• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Vertex 4

I guess that depends on how you want to look at it. OCZ would certainly tell you that the Vertex4 is faster than the Vertex3.

The Vertex4 has a lot going for it, but it's unclear how the 128GB model performs. The 256GB and 512GB Vertex4 are a good bit faster than their 240GB/480GB Vertex 3 counterparts, but the 128GB model may not be... there is no way to know without setting hands on it.
 
yes. the vertex 4 has some of the fastest 4k queue depth 1 reads available.
 
Thanks. I figure Ssd's are made for the Os only. There's no point in installing everything in one huge ssd because almost all the time you have to reinstall everything.
 
AndreRio said:
Thanks. I figure Ssd's are made for the Os only. There's no point in installing everything in one huge ssd because almost all the time you have to reinstall everything.
Click to expand...

I have everything installed on an SSD and refuse to use internal mechanical drives. If I have to reinstall, I backup and create image first.
 
I'm not impressed with it. It's good at writes and high queue depth reads, but neither of those are important. It is less than impressive at low queue depth reads, which are by FAR the most important.

Also, being made by OCZ, I don't trust it to be reliable whatsoever.
 
dandragonrage said:
I'm not impressed with it. It's good at writes and high queue depth reads, but neither of those are important. It is less than impressive at low queue depth reads, which are by FAR the most important.

Also, being made by OCZ, I don't trust it to be reliable whatsoever.
Click to expand...

It blows away everything with 4K low QD Random Read - you're looking at sequential read.

As far as OS snappiness is concerned, things opening quickly and general overall responsiveness, low QD random read is where it's at. I'd like to give 'em a go. I think I will.

My V3's have been absolutely problem free and are still as blazing fast as the day I got 'em. Low qd random read is their weak point - this is where the V4 addresses this.
 
Personally, I'll just wait for the new Marvell controller. You are right that the random read is good on the V4 but sequential is SO BAD that I feel... ehhhhh....

I don't understand how they let it out the door failing sequential reads so badly, even if randoms are good.
 
Last edited:
The Plextor M3P has just as fast low QD 4K random reads, but it is much faster than the Vertex 4 at low QD sequential reads.

The Plextor M3P is the better SSD.
 
MissJ84 said:
I have everything installed on an SSD and refuse to use internal mechanical drives. If I have to reinstall, I backup and create image first.
Click to expand...

+17

If I don't have enough space on my SSDs, then I ave way too much stuff. I would take one 32GB Intel X25-E over all the mechanical storage in the world.

If you are thinking about getting your first SSD, there are some fantastic deals on 128GB drives. The 830 128GB has been as low as $139, and the 128GB M4 was $129 yesterday, and may still be. There are lots of great drives and they're all well-priced. I'd much rather get stuck with a 1155 Celeron than mechanical storage. If I had to build a whole new system on a budget, I'd do whatever I had to do and make whatever decision I had to make to make room in the budget for a decent SSD of almost any capacity.
 
Last edited:
Definitely an interesting drive. I'll be waiting until their next firmware release (stated to release in a few weeks) that will hopefully tune the drives for better low-queue performance.

Anandtech review
Both of these issues are apparently being worked on at the time of publication and should be rolled into the next firmware release for the drive (due out sometime in late April). Again, OCZ's aim was to deliver a high-end drive that could be offered as an alternative to the Vertex 3 as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...

If OCZ is able to improve its low queue depth sequential read performance through a firmware update in the coming weeks, it will truly have built a drive (and controller) that are among the fastest on the market. I see no reason that OCZ shouldn't be able to achieve this given the sequential read performance we saw from Octane, but as is always the case with these types of launches we have to review the product we have, not the product we'll get.
Click to expand...
 
I think the V4 has a lot of potential, and it's certainly unique as-is.

One mantra I've been hearing over and over is how awful OCZ's support and RMAs are. I'm no OCZ apologist, but the one RMA I had to do was completed very quickly and they even shipped the product back 2nd day air. Having to get support solely through the OCZ forum isn't ideal, but it's a lot better than most.
 
JoeComp said:
The Plextor M3P has just as fast low QD 4K random reads, but it is much faster than the Vertex 4 at low QD sequential reads.

The Plextor M3P is the better SSD.
Click to expand...

I agree. Anyway, the Vertex 4 fails hard at Vantage. The Plextor M3P and M3S dominate with almost double the HDD suite at 80K. Looks decent otherwise.

As for OCZ's customer service, they work on the squeaky wheel principle. You want legit great RMA service, try Corsair. They even go the extra mile when no one is looking. ;)
 
All benchmarks aside, I doubt most anyone would be able to perceive a difference between any decent current-gen SSDs under the vast majority of uses. I'm not saying we should all buy cheap Intel 320s (well, I guess they aren't so cheap anymore, relatively speaking), but if you have anything recent I wouldn't upgrade unless it's for a jump in capacity or because your current drive is misbehaving.

I guess adding a second drive for game installs makes some sense too (I think that's what the OP was alluding to), but it's kind of overkill if you have anything 120GB or larger for a boot drive imo. 'Course if you have lots of games installed or a legitimate use for the extra space and performance (video edit work scratch space, etc) then by all means...

If 120GB drives keep selling for a lower cost per GB than 256GB drives, I'd probably buy a second one too before opting for a 256GB drive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top