cause of the issues they experienced are RARELY right on target due to the plain and simple fact that many are not what you would call "experts" on the various factors involved when we mix and match all this hardware/software together. They often lump various factors in there without the knowledge of potential resolution being added to the final conclusion. They just know it didn't work and speculate more than a wall street broker as to the exact cause. Ram/CPU voltages/drivers/overclocking etc all have caused issues and often don't show up immediately because some SSD's tend to tax the system/subsystems harder than HDD ever would which manifests into increased problems much more quickly and deceives from the actual underlying cause. Seen dozens and dozens of posts where people are swearing that the SSD is the cause "because the HDD doesn't do that".. only to find the issue lay elsewhere in the end. A quick visit to any RAM mfgrs forums right after a platform or product release will make that quite obvious.

When a simple mobo bios update.. or a driver install/delete.. or even a power mgmt tweak can make an otherwise unstable device work as it was supposed to out of the box?.. you can bet yer ass that there's FAARRR more to it than simply "following sata spec" and getting the mobo mfgr to include your devices script/id/ACPI interaction profiles to have everything work as it should right out of the box. If it was that easy?.. we surely wouldn't be seeing the huge influx of driver, software, CMOS, firmware updates that we commonly see when new tech hits our shelves. If the SF-2281 controller had not been introduced when the new 6 series chipsets came out(ie, X58/AMD SB850)?.. the issues would have been GREATLY reduced as the variable added to all that mess was overwhelmingly stacked against that controller. The responsibility and cause was not entirely on Sandforce's shoulders there and even other controllers had issues early on as well.

This is life with PC hardware in general and those that test further than all others/spend more money up front?.. are the ones who have the least problems.. aka.. Intel(although their latest chipsets have been less than stellar in that regard). Unfortunately that makes the end product more expensive and IMHO the adoption of these SSD's into "typical use computers" would not be where it is today without companies like OCZ sticking their necks out to make them at lower costs.

That lower cost can sometimes come at a price but even those who do have issues and decide that a specific "brand" is not viable due to hassles?.. are quick to search for alternatives because they simply cannot go back to running an OS from a spinner any more. I've seen plenty of early Sandforce adopters try and switch brands(thinking that's where the entire problem stemmed from) only to find the exact same issues(or even new ones) when changing brands so obviously there's more to it than meets the eye. Putting blinders on only makes that view that much worse. Also keep in mind that the earlier Indilinx related issues are now easily resolved with a destructive flash and smacks back at the face of all those "experts" who said their drive was actually dead or contained defective "chips", etc. So, there is a vast multitude of things that many don't understand when it comes to an SSD and a "failure" can be attributed to many underlying factors.

In the end here.. speed is FAARRR more addicting than stability ever will be for the typical PC/laptop user and OCZ typically caters to those consumers who want to live on the edge. Lower prices never hurt either. And if you're one of the unlucky ones to fall over that edge?.. there's a tiny little invisible cable that comes attached to all their SSD's and it's called.. "forum support" and "warranty".. to reel you back in if need be. Sadly.. not all have the strength to pull themselves back up and run away crying and feel the constant need to "tell daddy" about the bad man(sorry.. I have a "bad humor" habit at times). :twisted:

This ain't enterprise.. and that's good enough for me. Plus.. that's what backups and raid is for.

 

[Obsoleet]

OK.. here it is. CMOS/HARDWARE/DRIVER COMPATIBILITY.

To summarize for the OP, the TLDR version of this is that Intel/Samsung/Crucial do the CMOS/hardware/driver compatibility testing for you. So you buy it, and it works.

OCZ let's you do that for them. It's true what he said, over time the issues have been solved, but not always very quickly.

Intel/Samsung/Crucial not only do substantially better QA, so you don't have to worry about having to run RAID or a backup scheme due to a crap SSD.. but you get fast drives too.
Anyone who says an Intel 510 (the most reliable SSD on the market), Crucial M4 or Samsung 830 is slow needs their head checked.

The Intel 510 is frankly, dominant.

OP, get rid of the damn OCZs.

 

[groberts101]

or better yet?.. get rid of all the OCZ related posts and call it "Anandtel Forums".

