Any opinion on the OCZ Octane OCT1-25SAT2-128G?

D

Dallows

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
6,816
As title states... Newegg has this for $110 right now. Wondering if it's worth picking up.

Thanks.
 
Honestly, the Vertex 4 is about due here and it will use the second-gen Octane controller - gonna be pretty beastly.
 
Yeah, but it's not going to be $110 for the 128GB.

If you need a drive on SATA II, I don't think you're going to do much better than that, at least on price. I've not had the opportunity to play with the slower Octane or the Petrol.
 
I don't think I'll go for that drive. I was just busy at work, saw the deal and figured I would try to reach out. I've been looking over SSD's more as the day goes on. I feel like I'm ready to pull the trigger. Just want to make the right purchase. Best for the value etc, not spend a ton. Somewhere in the $150 range I guess.
 
There are some good values in that price range, but one week a drive is $150 and the next it's $200 it seems like. Volatility in pricing is pretty high.
 
A Crucial M4 128GB is a great value and quite fast drive. They are generally in the $150 range.
 
An M4/Plextor M3/Samsung 830 are all excellent, so if you see one on sale, get the one on sale. Intel's Cherryville 520 is also getting pretty cheap.
 
it's a good deal. just depends on what you need your ssds for. personally, i think demanding 500 GB/s read/write is just "buying specs (like having more HP in a car)," the same goes with having higher "IOPS."

higher read/write is nice, but only if you're transfering huge files across.

higher IOPS are nice, but i don't think the avg user will benefit much from having 80k vs 20k per sec. if you're running a dataserver/webserver or something where you do a lot of random 4k accesses. then that's a different story.

IMO. if you're just a regular user, gaming, surfing, etc. *any* SSD would be a huge improvement over a regular HDD.
 
Decided to go with the Crucial M4 128GB. Thanks for the input.
 
lsun22 said:
it's a good deal. just depends on what you need your ssds for. personally, i think demanding 500 GB/s read/write is just "buying specs (like having more HP in a car)," the same goes with having higher "IOPS."

higher read/write is nice, but only if you're transfering huge files across.

higher IOPS are nice, but i don't think the avg user will benefit much from having 80k vs 20k per sec. if you're running a dataserver/webserver or something where you do a lot of random 4k accesses. then that's a different story.

IMO. if you're just a regular user, gaming, surfing, etc. *any* SSD would be a huge improvement over a regular HDD.
Click to expand...

Yes. High QD performance is just not relevant for most desktop workloads. Low QD performance is vital however. The Samsung and Marvell based drives give you good sequentials and good low QD random performance. SF gives you decent performance too, but aren't as good over time at maintaining their out-of-box-speed.'

There is always a balancing act to get one type of performance profile or another. One recent FW update for a drive traded better used-state performance for higher sequential reads. This resulted in a faster drive that is slightly slower when really pounded.

How a drive performs weeks after it's installed in your system is an important metric of drive performance IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top