OCZ Summit Series SSD(Samsung controller)

[ou_phidelt]

Link (http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=666&type=expert&pid=12)Ok, the Vertex isn't even released and here we go with another. From the early look it has slightly better performance for than the spec'd Vertex but at basically the same price. Something has to give.

[Ashura]

This is kind of annoys me. For months OCZ reps at OCZforums have been saying that if you want the best performing OCZ SSD, get the Vertex. For mainstream use, get Apex and for budget, get Solid. Where is the Summit supposed to fall in this hierachy and what makes it better or worse than the Vertex? In terms of read/writes posted so far the Vertex is faster with it's latest firmware... but the reviewed Summit is also an ES that can be tweaked for even more performance. And according to the prices mentioned by pcper, it's going to be more expensive.

But wtf OCZ, why are we seeing a full on review of an ES SSD that won't be out till March instead of the Vertex which some of us were expecting to have a month ago?

[TimoneX]

Last I checked the consensus on the vertex thread at XS was that the summit & the vertex drives were one & the same. I did look through the pcper review a couple days back when it first showed and it seems like the indicated the markings on the controller chip were removed and merely speculated that it was a sammy controller. I've read so many SSD reviews lately though that the specifics are getting muddled in my limited brain.

It would make more sense if summit & vertex were one in the same. Lots of speculation and little fact, but it seems unlikely OCZ has the resources to develop two new SSD designs in parallel for release around the same time...but we shall know soon. Link:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=210458&page=12

[ou_phidelt]

I have been wondering the same thing myself. From what I can tell they are both $249 for the 60GB variety with the Vertex getting a bit cheaper as the capacity increases. But where is it going to fit in? I wonder if at first they couldn't get the pricing they wanted for the Samsung controller so they did the Vertex, but eventually did and here we are.

[Ashura]

OCZ reps have confirmed that they're two different drives with one using a Samsung controller and the other using Indilix. They both have the same amount of cache for the respective GB sizes.

Scratch that, I was just reading too fast. They're pleading the fifth on Summit details so no confirmation on the controller. Only thing that's confirmed is that Vertex uses Indilix.

[TimoneX]

Interesting Ashura. I have monitored the OCZ SSD threads for a couple weeks and have seen little or no mention of summit. There is alot of information surfacing about the Indilinx controller, but little mention about any sammy controllers used save the one in the knockoff sammy SLC drive.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=14257

I too am more than a little annoyed with OCZ's hype machine. Though not unexpected the confirmation that 30 & 60GB vertex drives will have both lower cache AND lower throughput due to fewer channels than the 120GB drive kind of annoys me.

[Ashura]

Yeah, the PCPer review pretty much dumped the Summit info on everyone's laps. The only thread on it is one that was created right after the review published: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51174

[TimoneX]

OCZ reps have confirmed that they're two different drives with one using a Samsung controller and the other using Indilix. They both have the same amount of cache for the respective GB sizes.

Scratch that, I was just reading too fast. They're pleading the fifth on Summit details so no confirmation on the controller. Only thing that's confirmed is that Vertex uses Indilix.

That would make more sense. There are ES vertex benchmarks posted on OCZ's forum. A quick comparison to PCPer's Summit results is very interesting and to my mind makes it a certainty that these are the same drives. As I recall both had higher write speeds than read speeds at very low block sizes. Almost as certain as a fingerprint. :)

I'm not crazy about the way OCZ is handling their SSD marketing and will be sitting Vertex out, at least for awhile. It kinda looks like it will be near X25-M performance but quite possibly at an even higher $/GB, at least initially.

[Ashura]

Least we finally have some new Vertex numbers:

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=670&type=expert&pid=14

Still looks like the drive I want to get.

[TimoneX]

Interesting. Two different products after all. Looks like it could be a legitimate competitor to the X25. The IO meter results were rather disappointing. Hopefully a firmware update can sort that a bit prior to shipping.

