Three days spent with an OCZ Core V2 SSD (pics inside)
- Thread starter OrphanBoy
- Start date
Ch-rist, to reiterate: I didn't pay for the thing, I didn't choose the thing, it IS fast, and the job that it was meant to do - it does well! I'm not reviewing it in the sense of "hey, here's the top end product check out how how fast I can copy files OMG!!1". Just here's me trying a mainstream drive out - if you're considering buying the same drive please have a read first! Ch-rist! Some people are really eager to defend their purchases!
(good to hear from you btw...got any jobs going? I'm a bit bored here!)
So what, just because it doesn't come top on OcUK's "sort by price" it's not ever going to be considered a valid purchase by people of this company? Not every one can afford to buy the most expensive products on here. Also if a Core V2 is gen 1, what was core V1?
Haha, you'd be surprised...when using their proprietary file system I get awful transfer rates - it yo-yos from 2-75 MB/s but with FAT32 I get rock steady 75! I've logged a complaintDanPhillips said:
(good to hear from you btw...got any jobs going? I'm a bit bored here!)Haha man, actually it was! I think that's what sold me I think! I had imagined that you wouldn't be typing that if your games were loading 20% faster...that's how you'd react if (eg) Windows boots in two seconds!Ninja Please! said:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 14 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 1,110
Samsung 64gb is the way forward. Interested in one myself.
So what, just because it doesn't come top on OcUK's "sort by price" it's not ever going to be considered a valid purchase by people of this company? Not every one can afford to buy the most expensive products on here. Also if a Core V2 is gen 1, what was core V1?
You dont have to buy the most expensive, you just have to know what to buy and what not to buy.
As for the name, I think the original Core V1 got such a bad press, they just tweaked the firmware, rebadged and re-released them using the V2 tag. Naughty, as they still sucked like the V1, but I guess they might sell a few more that way to the uninformed. *cough*
They will probably work fine in your embedded system, but for how long is anyones guess, as lots of writes is bad for SSDs.
So how do the Solid models compare with the Core series? On the OCZ product listing they're lower down than the Core v2s.
Regarding the Samsung drives - I'm seeing mixed reviews. Is opinion divided on these drives? They are cheaper than many of the other models that you can buy...
Regarding the Samsung drives - I'm seeing mixed reviews. Is opinion divided on these drives? They are cheaper than many of the other models that you can buy...
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 8,725
- Location
- UK
Depends on what generation. Current gen = amazing, previous = meh
I would imagine installations from a cd/dvd would still be slow due to the optical drive's transfer rate.
Also I feel if it were not for the early SSD's that were poor and had problems I think many people would have adopted them more. I cant help but feel that some people are cautious of what to buy and what not to buy and are confused by all this talk of vertex' and whatever and generally just want a decent drive without spending a fortune.
IMO if these older drives are so bad they should be banished from respectable hardware suppliers, especially when current generation drives are near the same price, and save the consumer some confusion.
Also I feel if it were not for the early SSD's that were poor and had problems I think many people would have adopted them more. I cant help but feel that some people are cautious of what to buy and what not to buy and are confused by all this talk of vertex' and whatever and generally just want a decent drive without spending a fortune.
IMO if these older drives are so bad they should be banished from respectable hardware suppliers, especially when current generation drives are near the same price, and save the consumer some confusion.
It matters little. The real performance gains you will see are between [Core, Solid, Apex] series and [Agility, Vertex] series. For £150 a very good drive to buy at that capacity would be the Agility or the Samsung.
The 1st gen Samsungs (low transfer rates) are better than [Core, Solid, Apex] for most things because [Core, Solid, Apex] use the jmicron controller, with next to no cache, whereas the Samsungs have always used controllers with cache.
Edit: Yes, the rubbishy SSDs should be lower-priced and with a big warning, but I doubt that would fly too well with manufacturers trying to clear stocks
For the record, OcUK currently only have the Solids, Kingstons, and a solitary Apex in stock that should be fazed out.. (apparently the Kingstons have just 64kb cache, therefore making them unsuitable in my book until proven otherwise).
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 876
- Location
- Indiana, United States.
I'm still getting a cheapo 30gb ssd for my music storage and maybe 1-2 game installs. As far as I see it, if I'm not putting an OS on it there will be very little tweaking or stuttering involved. I'm really not a GB hog as another 120gb's and I could go total ssd. I plan on doing that as a experimental project this fall (when student loan money comes ) I will back all my stuff up on my 500gb wd green drive and then pack it away in anti-static bags and padded boxes until needed again.
) I will back all my stuff up on my 500gb wd green drive and then pack it away in anti-static bags and padded boxes until needed again.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 8,725
- Location
- UK
I'm still getting a cheapo 30gb ssd for my music storage and maybe 1-2 game installs. As far as I see it, if I'm not putting an OS on it there will be very little tweaking or stuttering involved. I'm really not a GB hog as another 120gb's and I could go total ssd. I plan on doing that as a experimental project this fall (when student loan money comes
This doesn't make sense. Games use big, sometimes massive audio and texture files. Reading big files from an SSD isn't great. Likewise music.
