OCZ is developing junk

[kapalua12]

Groberts is right and these drives are high tech and have to be implemented appropriately. The benefit is they run extremely fast and even faster in Raid 0.
I love them but then they are not for everybody. Information and knowledge, as Groberts alluded to, is essential. Those not willing to accept this should stick with conventional HDD's....at speeds far less that 1GB/sec data reads and writes in Raid 0 with just two Vertex 3's.

 

[Itchrelief]

Yes, because pointing out products with obvious flaws translates to "hip to bash".

And yes, Bulldozer is crap as well. It's because of people like you that say "suck it up" and don't call them out on it that they don't improve anything. What's the incentive to improve if people will simply dismiss whatever problems it has?

It's beyond pointing out flaws to the point of utter hyperbole and just piling on. Taking a 60G drive, which most people in the know realize is not going to perform as well as the larger, fully populated SSDs and pointing out the sequential speeds are slower than the current highest platter density HDs on the outer sectors to call a drive crap when an Intel drive of similar price/less capacity isn't going to do any better? Come on.

 

[Voo]

OCZ has been known to work more closely with SandForce than the other manufacturers. They've always been first-to-market with whatever new high-performance SandForce controller comes out. Since they work closer with them than the other manufacturers plus they have the most used/popular drives I'll point to them mainly.

Sorry if I miss one side sentence in half a dozen posts full of hyperbole mostly without facts

So if say a MB chipset turns out to be faulty you will all enlighten us how crappy <whoever manufacterer that sells the most MBs> is, instead of pointing at say Intel? Yep that makes clearly sense.. sorry no the other word - ah yes, "cray". There's absolutely no reason to single out OCZ for using SF controllers when there are several other companies doing exactly the same, it doesn't make you look sensible or whatever but more like you're on some kind of crusade - which ruins your credibility anyhow.

 

[nanaki333]

Sorry if I miss one side sentence in half a dozen posts full of hyperbole mostly without facts

So if say a MB chipset turns out to be faulty you will all enlighten us how crappy <whoever manufacterer that sells the most MBs> is, instead of pointing at say Intel? Yep that makes clearly sense.. sorry no the other word - ah yes, "cray". There's absolutely no reason to single out OCZ for using SF controllers when there are several other companies doing exactly the same,<b> it doesn't make you look sensible or whatever but more like you're on some kind of crusade </b>- which ruins your credibility anyhow.

kind of like how you're starting to sound

and i steer clear of gigabyte boards because i've had many more failures with those boards than asus or msi. ocz catches the most flack because they want to be first to rush the product out the door rather than do extensive testing in-house. instead, we're all the beta testers.

 

[groberts101]

It will be hilarious(and quite satisfying in some childish petty kind of way) to see all the Sandforce bashers that will eventually buy into the Intel variant using the SF-2281 controller. Will that mean that Sandforce is truly worthy of the top status they often earn in all the reviews from a speed standpoint? Nope.. compression will still just be some sort of advertising gimmick that Intel sold out for, right?

Also kinda funny to see how they seem to have scrubbed some speed from the controller in the process as well. Could that mean that some boards may even have weak signaling issues with drives that can fully saturate the channel? No way.. it couldn't be the reason or have anything to do with Intel lopping off 8 of the early projected sata3 ports from the next gen X79 stuff.

Then oddly enough.. they(OCZ and variuos SSD/mobo mfgrs) seem to have fixed(maybe better to say.. "worked around") many of these SF-2281 issues with newer OROM's, drivers(sata and IME in particular), along with all the various power mgmt chipset feature tweaks within Windows itself.. long before the newest firmware even came along? Almost makes you wonder if the chipset mfgr might have been holding something back from the public until they were close enough to releasing their own SF version of these drives. Naaaa.. Intel wouldn't possibly do that.. would they?

