Intel 510 120GB vs. OCZ Vertex 3 120GB - My mini Review

OK so I got the Vertex 3 about a month ago, and recently got the Intel 510. Both are 120GB.

After trying switching both drives on port 0 and port 1 in my M17x R3, and after many different tests, I came up with these results. All with AS SSD.

First, I started off with OCZ on port 0 and Intel on port 1 - BOTH ARE SEEN AS SATA 6GB/s

I. OCZ port 0 - Intel port 1

A. OCZ = boot drive:



B. Intel = boot drive




Next, I switch the drives, Intel now on port 0 and OCZ on port 1. Things become interesting HERE. Now, the Intel is seen as SATA 3GB/s while the OCZ is still on SATA 6GB/s no matter what drive I chose to boot. And here's the result:




Clearly, I did observe that PORT 0 is SOMETIMES only SATA 3GB/s, but NOT ALL THE TIME. I am still investigating on this issue. But from those results my conclusion is that the OCZ does have better 4k random write and sequential read, while the Intel has better sequential write and about the same random read. The Intel also has much better acc. write time but worse in acc. read time.

Of course those benchmarks does not mean everything to me. Regardless those benchmark, here's what I observe in "real world" performance:

1. Windows 7 installation time (when both are BRAND NEW):

OCZ Vertex 3 120GB - 20 mins
Intel 510 120GB - 22 mins

2. Windows 7 Boot time (exactly the same drivers and software, with same start up settings):

OCZ Vertex 3 120G: 13-14s
Intel 510 120GB: 13-14s

3. Applications start up: (photoshop, lightroom, office, etc.): I hardly see any difference, this is why all SSDs at this level basically have the same "real world" performance.

My conclusion: In benchmark, the Vertex 3 is clearly the winners, and I mean by a lot. DO NOT forget that my Vertex 3 is one month old while the Intel is BRAND NEW! However, during my typical usage in real world, (web, office, video editing) I dont really realize the difference. Both feel very responsive at this level. For that said, I wanted to keep the Intel and would have kept it if the issue of Sata 3GB/s port 0 does not happen.

 

what do you count as "windows 7 installation time"? because going trough the setup till desktop took me around 7 minutes on an intel gen2. (i install from usb. you installed from dvd?)

 

I looked at a few options and ultimately chose the Intel 510 120GB for my system. Intel is the best in the business for reliability.

 

Thanks for posting. Nice to see some real world benchmarks.

Could you run AS-SSD File Copy benchmark and post the results here?

 

It is interesting that the Intel on port 0 read 3GB/s, as I saw on another thread that someone put their ssd (I don't remember if it was Intel or not) on port 0 and it was 3GB/s, but on port 1 (the OD bay) it recognized 6GB/s. Is this somehow still part of the original SB Sata3 issue? Or something else? I will try to find the other thread.

 

Thanks for the review. OCZ may be king of the benchmarks, but it really doesn't help that much real world...

At least they're cheaper, although at the cost of reliability.

Probably go vertex 3 myself anyways

 

+Rep for the awesome review.

I'm interested as to how this stacks up against older SSDs from 2 or 3 generations ago and whether it'd be worth it for those SSD owners to upgrade to the latest and greatest, but I suppose I shouldn't get too greedy

 

Torai,

First thank you for the review.

Just a couple of quick observations:

1) you have not run the tests identically - some are with default MS drivers and some are with RST drivers if I'm not mistaken.

2) I can't understand why you would choose the less reliable product when the actual use is essentially identical?

3) If your notebook is using a SATA2 port for the boot drive - this would indicate to me that you're running a 'B2' motherboard version - not a 'B3' stepping which would indicate a 'fixed' MB.

In your shoes - I would have returned the system - not the Intel SSD.

 

Sure I will Phil. I am just too busy these days and next week.

Thanks. IMO, if your current SSD is working fine, then its not that much of difference between g2 and g3. It will be faster for sure, but I would rather wait for 1 more year and buy g4 SSDs

Tiller,
1. Both SSDs are tested with RST drivers. What I meant when I say "OCZ not running RST" was the software, not the driver. The OCZ vertex 3 does have RST driver, just not the RST software.

2. If so, I would have not bought the Intel. I wanted to return the vertex 3 and get the intel 510 basically because the intel was $40 cheaper, but then I found the SATA II/III issue that I mentioned in the 1st post that some other alienware users are having. That's the only thing that makes me think again about the Intel. I just posted that issue in alienware box, not here because this is SSD sub-forum

3. The motherboard that I am using is the "fixed" version, no wonder. You misunderstood the info that I gave.

Btw, I just made an order with the Crucial M4 and Im gonna test it. Not neccessarily the best, but pretty reliable and good performance w/ high 4k random write, and cheap. Hopefully it will not have the sata III issue like the Intel.

 

I installed from the same USB for both. The windows installation DVD that comes with Alienware M17x contains a lot of other information that makes the installation period very long, much much longer than it should be. It took me almost an hour and a half to install windows 7 to my old Intel X25-M just 2 months ago, from DVD. That was a very annoying DVD from Alienware, lol.

 

Torai, you may have tested both with RST drivers, but you sure didn't post the benchmarks like that (iaStor vs. msahci).

I find it hard to believe that the SATA2/3 issue is with the Intel SSD - it is your notebook/MB.

Again, even though it performed the same as the V3, I still can't believe you returned it. (Shrugs). Especially when you want reliability.

 

^ Intel fanboy.

It's a matter of personal preference IMO.

I'd rather wait out a few more rounds of reviews and testing before I make a final decision for my SSD.

 

Tiller, I didnt say I returned the intel, but I might not keep it either. In fact, I returned the vertex 3 already because it was expensive ($300) and the intel will be gone after the crucial m4 comes.

I too dont think the sata issue is because of the
Ssd, but I just didnt have that issue with the v3 and hopefully the coming m4. So yeah, I'll use whatever that seems to be working between m4 and 510. Both are reliable to me, they use the same marvell controller. Plus I have 8gb more with the m4, lol.

Btw, did you have a chance to test your 250gn 510 yet ??

 

Hmm I came soooooo close to buying that same Vertex Drive today but ultimately ended up buying the Older Corsair x256 Drive for 260 dollars. for 256gb of Space for my alienware, at nearly a dollar a gig you really can't complain It reads at about 250-240 though, no where close to the Vertex 3 but it has an additional 100 gigs of space which is nice for nearly the same price, if not cheaper.

 

why? because in all reallife tests they perform the same, and one is known to have a lot of returns and it's not intel?

 

If you want to burn fast, use OCZ.
If you value your data & reliability over speed, use Intel.

 

There is nothing wrong with the Intel drive. It is the M17x motherboard there is some compability problems with or something. No one have mentioned that they only get it to work on SATA 2 and not SATA 3 except a select few Alienware M17x owners.

And it is useless to argue about which SSD people should buy. It is all about personal references. Personally i think it is a bit odd to pick a SSD that perform the same as the 2 others, but come from a company that have a bad history. Same with their SSDs.