• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

[O/C] OCZ's 25nm Vertex 2 Performance Issues

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
my thought is that they are still sticking to just performance based on atto, which is highly compressable data. asssd is non compressable data and I am sure is prolly still going to be gimped a bit from the 34nm nand.

what isnt addressed is if the p/e is affected by not giving up the extra 4gb of space to cover the 40% reduction in expected life cycle of the nand itself. also if 25nm nand is half the price of 34nm nand, and you paid the same price as said 34nm nand how could there have ever been a price upcharge to cover the price difference of the half priced ram? wow, is this ever a quagmire
 
I.M.O.G. said:
Latest update made to the article - OCZ will cover shipping costs both ways for anyone unhappy with one of these particular drives in question, and they will not charge anything for pricing differences. Read the end of the article for the latest word direct from OCZ. They also directly address the performance question.

I still don't care much for sticking with the same product name in light of the nature of these differences, but that is common practice in this industry unfortunately. Most importantly to me, OCZ is doing what it takes to make this right for anyone with the product, who is aware of the issue... That means our audience is taken care of, and I'm happy with that. :thup:
Click to expand...

I just picked up a 60GB V2 over the weekend unaware of this (bought due to the great praises of the V2).

Now like many I'm not at all happy about sneaking this in on us but the biggest thing to me for a manufacturer or seller is how they handle issues. This makes me much happier.
 
Well fortunetly, OCZ has confirmed that they will not be making 8 IC configurations anymore and only the higher performing and larger formatted 16 IC versions. Just to clear this up again since tons of people seem to be confused about this, the 24nm IC's are actually better than the 34nm IC's in that they use less power, are cheaper (now anyways), and run cooler. It is the fact that OCZ decided to go to a 8 IC design when they switched to 24nm IC's that hindered performance. It's cheaper to make a 8x 8GB version rather than a 16x 4GB version. Thankfully, you can upgrade for no cost at all to the 16x 4GB 24nm version through OCZ.
 
Thank You

Thank you for posting this article! I was one of the unfortunate ones to get one of the 25nm drives. I will be sending mine back to OCZ for sure. I'll update as soon as the process is complete if someone hasn't beat me to it.
 
From reading their forums, the 16IC product is still scant on performance. They are looking to release a new firmware soon to aid in addressing the issue, according to their forum staff. On what level of improvement, he stated that "how much I do not know but we are trying." This is as close to a tacit admission of performance issues as I have seen from their staff or management related to the NAND or controller implementation. We do know from the StorageReview article that they are using a different controller revision for the 8IC units, but have not seen the internals on the 16IC version.

Hopefully, this will resolve the issue. The worst case scenario would require a respin of either silicon or PCBA.
 
Hey look at that. Guess which drive I purchased for my new computer....:bang head

Trying to decide if I should send it back or not. I haven't been dissatisfied with its performance, but just knowing that it should be faster is something that might bother me.

Maybe I'll send it back over spring break while I'm sending my 460 to EVGA to step up to a 560 Ti since I won't be able to use my computer anyway.

Just my luck...
 
Techboy10 said:
Hey look at that. Guess which drive I purchased for my new computer....:bang head

Trying to decide if I should send it back or not. I haven't been dissatisfied with its performance, but just knowing that it should be faster is something that might bother me.

Maybe I'll send it back over spring break while I'm sending my 460 to EVGA to step up to a 560 Ti since I won't be able to use my computer anyway.

Just my luck...
Click to expand...

Are you sure its a 25nm version?
 
The Vertex 3 Pro sample I received is a drive rated at 200GB with 256GB of NAND on-board. The SF-2682 controller is still an 8-channel architecture and OCZ populates all 8 channels with a total of 16 NAND devices. OCZ selected Toshiba 32nm Toggle Mode MLC NAND for these early Vertex 3 Pro samples however final shipping versions might transition to IMFT 25nm. The consumer version (Vertex 3) will use IMFT 25nm for sure.
Click to expand...
Linky

Seems this is spilling into Vertex 3 as well. Sample benchmarks meaningless :shrug:?
 
Psykoikonov said:
Linky

Seems this is spilling into Vertex 3 as well. Sample benchmarks meaningless :shrug:?
Click to expand...

The sample benches are just for hype and are very misleading.

Check out this quote from anand:

anandtech said:
OCZ selected Toshiba 32nm Toggle Mode MLC NAND for these early Vertex 3 Pro samples however final shipping versions might transition to IMFT 25nm. The consumer version (Vertex 3) will use IMFT 25nm for sure.
Click to expand...

Later on in the article we see this gem:

anandtech said:
I did attempt to use the Vertex 3 Pro as the primary drive in my 15-inch MacBook Pro on my trip to MWC. I did so with hopes of exposing any errors and bugs quicker than normal, and indeed I did. Under OS X on the MBP with a full image of tons of data/apps, the drive is basically unusable. I get super long read and write latency.
Click to expand...

Translation: OCZ sent out ringers designed only to blast through synthetics.
 
ratbuddy said:
The sample benches are just for hype and are very misleading.

Translation: OCZ sent out ringers designed only to blast through synthetics.
Click to expand...

Not a shocker. I have not had a good experience with OCZ yet and this is not the first time they've done shady business. I do enjoy my Vertex 2, but only because I didn't get screwed. It's not like OCZ is the only one selling great SF1200, 64GB based drives either, I could have bought a G.Skill, Corsair, or Kingston drive for roughly the same price, capacity, and performance. I really don't see any point in buying from them again.
 
Not a shocker. I have not had a good experience with OCZ yet and this is not the first time they've done shady business. I do enjoy my Vertex 2, but only because I didn't get screwed. It's not like OCZ is the only one selling great SF1200, 64GB based drives either, I could have bought a G.Skill, Corsair, or Kingston drive for roughly the same price, capacity, and performance. I really don't see any point in buying from them again.
Click to expand...

Not to offend anyone but I've never been impressed with OCZ. I've never purchased anything from them, but I have dealt with the products first hand and for the price and the reputation they seem to have I don't get it. At one time I worked for a small computer company that carried OEM/OCZ/Mushkin memory. (I and several other people pushed hard for the Mushkin, which was only a small step up in timings over the OEM stuff and certainly behind the OCZ.) Either way though we never had a problem with Mushkin, but we were RMA'ing probably 10% of our OCZ stuff for failing in non over clocked/stock boards...

I know companies can change over time, but I never get that impression with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Overclockers.com
[O/C] OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD Review
Replies
15
Views
9K
creecher
creecher
Super Nade
Athlon64 and General CPU Technology mini-refrence
2
Replies
30
Views
15K
jonspd
jonspd
S
General Silencing Info
2
Replies
34
Views
40K
hollywood96
H
Back