I would assume OCZ can use whatever NAND they want -- so we'll probably see some asynchronous solutions along with the other stuff. I just want to know if performance is there or not (and reliability).
This may have been delayed and put OCZ to make custom firmware with Marvell? Controller Performance has been tweaked to the point where the difference are nearly negligible apart from benchmarks. What we really need is a much lower power usage controller while retain similar performance. And then we need 20Gbps+ I/O port to future prove our SSD.
Sounds good, but Everest 2 has really turned me off from OCZ and I was a big supporter of OCZ when everyone got on their case for Sandforce issues. Everest 2's reduced performance the more the drive is filled, even if less with 1.5 firmware, still seems like shady marketing to me. That's putting aside any relaibility concerns. I hope this doesn't show the same tendency, and if it does I hope websites run *all* their tests in a manner that exposes it.
It isn't true of "pretty much every SSD on the market". What OCZ did was implement a dynamic spare area tweak, which isn't SOP with other controllers. It is a scam.
It is amazing how much a little hearsay can carry a company, even if it is as dodgy as OCZ. People still choose to "support" OCZ even when the big players such as Samsung, Crucial, Intel et al. are providing competitive alternatives
He's probably referring to performance mode, which gives higher benchmarks when the drive is less than 50% full. That's not likely to be the case in real use and therefore, isn't a good indicator of performance in use cases where the drive is filled more than half.
Note: the "slower performance" thing was for drives under 256GB (so basically the 60 and 120GB models). The 256 and 512GB drives are unaffected by what you're referring to.
Which already weren't really intended to be filled, just used as a boot drive really. At least that's what I've seen SSDs in those sizes purchased for.
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
18 Comments
Back to Article
ganeshts - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
and Toshiba ramping up.. Was it a good choice for OCZ to go with Micron for the NAND ?JarredWalton - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
I would assume OCZ can use whatever NAND they want -- so we'll probably see some asynchronous solutions along with the other stuff. I just want to know if performance is there or not (and reliability).mrdude - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
and power consumption :P The current flock of Indilinx stuff chews up far too muchjosephjpeters - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
Is that Q4 of the Calendar Year or the Fiscal Year?Any word on performance spec's?
shabby - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
They're not releasing financial reports, just ssd's, so its calender year.FATCamaro - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
Lol nice reply. This is generally true.josephjpeters - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
Just wanted clarification, thanks.For what it's worth I've heard this drive is suppoed to be one hellluva performer. 150k IOPS range.
iwod - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
This may have been delayed and put OCZ to make custom firmware with Marvell? Controller Performance has been tweaked to the point where the difference are nearly negligible apart from benchmarks. What we really need is a much lower power usage controller while retain similar performance. And then we need 20Gbps+ I/O port to future prove our SSD.surgex - Saturday, September 22, 2012 - link
12Gb/s SAS is just around the corner.Hitachi GST has already demo'd drives, and I believe LSI has a PCIe 3.0 12Gb HBA that's already in trials.
MadMan007 - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
Sounds good, but Everest 2 has really turned me off from OCZ and I was a big supporter of OCZ when everyone got on their case for Sandforce issues. Everest 2's reduced performance the more the drive is filled, even if less with 1.5 firmware, still seems like shady marketing to me. That's putting aside any relaibility concerns. I hope this doesn't show the same tendency, and if it does I hope websites run *all* their tests in a manner that exposes it.A5 - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
You are aware that this is true of pretty much every SSD on the market, right?FunBunny2 - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
It isn't true of "pretty much every SSD on the market". What OCZ did was implement a dynamic spare area tweak, which isn't SOP with other controllers. It is a scam.semo - Thursday, September 13, 2012 - link
It is amazing how much a little hearsay can carry a company, even if it is as dodgy as OCZ. People still choose to "support" OCZ even when the big players such as Samsung, Crucial, Intel et al. are providing competitive alternativesZoomer - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
He's probably referring to performance mode, which gives higher benchmarks when the drive is less than 50% full. That's not likely to be the case in real use and therefore, isn't a good indicator of performance in use cases where the drive is filled more than half.Ammaross - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
Note: the "slower performance" thing was for drives under 256GB (so basically the 60 and 120GB models). The 256 and 512GB drives are unaffected by what you're referring to.lmcd - Tuesday, November 6, 2012 - link
Which already weren't really intended to be filled, just used as a boot drive really. At least that's what I've seen SSDs in those sizes purchased for.kpo6969 - Thursday, September 13, 2012 - link
I wonder how the Barefoot 3 controller compares to the Marvell 88SS9187 in the Plextor M5 Pro with Toshiba 19nm Toggle-Mode MLC NAND.etamin - Tuesday, September 18, 2012 - link
So what's going on with Ryan Peterson's resignation? could this perhaps point to a lack of confidence in Barefoot 3?