OCZ Vertex 2 90GB 3.5" speed check

gareth170

gareth170

gareth170

Soldato
Joined
24 Jan 2007
Posts
14,063
Location
.
hi

does this look right? i guess crystal disk mark doesn't give the right readings?

crystaldiskmark.png


attoz.png
 
Speeds look fine, take the first bench as worst case scenario, and ATTO as best case, its just they use different ways to test the drives (methods), both are correct for the ways they test.

But as ATTO tests the vertex's controller better, i would use that to do regular checks with, and only worry if u spot massive drops in that.
 
Agree with bifday2k.

Though ATTO writes look slightly lower then I've seen with other Vertex 2 drives. Though I suspect nothing to worry about. Depends on what SATA controller and drivers you are using I suspect.

Though I would not recommend running CDM too often on an SSD with a Sandforce controller. Especially with the file size you are using! OCZ recommend if you want to use CDM, cut file size to 100MB and only 3 runs (rather than 5). All that un-compressible data will soon degrade your drive! (so they say).

ATTO on my drive:

SSDATTObenchmark.jpg


PS. OCZ Vertex drive performance figures quoted are obtained using ATTO. So yes, this is the one to run to check your drive.
 
Last edited:
gareth170 said:
how can un-compressible data degrade the drive?
Click to expand...

Because the way Sandforce drives work is that the controller compresses the data written to the drive, this means it has to transfer less data so can report the high speeds it does, the problem is if you bombard the controller with a lot of un-compressible data it bogs it down and it can take days, even weeks to recover, sometimes it won't recover fully depending on the amount of un-compressible data you are bombarding the drive with and you'll have to secure erase the drive to bring the speed back up.
 
Somone really needs to sticky a thread with info on the vertex 2. Get one of these threads every time someone buys one and everytime someone has to explain how the sandforce controller works.
 
Lol shall i post on tomorrow when my vertex arrives just to be annoying lmao.

But i do agree, there really should be a more upto date sticky including the differences in the controllers for SSD's, the benchmark stuff and so on.
 
Boozebeard said:
Somone really needs to sticky a thread with info on the vertex 2. Get one of these threads every time someone buys one and everytime someone has to explain how the sandforce controller works.
Click to expand...

Indeed...

But then again. All this info is available on OCZ's Sandforce SSD forum. While I accept that not everyone is the same etc. I would never consider buying any sort of new tech. without visiting the relevant support forum etc. Only my opinion of course.
 
Last edited:
Broken Hope said:
Because the way Sandforce drives work is that the controller compresses the data written to the drive, this means it has to transfer less data so can report the high speeds it does, the problem is if you bombard the controller with a lot of un-compressible data it bogs it down and it can take days, even weeks to recover, sometimes it won't recover fully depending on the amount of un-compressible data you are bombarding the drive with and you'll have to secure erase the drive to bring the speed back up.
Click to expand...
so how would i know if it as "boged it down"? is it by the heath status?

surely in time normal use would "bog it down" also?
 
Broken Hope said:
How many times have you benched that drive, because sadly it already looks like it's been heavily degraded..

When comparing to findings here and here
Click to expand...
CDM only 2 times.

atto about 3times.

the CDM result is the same when i got the drive 2days ago.

are you saying if its degraded it can't be fixed?
 
Last edited:
Can't see the number of benchmarks you've run should impact performance. We are talking repeated runs using large files. Bill Gates on the OCZ forum was somewhat being a prat (and that's being polite in my opinion), look at the file size (4GB for Gods sake!) and the number of runs. That's a massive amount of in-compressible data being punted about! From everything I've read, in everyday use, this should not be an issue.

Mind you... I did wonder about your CDM results to be honest.

Mine (and this looks to agree with others I've seen on forums etc.):

SSDCDMbenchmark.jpg


Which is a fair bit better than your results. Though I'm only using a file size of 100MB and 3 runs (as recommended). I also have a 120 GB drive, though I would have thought this should not make any difference.
 
is there anything i can do?

my read result as been 153mb seen i had the drive 2days ago. i'm sure the write was 135mb~ before i flashed it to 1.24.

i don't want to rma it if it's fixable myself.

this is my first SSD, i was told these are easy to maintain but it seems like they not.
 
Last edited:
mikeo said:
Can't see the number of benchmarks you've run should impact performance.
Click to expand...

I asked simply because the default is 1GB filesize and 5 runs, which is 5GB of data each time, which if done enough would degrade the drive.

gareth170 said:
is there anything i can do?

my read result as been 153mb seen i had the drive 2days ago. i'm sure the write was 135mb~ before i flashed it to 1.24.

i don't want to rma it if it's fixable myself.

this is my first SSD, i was told these are easy to maintain but it seems like they not.
Click to expand...

SSDs are easy to maintain, just Sandforce drives have quirks that the Marvel and Intel based controllers don't have.

You can fix it yourself, you need to secure erase the drive which will wipe all data, so you need to take an image of your OS first and then put it back on after the secure erase.
 
Probably not what you want to hear. But if it was me.... I'd leave it a couple of weeks, use it normally, don't do any more benchmarking. And then run another test (and if using CDM, use 100MB / 3 runs). And see what it looks like.

If still unhappy, Secure Erase your drive (see OCZ forums for full explanation) and start again.

I doubt very much if your drive is faulty. It's very easy to get hung up on benchmarking. Unluckily, there is no "ideal" tool out there yet in my opinion. The issue of SSD performance and longevity etc. is a complex issue and not very well gone into in a lot of articles.

If it was me, I would also change the power options to prevent hibernation and set the drive to never sleep. Gives the drive the best chance to recover.

I'm no expert here. So feel free anyone to pull my thoughts apart.
 
when u say degraded u mean by performance, not actually damaged the drive? , right.

the heath status says 100% i guess that is the lifespan.
 
Last edited:
gareth170 said:
so it hasn't damaged the drive? it just slows it down, right.

the heath status says 100% i guess that is the lifespan.
Click to expand...

Correct. I suspect your drive is fine.

Not sure how accurate that "health status" indicator is. It's yet another thing that seems to get banged on about in forums / articles etc.
 
gareth170 said:
when u say degraded u mean by performance, not actually damaged the drive? , right.

the heath status says 100% i guess that is the lifespan.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just performance. The drive itself hasn't been damaged in any way. The firmware for the Sandforce drives will limit write speed if there's too much incompressible data written in a short amount of time, it takes a while to recover.

There's a ton of info over in this thread, it's a long read though.

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...Secure-Erase-TRIM-and-anything-else-Sandforce
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom