OCZ Vertex 3

I read that these were just announced. New Sandforce controllers etc etc...

Sounds like these will be the latest and greatest. I'm probably going to jump on the SSD wagon with this release.

120, 240, 480 GB versions will be available based on what I've read.

I think 240 will be good for me. Probably the best $500 I will spend haha.

 

maybe not. read about the new 25nm SSD drives OCZ is shipping now. its on their forum. dont know if i can link to it. its only for current ones, but all new ones are supposed to be 25nm now.

 

There's the PRO version and the consumer version.

PRO: OCZ Vertex 3 PRO review
"Today's product reached read speeds of 550 MB/sec with write speeds of 500 MB/sec."

Consumer: OCZ Vertex 3 240GB review
"Yes, this SSD as well reached read speeds of 525 MB/sec with write speeds of 500 MB/sec."

 

I think the problem though is primarily with 120GB and under as the number of chipsed used is reduced and so are the subsequent channels. With the larger format hopefully that is resolved. I amongst others are not happy with OCZ sneaking in the 25nm though without any warning to the consumer..............

Edit; I think also the agressive durawrite LTWT of SF2 drives is supposed to be addressed with the new controlers that may be a plus too, time will tell..........

 

others presented similar ssds. and as i can not stand behind the politics and consumer-cheatings that ocz does, the others would be my preferred option.

 

what he said................

 

TANWare,

Interesting that they might change the LTWT algorithm of new SandForce drives - this could very well place them on the approved 'buy' list again from me (still not from OCZ though...).

Depending on how much they limit LTWT with new firmware, of course.

Do you have any links/sources for this possible change in SandForce's 'protect nand at all costs - even to the detriment of the user (seen in vastly reduced performance, when LTWT kicks in)?

Thanks!

 

The whole issue with OCZ and the 25nm issue affected their OCZ Vertex 2 drives.

To summarize for those that may have missed it the first time - what basically happened was that OCZ changed the memory they use in their OCZ Vertex 2 line of drives from memory manufactured on a 34nm process --> memory manufactured on 25nm process. There were consequences from these actions, such as slightly decreased performance, and slightly reduced storage capacity.

The whole fiasco isn't because the products themselves were bad - the fiasco was because (a) OCZ didn't communicate the change well. They didn't change their packaging or model numbers, so consumers had no idea that they were buying these 25nm drives with decreased capacity and performance; and (b) OCZ was being a jerk about fixing the situation that they created.

The OCZ Vertex 2 25nm drives are fine products. They're fast, they work, and they work well. From all of the early reviews, the OCZ Vertex 3 is a 25nm drive that is fast, that works, and works well.

If you want a SATA-3 (6Gbps) drive running on the latest SandForce SF-25xx controller, then an OCZ Vertex 3 would probably do the job just fine for you. In all likelihood, you will buy one, stick it in your computer, and never have any problems with it for as long as you own it.

 

The 25nm V2 were/are not fine products and they don't perform well.

In addition to the double talk (lies) of OCZ, the performance of the drives is less than half of what a 34nm V2 is capable of.

The V3's are no doubt impressive in preliminary benchmarks - but unless TANWare's hint that LTWT has effectively been eliminated, they really are no different than the original V2's:

V2's boasted the fastest SSD experience - just as long as you didn't actually use them in a 'stressful' environment.

The V3's change nothing on this.

 

Kent1146, we aren't doubting SSD are good products or not, but OCZ as a company lost it's integrity by defrauding customers into thinking they were buying a product when OCZ didn't mark which was which, while it pocketed the profit. Their products maybe fine but the corporate echelons might not be.

 

indeed. the particular product might be fine. but they have often issues with firmwares. they often sell defective products and know it. they delete posts about how a product does not deliver in their forums. they don't openly discuss until put at the wall and forced to. they lied to anandtech (but somehow he got .. pleased enough so he now loves them).

they cheated on everyone, more than once.

 

You are correct. Perhaps I could have clarified my post:

• The OCZ Vertex 3 will probably be a fine product, 25nm or not.
• However, OCZ as a company, recently engaged in some behaviors and practices that made a lot of consumers lose confidence in them.
• Take that loss-of-confidence into consideration when selecting a vendor that makes a SATA3 (6Gbps) SandForce SF-2500 drive.

 

Does anyone know how the Vertex3 compares to the new Intel 510 line of SSD's?

I understand that Intel is a more reputable company, but I don't care about the company, i care about the product itself.

 

The product=the company.

 

I heard the agressive behaviour was addressed not eliminated, but that could be too. Now this could be totally false as well but as I said time will tell. Would I be an early addopter again? Sorry I just can't stop laughing even thinking about it.

The smaller, I believe 60GB etc, were severly perfoance punushed but higher capacity were not hit as hard. Again I degress as there still needs to be more information to see what the full impact is/was.

OCZ without a doubt pulled one on the consumer and their ram owners with those life time warenties are not all too happy either. As they say buyer beware, with recent advents I'd be carefull before deciding to purchase anything OCZ.

 

It is quite unusual to have a bad company that produce good product.

The complete OCZ SF line so far haven't even reach the 'stable' enough status. Yes, I know the majority of current owners have no problem with it but there are enough evidence that it has compatability issue with a wide range of computers(all major brands, notebook or desktop) which cannot be attributed to simply 'bad luck lemon'. There are lots of cases that repeated RMA cannot solve the problem if it occurs.

My advice on thinking about buying OCZ SF(and other brand's SF as well) is to ask someone who has the exact computer model you have and have been using it happily for over 3+ months.

 

lolno

idgaf if a company lies to me, I don't care if they were a terrible company in the past

I want the item they're silling and i just can't bring myself to care abaout their pr

 

For your own use, it is ok, after all it is your time.

Just be careful when the same approach is being taken if you are working in the IT of a company, that can be suicidal career wise.

 

The company is much more important than the product itself. For example, OCZ, Patriot, Corsair, etc. all use Sandforce controllers in at least one of their SSD lines and flash memory from several known suppliers (Samsung, Micron, etc.). The difference isn't in the product but how the company prices their units and how they support it. You will honestly not see much difference in majority of real life applications even when comparing different products such as SSDs based off of the Samsung, Intel, Sandforce, or Marvell controller.

 

i don't buy stuff from people i can't trust, as they have provenly cheated other buyers. why should i? i can spend my money better by giving it to friends than to criminals that sell me crappy products.

 

See, this is why I think there is a little bit of an overreaction to the whole OCZ Vertex 2 25nm fiasco.

People act as if OCZ was sitting behind their big oak desks, stroking their persian cat on their laps, twirling their handlebar mustaches trying to create grand schemes to "cheat" and steal from people.

What happened was that they updated their products without properly communicating the changes to their customers, and dropped the ball on cleaning up the problem. Ineptitude is pretty far away from malicious "criminal" intent.

 

Er, my point is that I will buy the best product regardless of the manufacturer's ethical background.

If, as you say, the product is crappy then I won't buy it. OTherwise, yeah, I'm gonna buy it. I don't trust them to take care of my personal life, but if I See the PRODUCT does well, provides performance and isn't a POS than I'm going to buy it.

 

you don't have a clue what happened with ocz. read up on the ocz core products, read up how they repeatedly lied and then resold the product under a different name. read up how they lied repeatedly on anandtech, tried to get him in any way to remove his articles that showed how they lied.

how they sold buggy ssds later and did denied any responsibility.

it is NOT their first fault. and it's NOT their biggest one.

that company has shown that they (and thus their products) are not worth trusting. i don't want to buy stuff that i can't trust in.

 

and that's the point. as it's a company that repeatedly has not delivered good products (but great on benchmarks of course), how can you believe that their product is any good? how can you trust it to life for a month? a year? they delivered products that died within short time.

in short: if it's a company you can't trust in, you can't trust in their products.

 

reducing the chip count by half is not a simple 'without properly communicating' as we all know that it has direct consequence to the performance(why Intel clearly distinguish 40V and 80/120/160M). I would say there is an intent, whether it is criminal is another issue.

It is not a simple 34nm -> 25nm.

 

And Intel paying off companies not to use AMD chips is that much different? Especially since at the time, AMD had an equal, if not better product? In point of fact, Intel was even found, through the courts, guilty of criminal intent. We only found out long after the fact, when Intel had a better product than AMD, so we "forgive" them because their product is so good. OCZ, or course, doesn't have that advantage (at least, not now, and not for the forseeable future).

 

I don't think we are talking about who commit 'more' crime(or more evil) but was about company and product.

To me Intel or OCZ is a vendor and their responsibility is to me, on the product. Let's not drag in other things or we shall be talking about communism soon.

