Don't forget Sandforce is generally cheaper, especially their mature first-gen controller based drives like the $120 Sandisk 120GB, or recentlky the Patriot $105 120GB drive.
The Patriot Pyro you're mentioning is based on a Sandforce 2281 controller, so SATA3 and second-gen. But yes, definitely cheaper than most (all) worthy alternatives.
Sorry, but no. I just RMA'ed a 128 gb Crucial m4 because of a numerous issues and incompatibilities stemming from poor firmware. The system wouldn't wake from sleep without modifying the registry (and even then, it wouldn't always work) and the drive would frequently stutter thanks to an unacknowledged (but clearly prevalent, given forum posts about it) issue with Intel RST 10.x drivers.
I am now running a 120 gb Intel 320 and loving it. The performance is indistinguishable from the m4, despite the latter's advantage in spec and benches. If anything, the 320 might feel a bit snappier than the m4 (and certainly better than my old 60 gb Vertex... not 2 or 3, just Vertex).
OCZ deserves credit for continuing to support it's older Indilinx drives with newer FW. While Arrowana FW never materialized for Intel NAND equipped models, their newer FWs are much better.
The problem with the Octane isn't necessarily it's performance. The problem is price.
Unless the price drops, there isn't a compelling reason to own one. I'm pleased that OCZ is releasing new FW that positively impacts performance, but until they get the price lower, I wouldn't recommend that shoppers pass up the 830 -- especially at 128GB. Depending on the day, the Samsung 830 128GB is $10 to $20 more. For that price differential, you get better performance and probably better NAND as well.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the 64GB 830 and 128GB Octane are pretty much equal performance-wise.
No, I mean it's awesome that OCZ is supporting the original Indilinx with newer FW (like 1.7, and I assume there will be at least one more FW release). OCZ does a lot of things which irritate me to no end, but FW support is not one of them.
To me, FW support (both initial and long term) is pretty important, so they deserve credit for that.
The 128GB Octane is actually more expensive than the 128GB 830 today; Newegg is having a sale.
OCZ bought the indilinx controller thats why its in the octane and thats why they are supporting it. It is their own controller. They arent just trying to help out by supporting some old controller
Yes. Samsung and Toshiba both make Toggle NAND, but I don't think they're all that similar. Samsung and Toshiba both have their own fabs (Toshiba in Japan, Samsung in Korea) and I would assume they put better NAND in their own drives (at least, this is what Intel supposedly does). Therefore, arguably, you could get better NAND in the 830.
I don't know why so few drives utilize Samsung NAND today. Toshiba NAND must be much cheaper or something. I have a couple older drives with Samsung MLC and SLC, but I can't recall any modern drive using their stuff (beside Samsung of course).
So quick quetsion (and I know this isn't the best place to ask) But Intels new toolbox is telling me to upgrade my G2's. But I'm currently running Windows off of them and have them in a RIAD 0. Anyone know if thats ok to upgrade the firmware while operating the OS from them?
OCZ has lost it's unique (and some say unfair) advantage with SandForce so it is zero surprise they are working on Everest as the go-forward platform.
Intel's recent 520 release is a perfect example of this - the only thing keeping it from completely making OCZ SF drives irrelevant in the market is price. And this is Intel's way - why give it away when you have customers lining up to pay the premium for quality? When that line up gets short, the price will be adjusted and Intel will dominate the SF drive market.
So the question is - can OCZ compete on performance, features, and price? I'd say in the long run it can't.
But only if it is not your boot drive. As there is inexplicably no linux update method, you have to dig out a second ssd/hdd and install your OS onto that and then connect the Octane as a secondary drive, obviously making sure your SATA port numbers are all rosey and you haven't installed Intel RST.
I don't care how much lipstick they put on 'em, they're still OCZ drives, and OCZ drives are completely unreliable. Even worse, they're slow to offer any fixes, the fixes often don't work, and in the process they're fond of blaming their customers.
I'll not be buying any OCZ SSDs anytime soon, and will continue to warn others to stay away.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
Back to Article
iwod - Thursday, February 9, 2012 - link
Get M4 ( Or Marvell Based ) if you want Stable and Top Notch Performance.Get Sandforce Based Drive if you only care about Performance.
Samus - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
Don't forget Sandforce is generally cheaper, especially their mature first-gen controller based drives like the $120 Sandisk 120GB, or recentlky the Patriot $105 120GB drive.Ammaross - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
"...or recently the Patriot $105 120GB drive. "The Patriot Pyro you're mentioning is based on a Sandforce 2281 controller, so SATA3 and second-gen. But yes, definitely cheaper than most (all) worthy alternatives.
GrizzledYoungMan - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
Sorry, but no. I just RMA'ed a 128 gb Crucial m4 because of a numerous issues and incompatibilities stemming from poor firmware. The system wouldn't wake from sleep without modifying the registry (and even then, it wouldn't always work) and the drive would frequently stutter thanks to an unacknowledged (but clearly prevalent, given forum posts about it) issue with Intel RST 10.x drivers.I am now running a 120 gb Intel 320 and loving it. The performance is indistinguishable from the m4, despite the latter's advantage in spec and benches. If anything, the 320 might feel a bit snappier than the m4 (and certainly better than my old 60 gb Vertex... not 2 or 3, just Vertex).
iwod - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
I can definitely say the performance IS distinguishable from m4 and Intel 320.In terms of stability Intel is in a different league. So i forgot to mention them.