[Ashura]

Interesting. Two different products after all. Looks like it could be a legitimate competitor to the X25. The IO meter results were rather disappointing. Hopefully a firmware update can sort that a bit prior to shipping.

Check out posts 70-77 in this thread: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51200&page=5

According to Tony those results should be irrelevant to real life performance, but I'm a little hesitant to take OCZ's word for it after their track record with the Core and don't know enough about the benchmark to have an educated opinion. What do you think?

[TimoneX]

I read that previously. Frankly I think it's BS. Time & again it seems like drives that do better on IOmeter multitask better. XM25-E, XM25-M, Sammy SLC...great IOmeter results and nearly impossible to "clog" up. None of the MLC/Jmicron drives do well at IOmeter and they're stinkers on the desktop when you begin doing a few things.

I for one thrash the tar out of my drives and won't settle for using steadystate to condense random writes into a single contiguous file to make up for design problems.

[ou_phidelt]

Check out posts 70-77 in this thread: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51200&page=5

According to Tony those results should be irrelevant to real life performance, but I'm a little hesitant to take OCZ's word for it after their track record with the Core and don't know enough about the benchmark to have an educated opinion. What do you think?

After spending a short time on that forum I would take everything over there with a giant grain of salt. True, there is some solid advice on how to cure some of the ills but the insinuated marketing is ridiculous. The outright banishing of any discussion of a competitors is down right sad. I understand its their forum and can certainly understand limiting how far that discussion should be aloud to go, but outright banishing it all together? Doesn't show much confidence in your product.

But off my soapbox I will almost certainly buy either a 60GB Vertex or Summit. I have gotten a taste of SSD and want a decent one. The access times are just addicting, but I need one that can write worth a flip.

[Ashura]

I asked the same question about IOMeter over at NBR and got a response that satisfies my worries and keeps Vertex as my SSD-to-get: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showpost.php?p=4535531&postcount=3262

[rseven]

After spending a short time on that forum I would take everything over there with a giant grain of salt. True, there is some solid advice on how to cure some of the ills but the insinuated marketing is ridiculous. The outright banishing of any discussion of a competitors is down right sad. I understand its their forum and can certainly understand limiting how far that discussion should be aloud to go, but outright banishing it all together? Doesn't show much confidence in your product.

But off my soapbox I will almost certainly buy either a 60GB Vertex or Summit. I have gotten a taste of SSD and want a decent one. The access times are just addicting, but I need one that can write worth a flip.

I happen to agree with your soapbox. OCZ has been going in a very sad direction, and I would suggest caution in buying anything with their brand on it. These SSD hard drives look very promising for the future, but for now you are just paying premium bucks to play beta tester. :screwy:

R7 :beer:

[TimoneX]

You guys see this?

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51364

What a hoot. Do you want a drive that looks fast in a quick & dirty benchmark or actually performs with an OS installed on it?!?

[Vengance_01]

Interesting. I want a nice 250GB SSD for 200-250$. Come on. Till then Raid 0 on a small slice will have to do :santa:

[Know Nuttin]

You guys see this?

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51364

What a hoot. Do you want a drive that looks fast in a quick & dirty benchmark or actually performs with an OS installed on it?!?

Problem being, it's always about faster when it comes to marketing. Need I remind everyone about the Pentium 4 and its purpose of reaching super-high clock speeds? That's what marketing thinks people know so that's what they need to show. Same as everything else. We always get shown "max" this and "max" that, but it's very much not valid for what most people will actually get out of the item. Car amps are another thing that have succumbed to this type of marketing. Rockford Fosgate is horrible for this, marketing their 300w amps as 900w max. At least with the SSD, OCZ is able to reach what they propose in terms of sequential speeds.

