Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Vertex 2

Last response: in Storage
Share
May 27, 2011 8:47:11 PM

This article talks about the loss of capacity in the changed vertex 2 SSDs. I just received one today, and although the chart on page 2 of the article says it should be showing 105 GiB, it shows 111 GiB under Win 7.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ocz-vertex-2-25nm-s...

My question is: Does this mean that I got a drive from before the transition, or does it mean something else entirely? Have there been changes to the drives since then?

Thanks in advance.

More about : vertex

a c 303 G Storage
May 27, 2011 9:02:11 PM

What is the complete model number of the drive?
m
0
l
May 27, 2011 9:45:04 PM

There's a label with two numbers, PN and SN.

I think PN is product number, and I know SN is serial number. Here's the ON

OCZSSD2-2VTXE120G
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 303 G Storage
May 27, 2011 10:31:01 PM

It is the Vertex 2 E model. The E stands for extended. Refers to a little bit extra capacity because unlike older models the over provisioning in this model was reduced to 7%.


SandForce SF-1222TA3-SBH (SF-1200) processor

hand-picked NAND flash memory modules

Sixteen multi-layer cell Intel 29F64G08CAMDB flash NAND modules.

Confirmed that it is 34nm MLC NAND Flash memory
m
0
l
May 27, 2011 11:12:22 PM

OK, great. I was hoping it was one of the 34nm ones. Now, If I plan to use this as a boot drive, will it significantly impact performance/extend lifespan to have the files for swap and hibernate on a RAID5 array, rather than this drive?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
May 27, 2011 11:56:06 PM

will it... "significantly impact performance/extend lifespan"? Simple answer.. no it won't.

keeping used capacity lower than typical is going to be a better means of doing that by far. Keep it at 75% or lower, implement some logged off idle time for garbage collection(GC) to do its thing(need to remember that trim marked blocks don't get used immediately and more often then not rely on GC to make use of them). Also need to avoid larger hits of incompressible data(or random data benchmarks such as CDM3 or AS SSD). Then just enjoy the drive until it becomes obsolete.

PS. I would heavily caution against using sleep/hibernates though as some sleep bugs still exist for some users out there regardless of the newest firmware alleviating many issues. Set power options to high performance and to never shut the drive down. Anything else will be a gamble with a potentially panic locked drive resulting in an RMA back to OCZ.

PS.PS the likelyhood of it being 25nm is very high due to all the older 34nm parts being used up months ago. Could have gotten lucky and recieved some older stock but highly doubtful. If the drive is 64GBit(noted by running the toolbox) then it is applicable to a free RMA. I doubt that's a likelyhood as well though as all of the afflicted drives will format to 107GB whereas the 32GBit drives will show 111GB.
m
0
l
May 28, 2011 12:24:21 AM

So it is likely a 25nm with 32Gbit flash- the tool doesn't work with my USB 2 external enclosure for drives. Since my current install of Win 7 is larger than the full capacity of this drive, I was planning to do a new install. Only problem is that my OS an upgrade from XP, which I can't find the disks for. Should M$ have a problem with me doing a fresh install on my SSD, provided I wipe the current drive?

Are there any optimizations I should have to make to a fresh install of 7 in order to use my SSD to the fullest? Anything particular to the drive? I plan to put most of my programs in a Program Files folder on my RAID5, and only have the largest and most intensive on the SSD. Swap will go on the SSD.

Performance-wise, how does the 25nm 32Gbit compare to the old 34nm NAND, which my friend's PC has?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
May 28, 2011 12:39:23 AM

Not sure what MS's policy is on that. If you were' to clean up that install you could clone it over but be aware that since it was originally built off an original XP installation(I assuem so anyways), it will not be properly aligned. You would need to use Paragon Alignment Tool(PAT) prior to cloning it. Be cautious of the clone tool used as well since some have been known to destroy alignments even when correct in the first place.

If you use W7 to reinstall from the start?.. alignment is not an issue as W7 will align properly by default.

Just make sure that if the drive is previously used/tested that you perform a secure erase first as that's the ONLY way to wipe the drives mapping and start out-of-box fresh again. Reformatting will NOT be the same and just build on the original mapping which will inevitably lead to Durawrite throttling. I would check the OCZ forum out with this being the first stop. Secure erase methods are in there too.
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?...

As for the performance compare's?.. figure about 85% of the original 34nm drives performance. Most loss is in the small files and the incompressible write speed capability.

Most would never know the difference when just using the drive and only seriously heavy multitasking, vid writes(which should be avoided due to eliminating the drives built in compression allowance because of the nature of that incompressible data hitting more nand at the physical level) or the use of incompressible benchmarks(AS SSD/CDM3) would ever give you a clue.

Not really as big a deal as everyone makes it out to be. Lifespan shouldn't be a concern either because the drive will be small, slow and obsolete like a little USB stick by the time it becomes an issue. Good Luck and happy reading.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
May 28, 2011 12:43:49 AM

Quote:
interesting..
now you got me wanting to re-examine my vertex 2.
never even thought about it because I have never had any issues thus far, knock on wood.



yeah.. not trying to cause alarm but many have gone for months and then.. KABOOM.. missing drive. Sandforce is one of the worst(much as I love mine) for compatibility and sleep transistions. If you've had the drive for more than 6 months without issue?.. just don't screw around with the power options if working up to this point and just move on with your life.

I beta-test for OCZ but even I don't rock the boat with my year old 6 drive array. They let me have a Vertex 3 to beat up on if I wnat to gamble like that. LOL
m
0
l
a c 303 G Storage
May 28, 2011 2:35:13 AM

user 18 & malmental - When did you purchase your Vertex 2's? before or after 15 January 2011?

I need to go back and check a couple of technical reviews where they actually opened the drives and examined the components.
m
0
l
a c 143 G Storage
May 28, 2011 2:45:16 AM

The easiest way to know if it is 25nm or 34nm is to utilize the newest OCZ Toolbox. If the die size says 64-bit, it is 25nm. If it says 32-bit, it is 34nm...
m
0
l
a c 303 G Storage
May 28, 2011 2:46:01 AM

OK - The reviews were done last year. I went by the one published by Benchmark Reviews last July:

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_conten...

I definitely got things backward. My apologies!

GEEZ! This is the second time this week I got ssd models mixed up. :( 

Then again maybe not. Here is a direct quote on the very first page of thereview I linked to:

"In this article, Benchmark Reviews tests the 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 Extended OCZSSD2-2VTXE120G against some of the fastest storage solutions on the market." :o 

Here's the product number user18 posted: OCZSSD2-2VTXE120G

Did benchmark Reviews get things mixed up? Did OCZ recycle the product number? Now I'm really confused. :pt1cable: 
m
0
l
a c 303 G Storage
May 28, 2011 4:30:52 AM

melmental - I'm not much of a gamer so I just have one 6850. Got it for two reasons - Displayport for my 30 inch monitor and I wanted to take a detailed look at the heatsink & heatpipes.

Just checked my archives. Probably one 6950. Take a look at this:

"We should also note that Radeon HD 6950 2GB cards are just $20 more expensive. That makes the 6870 IceQ X Turbo X roughly 7% cheaper, but also 7% slower. When you take into account that the Radeon HD 6950 wasn't overclocked and can be unlocked to meet the 6970's specs, that seems like a better deal."

http://www.techspot.com/review/386-his-radeon-6850-6870...

My site is not ready for public debut but you can rummage around in the review archives I am compiling. Check out this month's and the 2011 web page. You might find some interesting 6850 and 6950 reviews:

http://www.johnnylucky.org/reviews/index.html

m
0
l
May 28, 2011 1:14:29 PM

I just purchased my SSD very recently - it arrived yesterday.

JohnnyLucky said:
Here's the product number user18 posted: OCZSSD2-2VTXE120G

Did benchmark Reviews get things mixed up? Did OCZ recycle the product number? Now I'm really confused.


The article at Tom's I posted up at the top showed that OCZ did recycle the product number. My question was, since I got a drive showing the original capacity of ~111GiB, did that mean I got a 34nm drive, or were the 25nm drives changed somehow to show the original capacity.

The OCZ fourm post that Tecmo34 linked me to showed that there were 2 kinds of 25nm NAND, 64Gbit and 32Gbit, and the 32Gbit reflected the original capacity.

...at least that's how I understand everything in here so far
m
0
l
!