M4 may have its problem, but nothing compare to Sandforce.
ckryan - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
OCZ deserves credit for continuing to support it's older Indilinx drives with newer FW. While Arrowana FW never materialized for Intel NAND equipped models, their newer FWs are much better.The problem with the Octane isn't necessarily it's performance. The problem is price.
Unless the price drops, there isn't a compelling reason to own one. I'm pleased that OCZ is releasing new FW that positively impacts performance, but until they get the price lower, I wouldn't recommend that shoppers pass up the 830 -- especially at 128GB. Depending on the day, the Samsung 830 128GB is $10 to $20 more. For that price differential, you get better performance and probably better NAND as well.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the 64GB 830 and 128GB Octane are pretty much equal performance-wise.
pc_void - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
The octane isn't an older drive. It came out not long ago.ckryan - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
No, I mean it's awesome that OCZ is supporting the original Indilinx with newer FW (like 1.7, and I assume there will be at least one more FW release). OCZ does a lot of things which irritate me to no end, but FW support is not one of them.To me, FW support (both initial and long term) is pretty important, so they deserve credit for that.
The 128GB Octane is actually more expensive than the 128GB 830 today; Newegg is having a sale.
pc_void - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
Do see what your saying now.eman17j - Monday, February 13, 2012 - link
OCZ bought the indilinx controller thats why its in the octane and thats why they are supporting it. It is their own controller. They arent just trying to help out by supporting some old controllerdarckhart - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
hm i thought the octane's used intel's 25nm synchronous mlc nand. the samsung uses some special concoction cooked up by themselves and toshiba.ckryan - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
Yes. Samsung and Toshiba both make Toggle NAND, but I don't think they're all that similar. Samsung and Toshiba both have their own fabs (Toshiba in Japan, Samsung in Korea) and I would assume they put better NAND in their own drives (at least, this is what Intel supposedly does). Therefore, arguably, you could get better NAND in the 830.I don't know why so few drives utilize Samsung NAND today. Toshiba NAND must be much cheaper or something. I have a couple older drives with Samsung MLC and SLC, but I can't recall any modern drive using their stuff (beside Samsung of course).
landion - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
Are they going to release a similar firmware update for the Octane S2?Does the S2 have the same problem that prompted the update for the octane?
MrSpadge - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
It was not a problem, it was rebalancing performance. If the S2 performs the same as the regular one, it would benefit & loose the same way.celestialgrave - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
Was there any difference in the power usage since the performance changed?SlyNine - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
So quick quetsion (and I know this isn't the best place to ask) But Intels new toolbox is telling me to upgrade my G2's. But I'm currently running Windows off of them and have them in a RIAD 0. Anyone know if thats ok to upgrade the firmware while operating the OS from them?sanguy - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
OCZ has lost it's unique (and some say unfair) advantage with SandForce so it is zero surprise they are working on Everest as the go-forward platform.Intel's recent 520 release is a perfect example of this - the only thing keeping it from completely making OCZ SF drives irrelevant in the market is price. And this is Intel's way - why give it away when you have customers lining up to pay the premium for quality? When that line up gets short, the price will be adjusted and Intel will dominate the SF drive market.
So the question is - can OCZ compete on performance, features, and price? I'd say in the long run it can't.
RU482 - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
more OCZ beta testing...I mean updates for the customer to performCoup27 - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
But only if it is not your boot drive. As there is inexplicably no linux update method, you have to dig out a second ssd/hdd and install your OS onto that and then connect the Octane as a secondary drive, obviously making sure your SATA port numbers are all rosey and you haven't installed Intel RST.And if you own a laptop you're f****d.
Seriously, WTF??!!
Jokeshop.
sanguy - Friday, February 10, 2012 - link
Will be interesting to see OCZ's blame game tactics now.They used to be very quick to blame the 3rd party controller manufacture, but that excuse train has dried up.
If firmware, tools, etc, are buggy it's one throat to choke -- and that's OCZ's throat. Nobody else.
God help the OCZ customers.
eman17j - Monday, February 13, 2012 - link
Last time I checked Intels new ssd was already having BSOD people talking about them on Intels forum so then it does sound like the controller to meLB-ID - Monday, February 13, 2012 - link
I don't care how much lipstick they put on 'em, they're still OCZ drives, and OCZ drives are completely unreliable. Even worse, they're slow to offer any fixes, the fixes often don't work, and in the process they're fond of blaming their customers.I'll not be buying any OCZ SSDs anytime soon, and will continue to warn others to stay away.
RobElk - Wednesday, February 15, 2012 - link
Hey Anandtech, Can you review this drive ASAP? I want to know if it is any good. Thanks...