I'm not saying that I advocate what OCZ is doing with their numbers, it's just how can they justify an OCZ Vertex with a label of 130MB read/110 write and a price tag of $600 compared to a G.Skill marketed with 200MB+ read/write and $200 cheaper? Do you market IOP's as the selling feature, because really, who really knows IOP's? Also take into account that they are trying to push SSD's into many markets so they need to have numbers that people understand.

Very easy to say that, yes, only people that know buy SSD's and they shouldn't dumb things down for them because they are aware of how things should work.

I think they are in an unenviable position (as you can see by the poll). You can't release a drive with 3 different firmwares to offer 3 different types of performance, at prices people want.

[TimoneX]

The solution in that case is to release the product with the "middle of the road" firmware and then make the other two available to those that wish. Not only would have a product that would theoretically function properly out of the box but enthusiasts will be impressed that they made a special firmware(or two) just for them. All the SSD manufacturers are faced with these same dilemmas, I don't see how OCZ is any different. Heck look at the rebadged sammy SLC drives on newegg.com. They're silly expensive and the stats make them look inferrior to core v2. I fear they're damaging their reputation.

BTW I never bought or built a netbust rig. When it was first released and failed to even outperform PIII I passed. I believe it was the first time an Intel product had brought so much fail to an inauguration.

[Know Nuttin]

The solution in that case is to release the product with the "middle of the road" firmware and then make the other two available to those that wish. Not only would have a product that would theoretically function properly out of the box but enthusiasts will be impressed that they made a special firmware(or two) just for them. All the SSD manufacturers are faced with these same dilemmas, I don't see how OCZ is any different. Heck look at the rebadged sammy SLC drives on newegg.com. They're silly expensive and the stats make them look inferrior to core v2. I fear they're damaging their reputation.

BTW I never bought or built a netbust rig. When it was first released and failed to even outperform PIII I passed. I believe it was the first time an Intel product had brought so much fail to an inauguration.

So special order the other ones? That might be a bit of a stretch?

Everyone is using the same JM controller yet you don't hear patriot/g.skill getting raked over the coals like OCZ. Goes to show you sometimes being the first to try to bring something to the masses is not worth it.

People who buy SLC drives are a bit of different target than the MLC market. They clearly (without needing to look that much into it) know what they are getting when they go for an SLC drive, and know why they are going for it. Same reason why people still go for 15k scsi even though they offer much lower capacities, slower transfer rates, and cost more than a velociraptor.

Believe me, I want a good SSD as much as everyone else. I also realize that having the better tech (Amiga, anyone?) doesn't always mean you will survive so sometimes, you end up doing things that appease many and not all. You can't win them all. Alienating some of your customers is, unfortunately, the way business goes sometimes.

FWIW, I'm still out on the Vertex as I'm still waiting to see what happens when people get them in their systems and not live on benchmarks and all that. Real user experience is what I want to know about.

[TimoneX]

LOL Amiga. What a great system Commodore had. I had several from the A500 - the 4000<sigh>

Your points are valid. Yes g.skill & Patriot are using the same controller and not getting bashed to the same extent. IMO OCZ is injecting more hype into their products than the other two are. It appears at least to me that they were initially capturing more than their fair share of the market for relatively inexpensive MLC drives early on. When those drives experienced some disturbing issues they received the lions share of the backlash. There was that early unfortunate incident with the rebate on the solids that, like most rebates required the UPC code from the packaging. Then of course the drive wasn't honored for return when the stuttering issue first reared it's ugly head. At least that's my take on it. Fair or not it's my perception that OCZ has put themselves more "out there" with their SSD products than either Patriot memory systems or g.skill has. I'd site the rep over at XS hawking wares on a regular basis as evidence of this.

I've always liked OCZ as a company, I just fear that their marketing department is writing checks their engineers can't cash.

BTW I was under the impression that Vertex could be flashed to alternative firmwares. No special orders, just a couple more FWs available to those that want them. I believe as long as the drive performed well out of the box then those that wanted these alternative FWs would feel "special" when they flashed their drives and that would likely be a net positive for OCZ.

[Ashura]

The reason I think OCZ gets so much flack is because of their strong support of our community. It's a double edged sword, with good products it's a great help but with bad products like the Core, reps at OCZ, either out of ignorance or out of eagerness to sell a product (I would bet on the former, I really do like everyone there), kept pushing the Core and saying there was no stuttering problem. As an early adopter, when I tried out my V1 and ran into stuttering issues, I contacted someone at OCZ forums and was told that my performance was irregular and that a RMA would fix the issue. My replacement drive gave me the same problems across multiple systems and I was told that there was no likely fix for my issues. But you didn't see OCZ publically declare that they had a hardware problem on their hands.

And, while I appreciate all the effort that's been done to optimize the OS for SSDs, I get very annoyed when they use it as a shield against their hardware defect. Samsung and Intel MLC SSDs work fine out of the box with no stuttering and no tweaks.

[Know Nuttin]

LOL Amiga. What a great system Commodore had. I had several from the A500 - the 4000<sigh>

Your points are valid. Yes g.skill & Patriot are using the same controller and not getting bashed to the same extent. IMO OCZ is injecting more hype into their products than the other two are. It appears at least to me that they were initially capturing more than their fair share of the market for relatively inexpensive MLC drives early on. When those drives experienced some disturbing issues they received the lions share of the backlash. There was that early unfortunate incident with the rebate on the solids that, like most rebates required the UPC code from the packaging. Then of course the drive wasn't honored for return when the stuttering issue first reared it's ugly head. At least that's my take on it. Fair or not it's my perception that OCZ has put themselves more "out there" with their SSD products than either Patriot memory systems or g.skill has. I'd site the rep over at XS hawking wares on a regular basis as evidence of this.

I've always liked OCZ as a company, I just fear that their marketing department is writing checks their engineers can't cash.

BTW I was under the impression that Vertex could be flashed to alternative firmwares. No special orders, just a couple more FWs available to those that want them. I believe as long as the drive performed well out of the box then those that wanted these alternative FWs would feel "special" when they flashed their drives and that would likely be a net positive for OCZ.

Well, releasing firmware for drive updates can be tricky (seagate 7200.11?). I can see how they would want to withhold that from some. And if that means they delay Vertex until they get it right, that's fine. I'd rather wait (even if it seems painful) for them to get the drive right than get the drive early and not right.

Definitely, they put their neck out there and that's a gutsy move. I applaud them for trying with Core/Core2 and bringing prices down. I really think if they didn't announce the Vertex, Intel would still be happily charging much higher for their SSD's now. I haven't really seen any bashing of Patriot/G.Skill because of their use of the JM controller.

It's funny though, how many it seemed were so ready to cancel their Vertex and get the G.Skill Titan which pretty much is the same as the Apex. I don't know how G.Skill support is. Vertex isn't equal to Titan but yet.... it's just weird to me.

I've thought plenty about getting a G.Skill given their pricing (cheaper than core/core2/solid here in Canada) but I keep telling myself that it isn't at the point where I am comfortable with the tech/pricing yet.

I hope that OCZ doesn't stop trying to do more to bring SSD's mainstream just because of the enthusiast community, who are extremely hard to please.

[tom10167]

im not buying a SSD until someone explicitly says "this drive wont have any stuttering issues without tweaks" and it doesnt cost $800 for 80GB.

That's the problem with reviews I see is they're benchmarks or something. I guess there's one decent one that tests IO to really see if it stutters but I'd still rather hear an actual users opinion of something.