And we all know that Sandforce as a company.. has far too much Integrity to ever allow Intel to control the firmware situation like that. :whiste:

 

[grimpr]

It will be hilarious(and quite satisfying in some childish petty kind of way) to see all the Sandforce bashers that will eventually buy into the Intel variant using the SF-2281 controller. Will that mean that Sandforce is truly worthy of the top status they often earn in all the reviews from a speed standpoint? Nope.. compression will still just be some sort of advertising gimmick that Intel sold out for, right?

Also kinda funny to see how they seem to have scrubbed some speed from the controller in the process as well. Could that mean that some boards may even have weak signaling issues with drives that can fully saturate the channel? No way.. it couldn't be the reason or have anything to do with Intel lopping off 8 of the early projected sata3 ports from the next gen X79 stuff.

Then oddly enough.. they(OCZ and variuos SSD/mobo mfgrs) seem to have fixed(maybe better to say.. "worked around") many of these SF-2281 issues with newer OROM's, drivers(sata and IME in particular), along with all the various power mgmt chipset feature tweaks within Windows itself.. long before the newest firmware even came along? Almost makes you wonder if the chipset mfgr might have been holding something back from the public until they were close enough to releasing their own SF version of these drives. Naaaa.. Intel wouldn't possibly do that.. would they?

And we all know that Sandforce as a company.. has far too much Integrity to ever allow Intel to control the firmware situation like that. :whiste:

:thumbsup::whiste:

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

@LOL Wut Axel
You should state you're only expressing your own opinion, and not facts, because the actual facts and reality are a million miles away from your opinion.

That's just my opinion, of course.

Says someone that's barely made any posts here and contributes nothing to the forum overall.

Of course, the problems I outlined are just "opinions" and people aren't actually having them. They're making them up.

If you want to be OCZ's monkey for Beta testing their drives, so be it. I'm not buying something I can't rely on.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

It will be hilarious(and quite satisfying in some childish petty kind of way) to see all the Sandforce bashers that will eventually buy into the Intel variant using the SF-2281 controller. Will that mean that Sandforce is truly worthy of the top status they often earn in all the reviews from a speed standpoint? Nope.. compression will still just be some sort of advertising gimmick that Intel sold out for, right?

Also kinda funny to see how they seem to have scrubbed some speed from the controller in the process as well. Could that mean that some boards may even have weak signaling issues with drives that can fully saturate the channel? No way.. it couldn't be the reason or have anything to do with Intel lopping off 8 of the early projected sata3 ports from the next gen X79 stuff.

Then oddly enough.. they(OCZ and variuos SSD/mobo mfgrs) seem to have fixed(maybe better to say.. "worked around") many of these SF-2281 issues with newer OROM's, drivers(sata and IME in particular), along with all the various power mgmt chipset feature tweaks within Windows itself.. long before the newest firmware even came along? Almost makes you wonder if the chipset mfgr might have been holding something back from the public until they were close enough to releasing their own SF version of these drives. Naaaa.. Intel wouldn't possibly do that.. would they?

And we all know that Sandforce as a company.. has far too much Integrity to ever allow Intel to control the firmware situation like that. :whiste:

What are you rambling on about? That makes no sense at all. If Intel makes SandForce take a 180 degree turn and focus on testing their controllers and making sure they'll be as reliable as Marvell's then so be it. As of now, it's been unreliable in comparison to most everything in the market, and OCZ using early adopters as Beta testers doesn't help the situation at all. If SandForce improves then I'll consider it just like I consider Marvell, Intel, and Samsung. As of now, the fact is they've shown much lower reliability in comparison.

 

[Old Hippie]

What are you rambling on about?

It's called conjecture from an OCZ/SF fanboi.

Nothing wrong with it....there's always two sides to every story.

Some are just more vocal about it.

 

[groberts101]

It's called conjecture from an OCZ/SF fanboi.

Nothing wrong with it....there's always two sides to every story.

