Vertex 3 Review

[grandnexus]

When will Anand do his official review of the Vertex 3 with the new SF-2200? I know he did one like 6 weeks ago, but he said he would do another, the "official" one.

 

[Zap]

Whenever he receives final hardware and firmware revisions.

 

[Strafe]

Per his twitter feed, later tonight.

 

[SolidSteel144]

So... Where's the final review?

 

[Lightflash]

I doubt Anand would hold it back if he had it finished. Could be waiting on more information from OCZ or any number of things. I would rather have the quality of an Anand review instead of have him rush the review out.

 

[Termie]

I doubt Anand would hold it back if he had it finished. Could be waiting on more information from OCZ or any number of things. I would rather have the quality of an Anand review instead of have him rush the review out.

And here it is: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4256/the-ocz-vertex-3-review-120gb

Anand has a very lengthy discussion of the 34nm/25nm debacle, and how he personally helped resolve it. He then goes on to review the Vertex 3.

And the conclusion may shock you...this is not a slam dunk win for the Vertex 3.

I really appreciate Anand's articles. He's technical, he's thorough, and he's honest. I feel like he's got our back.

 

[Zap]

Noted, for near future reading. (after dinner and Idol)

 

[nanaki333]

Noted, for near future reading. (after dinner and Idol)

:whiste:

 

[Old Hippie]

And the conclusion may shock you...this is not a slam dunk win for the Vertex 3.

It was shocking to me when some were declaring a pre-release Vertex3 as "SSD Nirvana".

The actual test was the least interesting part and the drive performed as I expected.


What I did find interesting is the controllers' firmware isn't finalized.....

The shipping Vertex 3s are using RC firmware from SandForce, the MP label can't be assigned to anything that hasn't completely gone through SandForce's validation suite. However, SF assured me that there are no known issues that would preclude the Vertex 3 from being released today

Unless you're buying a Vertex 2.25 (80GB, 160GB, 200GB) and Vertex 2.34 (60GB, 120GB, 240GB) a regular Vertex2's NAND will be a crapshoot.....

These drives will only use IMFT NAND - Hynix is out. The idea is that you should expect all Vertex 2.25 drives to perform the same at the same capacity point, and all Vertex 2.34 drives will perform the same at the same capacity as well

And Anand has made a "Truth in SSDs when buying from OCZ" law to make their products more "transparent" for concerned comsumers......

I asked OCZ to commit to the following:

1) Are you willing to commit, publicly and within a reasonable period of time, to introducing new SKUs (or some other form of pre-purchase labeling) when you have configurations that vary in performance by more than 3%?

2) Are you willing to commit, publicly and within a reasonable period of time, to using steady state random read/write and steady state sequential read/write using both compressible and incompressible data to determine the performance of your drives? I can offer suggestions here for how to test to expose some of these differences.

3) Finally, are you willing to commit, publicly and within a reasonable period of time, to exchanging any already purchased product for a different configuration should our readers be unhappy with what they've got?

The Vertex3 is nice but SF/OCZ isn't getting any of my money soon. :biggrin:

 

[nanaki333]

i read just about the whole review and it looks like my G1 raid0 replacement might be an intel 510. i wasn't overly impressed with the new SF performance. especially since i can get the new intel at a nice discount.

 

[Axon]

Wow, that was somewhat disappointing. I'm a light to moderate user - gaming, web surfing, basic applications like Word, Excel, Power Point. What's the most applicable test for me, his light workload bench?

 

[Old Hippie]

it looks like my G1 raid0 replacement might be an intel 510.

Are the specs that different?

I've had 80GB G1s and G2s in RAID0 and I'm not sure if a 510 would be much of an upgrade but I don't have any of my G1 AS-SSD scores anymore.

You may want to hold your dollars a little longer.

 

[Concillian]

And the conclusion may shock you...this is not a slam dunk win for the Vertex 3.

He needs to get a final rev 240 GB QUICKLY to find out how deceptive OCZ was with their pre-release version.

In the 34 / 25nm part of the article OCZ is smelling better, but by the time the actual review is done, it's looking like the same old, same old with a pre-release ringer to get the quotes for their adverts, then the real version ships and.... wha?

There still is a possibility this is 120 GB / 240 GB real performance difference, but if there's something there, it needs to be uncovered quickly.

 

[GundamF91]

it does look like that 25nm NAND is actually physically less capable compared to 34nm. This is a shame as normally the die shrink meant more efficiency, but here it's the reverse.

 

[Zap]

:whiste:

Hey what can I say. I've got my shows that I watch (American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, Castle, Glee, Bones). I blame it on my wife, since she's into this. I usually just watch while they sing and ignore the rest of it. I do have to say though that I love Haley's singing. Just really soulful and gritty.

What I did find interesting is the controllers' firmware isn't finalized.....

Yeah, they're doing this again. I don't care if they say "oh it's the same thing just not validated." They are selling it with pre-production firmware and thus people buying the drives now are essentially paying for the right to beta test. Companies should not be rewarded for pulling this kind of crap.

Are the specs that different?

Yes. You might be thinking of the Intel 320 (AKA G3), not the 510.

 

[Voo]

Yeah, they're doing this again. I don't care if they say "oh it's the same thing just not validated." They are selling it with pre-production firmware and thus people buying the drives now are essentially paying for the right to beta test. Companies should not be rewarded for pulling this kind of crap.

Sure, but would it be better if they just called it the release firmware and released fw+1 two weeks after release? Because that's more or less what all other companies have been doing anyhow (hello Intel), so practically the differences are rather negligible imho

 

[groberts101]

LOL. I find it funny that you guys are enjoying the fact that the 120GB model doesn't live up to the 240GB hype when in fact it nearly keeps up with drives that are twice its capacity.

Once you see it face the other contenders that are rated slower then their big brothers in the same "weight class".. things will be a little more clear. You won't like it.. but it will be clear.

Of course you'll find something else to nitpick by then. Maybe use the old standby.. "I don't like the 4k reads as that's the best indicator of an OS's requirement"?

 

[Old Hippie]

I find it funny that you guys are enjoying the fact that the 120GB model doesn't live up to the 240GB hype when in fact it nearly keeps up with drives that are twice its capacity.

Tell ya the truth, I didn't even notice. LOL!

The drive(s) are an improvement but nothing earth shattering.

 

[groberts101]

I agree 100% and probably not worth running around refreshing "item availability" to upgrade over one of the faster sata2 drives.

The biggest gain for my video usage is the much improved GC and reduced throttling over the first gen SF.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

is there a reason why the Vertex 2 isn't in the benches to compare against the Vertex 3? Isn't this kinda a no brainer?

 

[Termie]

is there a reason why the Vertex 2 isn't in the benches to compare against the Vertex 3? Isn't this kinda a no brainer?

I agree that would be more straightforward, but the Corsair Force 120 is essentially the same as a Vertex 2 120.

 

[frostedflakes]

Was going to say that you could use the SSD Bench to compare them, but it looks like there might be a bug. The Vertex 3 is listed, but the benchmarks aren't showing up for it.

 

[Old Hippie]

Yes. You might be thinking of the Intel 320 (AKA G3), not the 510.

I'm referring to the difference between a RAID0 of Intel 80GB G1's (what nanaki333 is running) and a single Intel 510.

Are the specs between those that different?

I wouldn't be ashamed to compare a 2 drive RAID0 array of the Intel G1s/G2s to single Gen3 drive from anybody.

They might not be the fastest in all marks but they'll give the single drives a run for the money.

I've run 80GB Intel G1s&G2s in RAID0 and there wasn't much difference.