[Ashura]

Heh, so what's stopping you tom? I can name a few SSDs right now that don't stutter and aren't $10/gb. :-P

[tom10167]

without tweaks? do it asap cuz im ordering a ton of stuff tomorrow. ;)

[Ashura]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167005

http://www.mtron.net/English/Product/ProductDetail.asp?itemcode=MSD-SATA3525

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233075&Tpk=corsair%20ssd

All three guaranteed not to stutter without tweaks and are under $10/gb. The MTRON is a SLC but has the lowest GB and middle of the road reads/writes, the Corsair is a MLC but has more GB and slowest reads/writes, and the Intel X25-M has middle of the road GB compared to the other two but blistering fast reads and decent writes. The X25-M is currently the preferred performance pick for enthusiasts. Considering how fast the Intel has been dropping in price, you might want to wait till the Vertex comes out to see if it gives the Intel any competition and forces the cost down even further. And when the Vertex does come out, that might be the best option for you too depending on performance. anandtech should have a review of it next Wednesday, and I plan to pick to pick it up and give impressions on the forum if anandtech says good things.

[Ashura]

First review of the Vertex showing great sequential read/writes but disappointing write speeds when it comes to smaller files:

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=299&Itemid=60

[UBB]

im not buying a SSD until someone explicitly says "this drive wont have any stuttering issues without tweaks" and it doesnt cost $800 for 80GB.


I saw a thread over at ocz forums (maybe a sticky, can't remember) where Tony said the Vertex will not stutter and only needs alignment not the other tweaks. He's been playing with Vertex for over a month. According to him, all drives, both slc and mlc benefit from alignment. Seems xp makes no effort to align them properly (his words).

[TimoneX]

I wouldn't expect any stuttering with the decent size cache on the Vertex and a non JMicron controller. The cache should be sufficient to allow the OS to release from the drive and continue with other things.

[Know Nuttin]

I saw a thread over at ocz forums (maybe a sticky, can't remember) where Tony said the Vertex will not stutter and only needs alignment not the other tweaks. He's been playing with Vertex for over a month. According to him, all drives, both slc and mlc benefit from alignment. Seems xp makes no effort to align them properly (his words).

Not just his words. There is an official powerpoint presentation from MS stating how XP doesn't align properly and puts the offset in the middle of an SSD page. It is part of their Windows 7 presentation on how it is more optimized for ssd's compared to previous os'es.

[Ashura]

There was a furious debate and an open poll over at OCZ forums about what kind of IOPS performance consumers wanted in the Vertex. High IOPS in exchange for lower read/writes got the majority and that's now the firmware that will be shipping with the drives.

[TimoneX]

Sensibility wins the day! ...and there was much rejoicing.

[Know Nuttin]

good to hear, now all we need is a massive price drop ($1/GB is good) and we're in business

[Surfrider77]

There was a furious debate and an open poll over at OCZ forums about what kind of IOPS performance consumers wanted in the Vertex. High IOPS in exchange for lower read/writes got the majority and that's now the firmware that will be shipping with the drives.

Lower writes ONLY. Reads are unaffected.

[Ashura]

Compared to FW10, the higher IOPS FW has lower max read speeds too. The drop just isn't as drastic as the writes.

[Ashura]

More benches of the Vertex, this time with the shipping firmware, Vista 64 installed and no tweaks aside from manual partition alignment: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=344962&postcount=221

[Know Nuttin]

Looking good so far. Now just need to drop the prices, and we're all set.

[ou_phidelt]

More benches of the Vertex, this time with the shipping firmware, Vista 64 installed and no tweaks aside from manual partition alignment: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=344962&postcount=221

I thought Vista and W7 aligned the partitions and only XP needed the manual alignment?

[TimoneX]

align=64 has had zero effect in my testing on WIN7 x64.

[tom10167]

Now the things i can't show in benchmarks.

Vista Home Premium 64 bit install (pre SP1)
Time taken: 13 minutes 31 seconds

Vista service pack 1 install
Time taken: 16 minutes 12 seconds.

So how does the system feel in use?

My 2x Core V2 on Adaptec hardware RAID is fast and smooth with Tony's tweaks.
The 2x Apex series i tested a few weeks ago, are very fast and smooth with a few of Tony's tweaks.