Some are just more vocal about it.

correction there. more like "conjecture mixed with actual firsthand experience from an OCZ/SF fanboi". ()

And.. nope.. nothing wrong with that at all. If you read around here enough you can even see more than 2 sides of it. Perspective, reality, and opinions of folks who read a few hundred complaints and have it all figured out. :whiste:

then lets not forget.. vocal is.. as vocal does.

and to toot my own horn you yet again?(I'm usually so shy).. I'm privy to more info about the inner workings related to many of the common delusionary opinions about the SF controllers misadventures with certain power mgmt features/ACPI disagreeance than most will ever know(specially the ones with heads inserted up their rear. No names of course.. but I'm guessing they have been singled out for it once or twice before in life(and maybe even here on ocassion) and probably know who they are by now. lol

 

[Old Hippie]

I'm privy to more info about the inner workings related to many of the common delusionary opinions about the SF controllers misadventures with certain power mgmt features/ACPI disagreeance than most will ever know

I'll take your word for it Mr. knowledgeable SF fanboi. :biggrin:

We all know you've had good experiences with your choice of SSDs and that's fine.

But many others, including me, have found the performance lacking and a multitude of other problems in one model or another.

That's just the way it is.

You're vocalness about the situation only goes to prove the fanboi point and effects me like all other "focused enthusiasts".

I ignore them.

I'm sure you don't care and that's fine but sometimes intelligent people find that less is more.

 

[nanaki333]

Now ladies

 

[Old Hippie]

Now ladies

No big deal.

 

[xman34312]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/storage/display/20111104123908_OCZ_Plans_Cheap_SSDs_Based_on_Triple_Bit_Per_Cell_NAND_Flash.html

1000 write cycles is not enough IMO.

I suppose 100gb for $20 would be tempting, but I highly doubt that this new process is really going to drop prices that low.

Perhaps there are servers out there that only read data, in which case a drive like this could work.

you are making the same claim everyone said about MLC. "IT CAN NEVER BE DEPLOYED IN THE ENTERPRISE. WRITE CYCLES ARE TOO LOW.. BLAH BLAH.."

Now what do we see? MLC is catching on fire!

Btw, who was it that helped bring ssd price down? It was OCZ. Or did you enjoy paying $6 a gig to Intel g1?!

Oh, and OCZ can get around the TLC write limit, by simply allocating more NAND as a failover!

OCZ is selling hundreds of thousands of OCZ, more so than Micron or Intel. Have a nice day.

 

[xman34312]

Hi,

I'm going to wade in here (into what appears to be somewhat anti-OCZ shark infested waters) and agree with berts.

I have had three OCZ SSDs.

First a Samsung based OCZ Summit 120GB - no issues at all and once Samsung released the 19C fw with trim support it's remained a solid performer without any fuss.

Second a Vertex LE, Sandforce based 120GB - no issues at all.

Third a Vertex 3 240GB - a few instability issues with earlier versions of the fw but I was able to work around all of them. I could aslo invoke instability issues during testing. The latest 2.15 fw, which I understand has had input from Intel, appears to have sorted out the overwhelming majority of instability issues. (Curious, isn't it, that compatibility issues with SF should get resolved shortly before Intel is due to release an SF based product)

There is no doubt that OCZ has suffered at the hands of SF's apparent lack of validation/quality assurance but OCZ's commitment to resolve issues on behalf of its customers has also been apparent. I'm sure they will have learned a valuable lesson that they will be sure to try and avoid with the upcoming Octane launch.

I also have an Intel 160GB G2, which has also been faultless.

I suppose folks will now see me as an OCZ fanboy, but regardless, I reserve the right to be objective based on my experience.

Regds, JR

i have a vertex 2 60 gig and vertex 3 max iops, my friend has deployed 2 of them in raid 0. Drives are great and would never go back to convention hds.

 

[xman34312]

Because all their drive series are crap when compared to others. Virtually all of OCZ's SSDs have had some major problems even if some here in denial say otherwise. Look at their Solid, Agility, and Vertex lines. Look at the new Vertex Plus, too. All have major problems in one way or another, and its OCZ that's SandForce's main partner and the one that's probably pushing them to put out new controllers every few months with all these problems. Like you said, the fact that they're a shady company doesn't help them either.

Corsair are morons for using SandForce, too, but since their drive series aren't anywhere near as popular I don't give them as much crap. In any case, they should've gone with Marvell like Crucial and Intel.