 

yes, as this was not lying to the customer, this was not denying support, or selling defective products to me. it was bad, but not really on the end-user side. the companies could have denied it, but they accepted the deal, too. so i don't blame only intel there, i blame hp, dell, and all others, too.

but with ocz, it's just me, the customer, and them, directly cheating on me by selling products that are not usable, products that don't fullfill what's on paper written, products that lose performance shortly after recieved, products that fail in shot time, etc.. (yes, all of those happened).

so i can't trust them to get a product that just works, and works for the next years. that was never a problem with intel.

 

• 
  
  OCZ has always been a borderline scam company. They have always been terrible for RMAs. I am a regular on another IT based forums and at least 2 users this week posted up email exchanges on foot of OCZ RMA tickets that were outrageous exercises in circular logic.
  
  They built up a nasty reputation with their overbinned, under tested memory that stretches back as long as 10 years ago and persists up until they voluntarily dropped out of the RAM market. You can google "OCZ RAM DOA" to get an idea of how many people got burned with dead sticks.
  
  When OCZ acquired PC Power and Cooling and fielded a computer psu lineup, they silently made the switch from Seasonic to Sirfa meaning that the Silencer range wasn't a Silencer anymore. This and shoddy build quality was responsible for the rapid decline of the PC P&C Silencer, although it technically stopped existing when SeaSonic ceased to receive orders.
  
  You folks already know about the Vertex 2 bait and switch, but prior to that point, OCZ had actually cultivated a reputable name in the consumer SSD market. Mostly this was due to the close relationship with Sandforce, the industry dark horse. They were also timely with firmware updates and had the most visible relationship with their consumers through the ocztechnology forums. For a while, I did believe that upper management was making a conscious decision to turn the ship around, a sentiment that reached its peak when they decided to back out of the RAM market.
  
  Then they retroactively transitioned their Indilinx Vertex drives from 50nm to 34nm NAND necessitating a major firmware update. That made me raise my eyebrows. Then came the Vertex 2 transition to 25nm.
  
  Fool me once, shame on you. At this point, they have repeated this same strategy so many times that I don't believe they will ever change as long as the current management remains. All they do is build or acquire an appealing brand name, then gradually dilute that brand until its worthless by silently cutting costs and skimming in the most outrageous ways.

 

they didn't do timely firmware updates for quite a while with sandforce stuff. only because anandtech in public called them absolute crap the way they act, they quickly brought new firmwares to please him. which they failed at first, too.

and i will never forget jmicron. they where not the only one with it, but they where the most public one.

Intel X25-M SSD: Intel Delivers One of the World's Fastest Drives - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News
they sell any crap that can make them money. they don't care about the customer, they just sell stuff.

thats why i like intel or samsung, too. they don't have to sell to survive => they CAN care about having a quality product, and they can recall if needed, delay if needed, etc.

 

double post.

 

If you look on the G.Skill, Mushkin and Corsair support forums, you'll find that all of their firmware updates come later than OCZ's. You can say many bad things about OCZ (and I just did), but not being timely with SF-1200 firmware is not one of them.

The Core range was a piece of junk yeah. At the time though it was a Velociraptor beater, as long as it didn't choke on disk i/o.

I share your sentiment with Intel and Samsung. Both are industry giants and have Q&A to match. Although I was disappointed to see Intel 510 with a Marvell controller, I also realise that Intel's Q&A is so rigorous and its name is so important to its server class customers, that its highly unlikely that quality control/firmware issues will slip the net. I mean, Cougar Point managed to survive the gauntlet of death that is Intel's Q&A process but the laser turrets at the end still shot it down before it could do any real damage to its customers.

 

having firmware first doesn't matter if it's untested firmware, which they've done more than once. having an actual tested good firmware took them very long. mostly much after a product release, which is why i call their firmware not timely. the first months where beta-tester-consumers.

 

I would also like to point out that if you read those forums, their firmware updates also suffer from the same issues as OCZ firmware (i.e. unable to wake up from sleep states, an issue which still affects me). They are also succeptible to blue screening and may require a cold boot after updating firmware.

I don't think this is an OCZ thing. I think this is a Sandforce thing. If you go Intel, you don't get these problems.

 

it's still an ocz thing as they sell stuff that is not really working. intel would just take that stuff from the market till fixed. as they've done before.

and it's not a one time thing for ocz. that's the important point. they repeatedly sell such products. there's simply no trust into any of their product. they just test "does it boot up" and are done with it.

the core ssd would not even go trough an installation of xp or vista without file errors. to install, one had to install on hdd, and then clone. i mean seriously, what sort of testing do they do there?

 

Does anyone know release dates on this product, or where I can buy it in Canada?