So you're paying huge money per GB for hardly any of the benefit of n SSD?
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 876
- Location
- Indiana, United States.
How are reads of 150mb/s not good? I'm not getting a core. I'm getting like a Super talent or something with good read speeds. It's really going to be used for music tho. Like I said to go total ssd means that *GASP* I'm going to use an ssd for *OH NOES* storage.
My OS is lightning fast but pulling files off of my hdd is annoying now.
My OS is lightning fast but pulling files off of my hdd is annoying now.
I feel thoroughly drowned out. The early releases were not terrible, they just required some setting up. Many users refused to do this and consequently complained about their performance. Running four solid series off a raid card with any cache would work just fine.
The current generation works well if you dont bother setting them up, and better if you do. Consequently people love them.
Consumers who are this easily confused should do slightly more research before buying latest generation hardware. There is hardly a scarcity of information available about them.
The current generation works well if you dont bother setting them up, and better if you do. Consequently people love them.
Consumers who are this easily confused should do slightly more research before buying latest generation hardware. There is hardly a scarcity of information available about them.
Uh-huh. In my case I did always hear "vertex this vertex that" which is why we bought OCZ, but couldn't afford that model at that price. Our argument was "mainstreams can't be too much worse than performance, right?"
Cheers, thanks for clearing that up. Man, I didn't realise how much SSDs are still in their infancy. If the previous generation was rubbish and the current generation needs lots of setting up (I'm thinking of that huge OCZ vertex forum + its firmwares) maybe they're not quite ready for the prime-time yet?
I actually think that was me
Although I didn't use the words "life changing" but it's pretty amazing when you have a rig like mine and somthing like an ssd is really able to rock it's boat. Also laptops aren't designed to run like an i7 beast so there is a chance we could have the same drive and I could be more excited about it, being able to really push it. I would think that even decent specs though would still be able to utilize ssd's to their fullest. But seriously look at sites that allow customers to leave their own reviews about their purchase and look for the drive you used. It isn't pretty.
Indeed, my PC is much happier with it's 128gig Falcon boot drive and this makes me very happy too.
This doesn't change the fact that a single generation 1 drive is flawed for normal use let alone for high performance. People think I'll buy one and they expect it to work rather than faff with buying four and the cost of a caching raid card!
For that money you may as well have bought a Vertex or SLC-based drive..
While a decent RAID array with a few HDDs will deal with big files faster than a single fast SSD, that would totally defeat the point of going wholly SSD.
Anyway, Ninja, why are you going full SSD? Your PC had better be passively cooled!
The amount of setting up needed is now actually minimal. The major firmware upgrades are done, and Win7 will automatically change your system settings to suit an SSD when it detects one. You can just plug in and go, and will see very little benefit by doing any additional tweaks. Their price means they may not be ready for prime-time yet, but in terms of installation complexity and setting up, there's no problem.
Hope you can persuade your boss to send it back and buy a different one
The end of the year will see a big boost in SSD sales, with new drives appearing, higher capacity at lower prices and Windows 7, that is when you'll see many people buying one who have previously been wary. Lots of people will buy Windows 7, and they will buy a 64/128GB SSD to put it on.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 876
- Location
- Indiana, United States.
While a decent RAID array with a few HDDs will deal with big files faster than a single fast SSD, that would totally defeat the point of going wholly SSD.
Anyway, Ninja, why are you going full SSD? Your PC had better be passively cooled!
Because I'm really bored. Kidding! No I just know that not too many desktops are complete ssd, wouldn't mind being the first out of all my friends to do so for one, but mainly (I'm prepared for the smack talk here) because I am a music head. If I'm not gaming, I'm listening to music (really loudly
), downloading music, recording music with my Fender Telecaster etc. So when I go to access this music file (around 30gb and growing) even when those folders are indexed it still take time to access that much music through wmp11. Sure when it was only 1gb large, everything is instant (which is what I'm going for here) but the larger my folder gets the more waiting I do. Hdd's are considered a bottleneck even for storage vs. an ssd although most aren't concerned with that. Personally I have spent sooo much on my rig already if going total ssd will make everything fast, as opposed to just what was on my os drive, than it's worth it in my eyes. I got a few reasons, none are valid enough for most people but I don't care. I bet when I'm done I get a few others to do the same should my result be positive.Because I'm really bored. Kidding! No I just know that not too many desktops are complete ssd, wouldn't mind being the first out of all my friends to do so for one, but mainly (I'm prepared for the smack talk here) because I am a music head. If I'm not gaming, I'm listening to music (really loudly
What Windows are you running? Indexing will surely slow down your music drive anyway, it's to do with faster searches not faster music loading into WMP.
Anyway I have upwards of 80gb music (stored on a 2.5" drive, no less) and the only time I notice a slowdown is when the music's first being added to the library. Absolutely fine the rest of the time. Anyway, your funeral