Now the Vertex.
No tweaks other than the partition aligned to 64K
Verdict:
It just doesn't get any better than this for a system drive.
Some of the loading times of applications can't be measured by a human with a stopwatch. They are instant, such as Internet Explorer, MS Word, Adobe Fireworks CS.

Installing applications is much faster on a single Vertex than it is on the Core V2 RAID and Apex RAID.

For more, see my full review when it's published on cdfreaks.com.
[hint] My review will contain benchmarks, but more of it will be focused on "real world" use.

Sold!

[Know Nuttin]

align=64 has had zero effect in my testing on WIN7 x64.
Alignment is already done properly in Win7.

[Ashura]

Now all that's left is anandtech to release their review on Wednesday and, depending on that, I'll be dead set to drop the cash for this drive as soon as it hits retail.

[ou_phidelt]

I got a check from my insurance company for some cash they owed me. I have $250 just waiting for the results to come in. Summit, Verex, Intel, hhmmm.

[TimoneX]

Alignment is already done properly in Win7.

So I've been told by many. I am a scientist by nature and must see these things for myself for peace of mind. Particularly in this case since it only adds a few seconds to testing.

[Ashura]

So I've been told by many. I am a scientist by nature and must see these things for myself for peace of mind. Particularly in this case since it only adds a few seconds to testing.

Is that with the two cards in your sig in RAID0? I think the rules change slightly when running RAID, I'll do some reading and get back to you.

EDIT: The general consensus seems to be that once you're using RAID, alignment offset starts to matter less. Only semi-major improvement is when it's done in XP to avoid the 63 sector offset. You can use the diskpar utility to find out what your current offset is.

[TimoneX]

Interesting. I only used diskpar to set alignment. Never thought to use it to see what it was currently set at. :) Do you know the command to do so offhand?

N/M I found it. Yes google IS my friend. "diskpar -i <disk#>" if anyone else doesn't know this.

[jcw122]

Sounds awesome but prices are still too high for me. I think I'll wait it out (I won't be making a new system anytime soon anyway :P ).

What the heck is disk alignment?

[Ashura]

Read all about it here: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=48309

I find it sort of cool how the SSD transition is forcing us to think about this sort of thing.

[TimoneX]

Agreed. I rarely thought about disk alignment until recently. There's a good article here:

http://www.msexchange.org/tutorials/Disk-Geometry.html

Frankly with the results I'm getting from the fleabay Adaptec + 2x32GB warps from the classies, I seriously doubt I will be getting any new SSDs for some time.

[tom10167]

Just pulled the Trigger on an X25-M 80GB :O

Hopefully it'll be here Wednesday and I'll have some real-world, non-benchmark data for you guys.

[TimoneX]

Sweet! Bring the data milkshake!

[Ashura]

Vertex should be shipping from retail later this week, or latest next week:
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=345850&postcount=30

And, despite the decreased write speeds from the high IO firmware, sequential writes are still pretty f'ing fast: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=345850&postcount=30

I want to buy this like yesterday.

[TimoneX]

I hope vertex pans out. Seems many have pretty high expectations for this one.

[ou_phidelt]

Is my understanding correct that the theory is high IOPS translates into better real world performance? i.e. while multitasking and other normal to heavy uses rather that just blazingly high benchmark read/writes that don't translate good real world performance?

[Ashura]

That's the general consensus right now.

[Surfrider77]

Man, I have been waiting for this stupid drive for MONTHS now. Its been push back over and over due to firmware. I have been ready to pull the trigger on 4x 30G Vertex, but now I am unsure. I think I am going to wait until CEBIT (1st week of March) and see what the announcement for Summit is like.

I think OCZ might have shot themselves in the foot on the Vertex drives by stalling for so long. It will be overlapping into Summit, which sounds like its to be the top performing drive of the bunch. I figure I have waited since late December for the Vertex drives, 1 more week for Summit info will not hurt.