Then you could have subforums for the others called.. Anandsung".. and.. "Anandcron" for all the self proclaimed "experts" to help you through your issues. Errr?.. wait.. those mfgrs never ever have any issues at all.. do they?

Nice bubble. :thumbsup:

 

[Obsoleet]

or better yet?.. get rid of all the OCZ related posts and call it "Anandtel Forums".

Then you could have subforums for the others called.. Anandsung".. and.. "Anandcron" for all the self proclaimed "experts" to help you through your issues. Errr?.. wait.. those mfgrs never ever have any issues at all.. do they?

Nice bubble. :thumbsup:

They do have issues, but they fix them much faster.

They also have more satisfied customers and lower failure rates. Also, very fast drives.
The Intel 510 has never had any issue, at all. Just saying.

 

[GoSharks]

They are well worth it if you run the latest hardware, drivers and firmware from the mfgrs.

There is absolutely no reason why there should be compatibility issues in using an SSD with 5 year old tech.

That was my experience with an Agility 3 running 2.15 and an IBM T60 (SATA I) - BSODs to the point where I was never able to finish Windows Update on a fresh install.

 

[groberts101]

There is absolutely no reason why there should be compatibility issues in using an SSD with 5 year old tech

Doesn't have to be right or wrong.. but actually there are plenty of "reasons why". Some can be fixed and worked around if you have the patience and knowledge required though. Most who have ongoing issues have neither.

I got "lucky" and my 5 year old Dell Precision Workstation lappy gets along fine with Sandforce controllers. And if a Dell can get along with these drives?.. makes it that more likely that many others will too. Must be true because I see that very fact ocurr on a daily basis for those that buy these things and shove them into such old tech.

 

[ccbadd]

I have disabled power management on every ssd I have installed and never had a problem with anything but some Corsair F120GB2's (3 out of 5 failed and one twice). It's funny how nobody ever looks at PM as at fault. Intel just disables it in the drive to avoid the issues with PM.

 

[groberts101]

I have disabled power management on every ssd I have installed and never had a problem with anything but some Corsair F120GB2's (3 out of 5 failed and one twice). It's funny how nobody ever looks at PM as at fault. Intel just disables it in the drive to avoid the issues with PM.

I too agree with that philosophy, especially when dealing with Sandforce controlled drives. Moreso on the first gen SF than the latest 6G controller, but still.

And yeah.. the one's who have deeper understanding of all the 6 series platform/driver issues with various SSD controllers do actually understand that. Unfortunately, the one's who often point fingers or play the fanboy card usually don't have a clue that Intel(and some others) have had to do that within the firmware of their controllers just to work around the mess that they themselves created. Kinda "funny", is right.

 

[bryanW1995]

There is absolutely no reason why there should be compatibility issues in using an SSD with 5 year old tech.

That was my experience with an Agility 3 running 2.15 and an IBM T60 (SATA I) - BSODs to the point where I was never able to finish Windows Update on a fresh install.

You are clearly a sleeper agent from intel/samsung/crucial. And now that you have 2800 posts and 13 years here at AT, you have been activated, right? /sarcasm

 

[Obsoleet]

I too agree with that philosophy, especially when dealing with Sandforce controlled drives. Moreso on the first gen SF than the latest 6G controller, but still.

And yeah.. the one's who have deeper understanding of all the 6 series platform/driver issues with various SSD controllers do actually understand that. Unfortunately, the one's who often point fingers or play the fanboy card usually don't have a clue that Intel(and some others) have had to do that within the firmware of their controllers just to work around the mess that they themselves created. Kinda "funny", is right.

So let me get this straight, OCZ and the rest of the industry trash expects the end-USER to be more knowledgeable about SSDs than they are?
Wow, just wow. I did not know that, but the memory and storage forum, as well as Anand needs to broadcast this as loudly as possible.

While Intel does research, quality assurance and makes sure your hard earned money doesn't turn into frustration??
Chalk another one up for Intel.

Do Samsung and Crucial also give 2 shits about their product like Intel? If so, that would explain why there are so many happy customers out there.