The SSD Update: Vertex Gets Faster, New Indilinx Drives and Intel/MacBook Problems Resolved
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 30, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
The Bright Side: The Vertex is Nearly 3x as Fast
Immediately after I published the anthology, I asked OCZ for a shipping version of the drive. I wanted final hardware, updated firmware, shrink wrap, the whole 9 yards. Here’s what I got:
The drive itself looked identical to the first Vertex I tested, but the differences were all internal. The new drive used a new PCB layout, let’s pop the top off to see it:
Oooh.
The major change on the new board layout is the addition of a 2-pin jumper on the back of the drive to allow the drive’s firmware to be updated by the end user. OCZ tells me that as of 1275, the jumper is no longer needed to update the firmware so it looks like it was a short lived change.
While OCZ claims that there’s significant validation done on each firmware revision, without a doubt it’s significantly less than what every Intel and Samsung drive goes through. There’s a certain amount of risk you take when jumping on the unproven hardware bandwagon, so as always proceed with caution. It’s worth looking into
While I haven’t done much testing on 1275, I can’t blame you if you want to try the firmware out right away because it is good.
I’ll start with the best news first. I looked at 4KB random write performance once again using iometer. This test is the same one I used in last week’s review; a 3 minute run, 3 outstanding IOs, 4KB random writes spread out over an 8GB section of LBAs. I filled the drive completely before running the test.
Random Write (4KB Block, 3 IOs) | IOPS | Transfer Rate | Average Latency (ms) |
Intel X25-M | 5923 | 23.1 MB/s | 0.51 ms |
OCZ Vertex 1275 | 1656 | 6.47 MB/s | 1.81 ms |
OCZ Vertex 0112 | 617 | 2.41 MB/s | 4.86 ms |
Yeah. It’s fast. Not quite as fast as Intel’s X25-M but it’s good. Average latency has dropped quite a bit. The Vertex using firmware 1275 performs used at about the level that the original firmware performed brand new. The Intel drive can still crunch through over 3.5x the number of IOs per second as the Vertex, but it also costs nearly 2x per GB. The Vertex proves itself an interesting value alternative.
I then looked at random read performance. Now most SSDs do just fine here, even the JMicron based ones.
Random Read (4KB Block, 3 IOs) | IOPS | Transfer Rate | Average Latency (ms) |
Intel X25-M | 13883 | 54.2 MB/s | 0.22 ms |
OCZ Vertex 1275 | 8931 | 34.9 MB/s | 0.34 ms |
OCZ Vertex 0112 | 8184 | 32.0 MB/s | 0.37 ms |
The new firmware bumped up the Vertex’s performance by about 9%.
I spoke briefly with one of OCZ’s flash engineers and it seems like the reason the 1275 firmware is so much faster in random write speed is because of a bug in the 0112 firmware I tested with. There was apparently a problem with the 0112 firmware that prevented the controller from writing to as many flash devices as possible in parallel. The 1199 firmware fixed this, which explains why the sudden rush to ship the firmware. Unfortunately it looks like that version also has problems and thus we end up back at square one again. There’s no free lunch folks.
Sequential read performance showed a very marginal performance improvement:
Sequential Read (2MB Block, 1 IO) | IOPS | Transfer Rate | Average Latency (ms) |
Intel X25-M | 115.1 | 230.2 MB/s | 8.7 ms |
OCZ Vertex 1275 | 127.9 | 255.9 MB/s | 7.8 ms |
OCZ Vertex 0112 | 125.1 | 250.1 MB/s | 8.0 ms |
But sequential write performance went up tremendously:
Sequential Write (2MB Block, 1 IO) | IOPS | Transfer Rate | Average Latency (ms) |
Intel X25-M | 35.5 | 71 MB/s | 28.2 ms |
OCZ Vertex 1275 | 67.7 | 135.3 MB/s | 14.8 ms |
OCZ Vertex 0112 | 46.7 | 93.4 MB/s | 21.4 ms |
The Indilinx (and most other) drives offer better sequential read/write speed than the X25-M. Intel optimized for the most important characteristics for a desktop: random read/write performance, while most other manufacturers optimized for sequential read/write. Indilinx is the first to seem to want to really drive sequential without completely forgetting about random performance.
73 Comments
View All Comments
AtenRa - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
Intel X25-M 80GB $4.29OCZ Vertex 120GB $3.49
OCZ Vertex is 120GB not 80GB ;)
strikeback03 - Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - link
Also not sure where those prices came from, as cheapest PriceGrabber finds the X25-M 80GB is $359, for $4.49/GB. The Vertex 120GB seems to be the best deal at the moment, at $2.91/GB before rebate, $2.66/GB after.nubie - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
Nice, these Vertex drives are looking even hotter :)That Super Talent drive is $108 on Newegg after a mail-in-rebate of $20, if you try to keep your main drive/partition under 30GB it might be the perfect way to speed up your machine.
Keeping media off of the main drive it should be simple to stay under 30GB, even putting games on a different (platter) drive you should see a much faster computing experience.
deputc26 - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
Anand your SSD coverage has been second to none. I trust your reviews more than anyone elses on the web but it sure would be nice to see real-world power consumption figures for SSDs as this is an important factor in notebooks._Nate
gwolfman - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
Great followup to the amazing SSD Anthology article. You win in my book.turrican2097 - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
I wonder if those JMicrons were low-cost for very specific scenarios, firmware and the like. And then it was the SSD manufacturer that cheaped out.I wouldn't blame JMicron without investigating
strikeback03 - Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - link
They probably are OK for some scenarios, but you can still blame the companies for using them in a manner they are not really fit for. If some company started selling 15"+ laptops for several hundred dollars using Atom processors, you wouldn't blame Intel for making the Atom, but the company for misusing it.Mumrik - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
Page 3: "The Intel drive can still crunch through over 3.5x the number of IOs per second as the Vertex, but it also costs nearly 2x per GB"Not true at all according to page 2 where price/GB is 4.29 for Intel and 3.49 for OCZ. That means that the Intel drive costs 23% more than the OCZ - nowhere near 2x.
sideral - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
Anand,Unfortunately I had not read about the issue when I read you fantastic article on the Vertex, which made me buy a couple of X-25Ms for my machine.
I contacted Intel through support right now after reading they might have a fix for the issue the drive has under Bootcamp on one of the new Macs with nVidia chipsets. They aren't answering (yet), do you have some color on the fix though ?
inolvidable - Monday, March 30, 2009 - link
I'm following ssd's progression throught your articles. I think they're the next big evolution in computer performance so I have much interest on them