[TimoneX]

There was that one review that had both ES summit & vertex drives on tap. Sounds like the vertex's fw was changed *AFTER* that review, but you can probably extrapolate relative performance with some degree of accuracy. If the accepted FW drops peak bandwidth in favor of reasonable IOPs then it will likely move closer to being competitive with X25-M. The Intel drive is likely to maintain it's lead however and also doesn't seem to gain much by utilizing RAID0. IMHO I think the optimal solution is to cash in on OCZ's potential ability to initiate lower prices on what appears to be the superior product(X25-M) and then buy a single Intel drive. With superfetch & drive restore disabled and pagefile moved or set to bare minimum(200mb) even a pigesk OS like WIN7 x64 installs with a footprint of around 7-8GBs. This leaves a whole lot of space for applications even on a single X25-M.

[ou_phidelt]

Man, I have been waiting for this stupid drive for MONTHS now. Its been push back over and over due to firmware. I have been ready to pull the trigger on 4x 30G Vertex, but now I am unsure. I think I am going to wait until CEBIT (1st week of March) and see what the announcement for Summit is like.

I think OCZ might have shot themselves in the foot on the Vertex drives by stalling for so long. It will be overlapping into Summit, which sounds like its to be the top performing drive of the bunch. I figure I have waited since late December for the Vertex drives, 1 more week for Summit info will not hurt.

I have been doing a bit of reading over at the OCZ forums. From what I can gather from the limited information they are releasing it seems they are going to market the Summit for workstations/business and the Vertex for everyday consumers/enthusiasts. How this is going to relate in performance is anyone's guess at this point.

[Ashura]

There was that one review that had both ES summit & vertex drives on tap. Sounds like the vertex's fw was changed *AFTER* that review, but you can probably extrapolate relative performance with some degree of accuracy. If the accepted FW drops peak bandwidth in favor of reasonable IOPs then it will likely move closer to being competitive with X25-M. The Intel drive is likely to maintain it's lead however and also doesn't seem to gain much by utilizing RAID0. IMHO I think the optimal solution is to cash in on OCZ's potential ability to initiate lower prices on what appears to be the superior product(X25-M) and then buy a single Intel drive. With superfetch & drive restore disabled and pagefile moved or set to bare minimum(200mb) even a pigesk OS like WIN7 x64 installs with a footprint of around 7-8GBs. This leaves a whole lot of space for applications even on a single X25-M.

Hrm, so based on numbers released so far you'd still consider the Intel to be the superior drive? They're pretty close in terms of $/GB.

[TimoneX]

I have been doing a bit of reading over at the OCZ forums. From what I can gather from the limited information they are releasing it seems they are going to market the Summit for workstations/business and the Vertex for everyday consumers/enthusiasts. How this is going to relate in performance is anyone's guess at this point.

Probably means vertex will be a bench queen and summit will be where it's at. OCZ will surely recognize that corporate IT departments won't consider steadystate to be an acceptable band-aid. Just my take.

[TimoneX]

Hrm, so based on numbers released so far you'd still consider the Intel to be the superior drive? They're pretty close in terms of $/GB.

...again IOMeter seems to indicate performance of these drives in real situations. Vertex looks fine on benches, but not so perty on IOMeter. Look at the few SSD's that get the nod for any corporate use. Intel X25-M, X25-E, and Sammy SLC, all of which excel with IOMeter. No way it's coincidence. Vertex smacks the sammy SLC drive around REALLY badly in most benchmarks...price aside which is probably the superior product overall?

[Ashura]

The question is to what extent is IOPS performance important? Is it a linear higher=better relationship or does it end up evening out at some point so that really reaching only a certain point is necessary and anything higher irrelevant to real life use? If the latter, what is that point and did Vertex with the new firmware reach it? And, when you mention Vertex's IOMeter results are you talking about what was posted at PCPer with the old firmware or what was posted at OCZ forums with the new firmware?

