so what are your views on the ocz vertex 4 then?
as i said im new to SSD's so i have no knowledge with whats best, with so many suggestions im kind of confused.
cheers.
Is this SSD good?
- Thread starter TomProx
- Start date
so what are your views on the ocz vertex 4 then?
as i said im new to SSD's so i have no knowledge with whats best, with so many suggestions im kind of confused.
cheers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 May 2012
- Posts
- 6,270
- Location
- North London
I would go with either the Samsung 830 or Crucial M4 , Quality products at good prices 
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 5,267
- Location
- London
OCZ had a reputation in the past for being unreliable (a lot of problems with their SandForce based SSD's), but since the Vertex 4 they've turned it around, 5 year warranty and an Indilinx/Marvell based controller, this gives the fastest SataIII SSD available today.
Also, the Vertex 4 doesn't suffer slow down when populated more than 50% like other drives as it features a mode which keeps optimum performance up to full
Last edited:
The Vertex 4 still has OCZ's bait-n-switch tactics.
For example:
OCZ Vertex 4 512GB 2.5" SATA 6Gb/s Solid State Hard Drive (VTX4-25SAT3-512G)
OCZ Vertex 4 512GB 2.5" SATA 6Gb/s Solid State Hard Drive (VTX4-25SAT3-512G.M)
Without knowing about the first one, somebody would just look at the 2nd one, google "Vertex 4 reviews" and think that they're getting decent performance, only to discover that they've bought the slower M version that OCZ made no real effort to draw attention to the change of flash chips other than to add a .M to the part that people are less likely to Google. They did this with the Vertex 2E, where they didn't even bother to change the part number.
For example:
OCZ Vertex 4 512GB 2.5" SATA 6Gb/s Solid State Hard Drive (VTX4-25SAT3-512G)
OCZ Vertex 4 512GB 2.5" SATA 6Gb/s Solid State Hard Drive (VTX4-25SAT3-512G.M)
Without knowing about the first one, somebody would just look at the 2nd one, google "Vertex 4 reviews" and think that they're getting decent performance, only to discover that they've bought the slower M version that OCZ made no real effort to draw attention to the change of flash chips other than to add a .M to the part that people are less likely to Google. They did this with the Vertex 2E, where they didn't even bother to change the part number.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 5,267
- Location
- London
Afaik, it's a slimmer V4 for Mac
If it was me and I had £120 to spend on an SSD, I'd hold out a little. We have already seen a Samsung 830 256GB for £117 and although that deal has ended we should see something similar in the coming month. For many users especially gamers 128GB is just too small.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2010
- Posts
- 531
Until 3 weeks ago, when I sent it back for a refund, my Intel 520 was giving me daily BSODs (with latest firmware, IRST drivers etc.). Intel spent a year writing/validating their custom firmware, so I doubt they made it worse than the "one size fits all" firmware in other drives. Check Intel's forums for numerous unsatisfied customers (mainly Mac/laptop users). Maybe other drives have less issues than Intel (though I doubt it).
Apart from compressible data benchmarks, the SF-2281 has been surpassed by several controllers, so why take the risk?
The Sandisk extreme 240GB in my desktop is very reliable since May and very quick. SF2281 controller but Sandisk own synchronous toggle NAND. Never had one issue with it. I also have a Vertex 2E 120GB in this netbook, slower as it is SATA I/II but also very reliable.
I've been running two Vertex 4 drives since they came out (one 128GB and one 256GB) and more than happy with my purchase. But then again, nothing wrong with Samsung, or Crucial SSD's either. I'm also one of the lucky ones that bought a couple of Vertex 2E's and still running and zero issues with them either. Sometimes it's just luck of the draw
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 65
- Location
- Texas
Thinking that maybe DennisMenace had some knowledge about the Intel SSD forums I decided to visit them myself to see what is happening. When I went there I just searched on BSOD since that is the most common result and claim against SandForce. I found nearly every BSOD reported issue with SandForce was fixed by one of the following:
1. SATA IDE mode instead of AHCI
2. Connected to bad SATA port
3. MB did not support LPM for any SSD, so turned it off and all was good
4. SATA cable was bad and caused low performance and issues
5. Used wrong power settings on MB
6. Issue with Intel RST driver not loading properly
7. Reinstalled windows with latest RST and AHCI drivers
8. Turn on or enable HOT SWAP for SSD port in BIOS
9. Did not follow proper Intel directions for setting up SSD as cache drive
To my surprise one of the few entries where someone did not find a solution was in fact a user named dennisammenace.
Most of the other entries are not even the Sandforce version of the Intel SSD. A bunch of them were before Intel started using SandForce.
1. BSOD with any SSD
2. Marvell SATA controller BSOD with Crucial (Marvell) SSD
3. Intel 510 (Marvell) BSOD when entering lower power state
Could there really be a bunch of people that just hate sandforce and have nothing good to say about them?
Deleted member 138126
Deleted member 138126
This is true about pretty much anything: rainbows, my little pony, Sandforce...