Vertx plus is getting great reviews SINCE they just upgraded their firmware. 1 dollar a gig is great. OH AND BEFORE YOU SLAM OCZ, remember what happened to micron last year and the c300, they had their own firmware debacle. THESE THINGS HAPPEN!

 

[xman34312]

It's dislike based on looking at them objectively. And you may well be of the half that doesn't have problems, but getting failure rates and general problems of that high of a number means you have a lot of issues to work out.

OCZ in recent years has been a very mediocre company, and you can see that from the many issues people had with their "Gold" and Platinum" series DDR2 memory, their StealthXStream and ModXStream power supplies, and their Vertex, Agility, Solid, and Vertex Plus lines. Saying otherwise is just turning a blind eye.

You personally owning a product proves nothing. We've had this conversation before, and the only one making inflammatory posts is you. All you've done is ramble on about how it depends on the person (it doesn't if so many people are having problems), how you can't make judgement on the drive if you don't have it (complete BS, and the reason to not buy it in the first place is because of the well-known reliability issues), and how somehow my objectivity is being "tarnished" by making "overly-emotional" posts, which ironically is what you're doing right now.

I already mentioned objective reasons, and you can see them all over the 'net.

you do realize that companies like western digital put out some serious junk hds in the early 90s right? go read their wikipedia page.

 

[xman34312]

I'm not. I already answered this. If you haven't followed the thread then don't bother replying.

OCZ has been known to work more closely with SandForce than the other manufacturers. They've always been first-to-market with whatever new high-performance SandForce controller comes out. Since they work closer with them than the other manufacturers plus they have the most used/popular drives I'll point to them mainly.

I already mentioned I don't like Corsair using their controllers either, but the fact is that their Force series isn't anywhere near as popular, nor are Corsair the ones always pushing SandForce to come out with new controllers even if they have serious reliability issues. They still use them, so it's a bad decision. It also doesn't help that like I said earlier OCZ is in general a shifty company. Many people complain about getting an RMA for defective drives to be a PITA, which also doesn't help. Most of the blame as far as SSD manufacturers go falls on OCZ, just like most of the blame would fall on Crucial/Micron if they used a new Marvell controller with shoddy reliability.

again, check out micron and the c300 firmware debacle. They got it together. Why not afford ocz the same chance as them? They took care of the indilinx firmware issue relativley quickly.

 

[groberts101]

For the easily confused about who wrote what.. see my responses in red. EDIT: see the one's in BLUE?

I'll take your word for it Mr. knowledgeable SF fanboi. :biggrin:
LOL.. well ok then.. Mr. President of the Intel Fan Club. See?.. works from a few different angles.. doesn't it.

The thing is.. we all just like what we like based on first hand experience, secondary from friends/families, and study of others using the same hardware... so in essence.. many around here are no different than I in regards to how much they like thier drives. Plus, in some weird freudian kinda' way we all want to sincerely believe that we made the best possible choice in the SSD that we chose so we may be more content to live with it long term. "Well.. it might be slow like that.. but it is more stable than that other one".. or a dozen other self rationale we come up with. Kind of a self inflicted brainwashing, I suppose.

We all know you've had good experiences with your choice of SSDs and that's fine. What makes you think that I've not had good experiences with others? I've used 5 different controllers spread across 4 different mfgrs so far, and they each have their own merits and liabilities. 30 day return policies are a great way to "test drive" these things before laying the cash out for good and will teach you far more than many of the "experts around a forum" ever will. I simply chose to use the ones with the right compromises for my particular usage with speed being the primary concern over stability. Luckily.. I ended up with both as we all know that some others have not been so fortunate.

Well.. actually that last statement is not entirely true. I did in fact panic lock 9 of my drives so far(8 Indilinx based and 1 Sandforce based) but have since learned from those config/power mgmt/chipset loading mistakes(and they are entirely repeatable.. which is why some of my advice really is better than others who simply "read about the issues", concoct their own theories, and simply pass it on) and can now avoid all the pitfalls that were associated with those panic locks.

But many others, including me, have found the performance lacking and a multitude of other problems in one model or another. As have I, bud... as have I. And we're not needing to be brand or even controller specific at all here, either.

That's just the way it is. Right again.

You're vocalness about the situation only goes to prove the fanboi point and effects me like all other "focused enthusiasts". ROFLMAO.. "focused enthusiasts"?.. that's the funniest damned thing I've read all week! More like "focused cynicism" when we speak of this particular company around this particular forum.

Funniest thing is that the "savior" himself.. has exactly the opposite opinion when you look at his many overviews relating to OCZ and the products they release. Who'da thunk that a "savior's followers"?.. wouldn't actually follow. That story sounds vaguely familiar somehow. ()

I ignore them. These little witty excerpts obviously say different.

I'm sure you don't care and that's fine but sometimes intelligent people find that less is more.

Well.. if that's the case?.. then they must have all stopped reading at the very first post of this thread. Kidding, of course.. well.. mostly anyways. :hmm:

And FWIW.. I actually enjoy most of your posts around here as you sincerley try to add relevance or input to help others.. not to mention I don't even mind you yankin' my chain sometimes(usually.. just because you can)... and the above little childish barb I wrote wasn't really intended for you at all. Only for those with single minded interpretation of all things they despise in life. Thought it was pretty obvious who those types would be,.. but just sayin', is all.

 

[nanaki333]

couldn't you have picked a different color to respond in? that red hurts my eyes and i can't fully read it

 

[ElFenix]

1k writes would make it a great game drive if the price is low enough. games mostly go on it and don't move. fine by me.

would also be ok for swap files.

as always, automatic backup to a rotating disk is a good idea.

 

[groberts101]

couldn't you have picked a different color to respond in? that red hurts my eyes and i can't fully read it

sheesh.. I realize you own an OCZ drive and have probably been pushed into yet another update(I know.. dust off the M4 once again, eh?).. but yer startin' to sound like my wife now.

Is this better.. pumpkin?

 

[groberts101]

1k writes would make it a great game drive if the price is low enough. games mostly go on it and don't move. fine by me.

would also be ok for swap files.

as always, automatic backup to a rotating disk is a good idea.

I agree completely. These types of drives will span the gap between cheap HDD storage(might not be so cheap the way things are looking so far, right?).. and those who finally want to make the leap to SSD based storage.

All I can say from experience is that I'd much rather R/W from/to an SSD than any uber-fast HDD array, regardless of the sequential speeds it may be capable of. That low latency gives you instant response even if the transfers are a bit slower than the uber-fast HDD array.

Plus, if the prices keep coming down as they are?.. then we will finally see more users with raided SSD storage arrays. Obviously we still want our HDD for data redundancy though. :thumbsup:

 

[Edrick]

I owned 2 OCZ SSD's (both Vertex 2). One of them bricked on my after 1 month. I was told by OCZ to take it out of my system and let it sit there for 24 hours. Then put it back in my system and try it. And sure enough, it worked again, but I did lose all my data.

I then replaced both those drives with Intel G2 drives. Not a single issue. I have since replaced those Intel drives with Crucial C3s and no issues.

I also used to buy OCZ RAM. I few times with their Gold series I had issues where they would not run at the speed specified. So after awhile I switched to GSkill and never had an issue like that again.

I am not saying that OCZ is crap just because of my personal experience, but I will never buy from OCZ again and I will not let friends buy them either.

Not to mention the stunt they pulled with the 24nm/25nm Vertex 2 drives prior to the V3 launch. I can not trust a company that does that.

 

[Emulex]

ocz is just 2nd tier - they buy parts du jour and put them together. no way they are getting micron/intel's cherry picked MLC -> that's going to their intel 710 drives. then the good stuff to intel/micron consumer ssd's then the leftovers maybe to ocz? no doubt something like that happens since their return rate is so much higher than (intel/samsung/toshiba).

but that is why you can buy their product for cheaps - and we can't deny ocz is cheap.