[TimoneX]

First, yes I am referring to the PCPer article as I believe that is the bestest mostest closest we've come to unbiased comparos. While I certainly applaud OCZ's decision to choose that particular FW revision(and voted so BTW :)) I do not see a firmware swap changing the results dramatically, at least not enough so to enable it to compete with the IO leaders. Since I haven't seen any retail results for vertex I can only speculate.

Secondly, yes I do believe there is a point of diminishing returns with IOPS. I also feel the Intel offerings NAIL it. If you look at IOMeter charts the X25-M skyrockets at low queue depths and then falls off at high queue depths...so much so that eventually a pair of RAID0 Vraptors overtake it on most charts. I think that's fine. One of my issues with some of the things stated(accepted?) on the OCZ forums is that a typical user(whatever that is) won't benefit from IOPS over a certain level since they seldom create a queue depth over four. FOUR? This on an enthusiast site where power users are probably the norm? Yer kidding. Grandma may start an install of office 2007 and go grab a cup of tea, I do not. Time is precious to me, my workstation is silly fast, and I don't twiddle my thumbs during virus scans & large proggie installs...I go right on working, and therefore adding to the disk subsystem's workload.

I'm delighted these products(vertex & summit) are coming as they help push the envelope of what MLC can achieve. I don't see them overtaking Intel's offerings, but I'd be overjoyed if either or both of them did. What do you suppose THAT would do to the price of X25-x? Would there be an X26-x within a month? :) Ya know Intel is surely working on a "tock". They'll sit on the sidelines and drop prices slowly and release another product when they must in typical 500lbs gorilla fashion.

[Ashura]

Hrm, I might end up getting back my X25-M (http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=596754). You and another at NBR are making me lean towards keeping it.

[TimoneX]

You can always send it my way! :beer:

Sorry about the eBay issues. I generally mark the products I ship out on eBay sales to prevent the buyer from swapping items with damaged/defective ones w/o my knowledge.

[tom10167]

Why'd you sell it? *worried*

[Ashura]

Why'd you sell it? *worried*

Curiosity about the Vertex, easiest way to fund it was by selling the Intel. :p

Same reason why I bought and sold the Core, Titan and Corsair 128.

[TimoneX]

...think he's on a mission to buy and re-sell every SSD ever made! LOL

[Ashura]

cdfreaks Vertex review: http://www.cdfreaks.com/reviews/OCZ-Technology-Vertex-Series-120GB-SSD-Review/conclusion.html

[Know Nuttin]

cdfreaks Vertex review: http://www.cdfreaks.com/reviews/OCZ-Technology-Vertex-Series-120GB-SSD-Review/conclusion.html

Which is Wendy from OCZ forums.
Good that she waited for the shipping firmware to post a review with.
Looks like a sweet drive....i can't wait for these to get to $1/GB (no seriously, i'll problably be dead by that time!:bang head)

[Ashura]

Wish they had an Intel with the rest of their drives, I can look up the various numbers posted throughout the web on the X25-M and compare but it would've been nice to see 'em side by side. I think they are really the two competitors right now for the performance SSD market.

[subverb]

So what are people's verdict? Vertex or Intel X25-M for a Vista 64/Win7-x64 OS drive?

Sorry to bump an old thread, just was browsing Newegg and noticed they added the Vertex.

Vertex 120GB - $399 after MIR ($3.33/GB) (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227395)
Vertex 60GB - $259 after MIR ($4.32/GB) (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227394)

[Ashura]

Still undecided right now, there have been no direct comparisons between the two. The final verdict depends on anandtech's review whenever that ends up coming out, or the reviews of various forum users who've had experience with both drives.

[subverb]

I must say that the reviews I've seen so far make this Vertex seems appealing..

I just hate what SSDs do to my shopping cart total when window shopping Newegg!