OCZ'z Vertex Pro 3 Demo: World's First SandForce SF-2000

[Dave76]

A few months ago SandForce announced its second generation SSD controller: the SF-2000 series. The specs SandForce released at the time were almost too good to be true.

SandForce is promising a single enterprise level drive that can deliver 500MB/s sequential reads and writes (for highly compressible data), and up to 60K IOPS for 4KB random reads and writes. That’s not an evolutionary improvement, that’s more than a doubling of what most of the competition can do today. Even compared to existing SandForce drives it’s a huge increase in performance. But as I’ve heard many times before, anyone can put out a promising PDF.

Today at CES, OCZ previewed its first SF-2000 based drives: the Vertex 3 Pro and Vertex 3 EX. Both are based on SandForce’s SF-2582 controller, the highest end offering in the SF-2000 family. The drives won’t see the light of day for months (sometime in Q2) and what OCZ is showing today is very, *very* early silicon and hardware. The drives are using 32nm Toshiba toggle-mode NAND (effectively DDR NAND), however OCZ will go to market with 25nm Intel NAND when the drive is ready.

More....and OCZ new Z-Drive R3 with peak reads/writes of 1GB/s

 

[Beginning]

More interesting info for the year 2011.. Thanks for the post!

 

[zrtom]

Awesome. Thanks for the post.
.... and here I'm just beginning to migrate from Vertex to Vertex 2...
Tom

 

[whs]

Cool, but 75K IOPS is not a lot. This thing does 1 Million IOPS

 

[Catswold]

Cool, but 75K IOPS is not a lot. This thing does 1 Million IOPS

If only. When does that next "Powerball" start?

 

[smarteyeball]

I personally got tired of anecdotal evidence and bought a Vertex 2 to dip my oars into the SSD landscape.


For the price vs performance (and satisfied curiosity) - all I can say is bring it on with these future generations.

As end user consumers - we are heading in the right direction.

 

[Dave76]

They are nice aren't they

Don't think I'll be able to go back to HDD for my OS.

 

[whs]

The one thing to consider though is that the read/write speeds do little for you if you use the SSD for the OS only. And for Data, an OCZ Revo drive may be the better solution. It would be more interesting for the OS, if the access times were improved.

 

[toughbook]

What is the big hoopla about not having a SSD as your OS drive? Laptop owners usually do not have the option to have several drive's.
I have been a SSD user since the Intel 32GB G1 SLC SSD came out. Right now I am using a Corsair F-series 120GB with the Sandforce-1200 in it. I am sure there are faster drives out there, but I actually do not thnk I will be able to tell a difference. I have 26 second boot times with some decent sized programs loading at boot. I hit my a program and it is eye blinking quick. How much quicker do we need, or what is the so called bad thing using a SSD as a boot drive?

 

[smarteyeball]

How much quicker do we need,

So quick, the app is open before we even know we want it open

or what is the so called bad thing using a SSD as a boot drive?

? SSD's are generally recommended as boot drives :huh:

 

[whs]

Depending on the amount of your data, SSDs are very suitable for laptops too. One of my wife's laptops has an 80GB Intel - she keeps all her data on USB sticks anyhow. I have one laptop with a 90GB OCZ Vertex2. That laptop has 2 USB3 ports and one eSata. So should I run out of space, I attach an external.

For the wife's laptop that was actually an emergency operation. The thing ran so hot that you could fry eggs on it. Since I installed the Intel, the heat is down to normal - another advantage of SSDs.

 

[sygnus21]

I personally got tired of anecdotal evidence and bought a Vertex 2 to dip my oars into the SSD landscape.


For the price vs performance (and satisfied curiosity) - all I can say is bring it on with these future generations.

As end user consumers - we are heading in the right direction.

LOL I just got one just before Christmas. Could say it was a Christmas gift to me. Anyway I agree, they are nice.

Now if we could only get those 250gig drives under $400 dollars it'd be sweet!

 

[Dave76]

What is the big hoopla about not having a SSD as your OS drive? Laptop owners usually do not have the option to have several drive's.
I have been a SSD user since the Intel 32GB G1 SLC SSD came out. Right now I am using a Corsair F-series 120GB with the Sandforce-1200 in it....
How much quicker do we need, or what is the so called bad thing using a SSD as a boot drive?

Not sure what angle you're coming from

They are great as a boot drive, don't think I would get one for my desktop data storage.

I would for a laptop but, luckily mine has two drive bays.
Been patiently waiting :sarc: for the Gen3s to come out, then this little one I have now will go to my laptop

 

[smarteyeball]

Anyway I agree, they are nice.

yeah, so far I'm not disappointed. I was initially underwhelmed, but I soon got over it.

(especially since it made it past the D.O.A, died after Windows install or the died after 30 days ) which were the most commonly reported failure periods for this drive. 3 months and still kicking (touch wood )

Now if we could only get those 250gig drives under $400 dollars it'd be sweet!

The price drop vs capacity is still slowly happening - but it's happening

One day we'll look back at the small capacity with the high price tags and laugh that we did it. Just as we laugh that we paid mega bucks for small capacity HDD's back in the day.

Before we know it, an affordable all SSD ( high capacity storage as well ) system will be common place. by the time that happens, we'll be complaining about other system bottlenecks instead


(sooner rather than later would be nice though )

 

[sygnus21]

One day we'll look back at the small capacity with the high price tags and laugh that we did it. Just as we laugh that we paid mega bucks for small capacity HDD's back in the day.

I keep a running spreadsheet of all my electronics, and computer parts that I've ever bought, and looking at my 4.3 gig Western Digital hard drive I bought in 1998, I paid $221 dollars (US) for it :shock:

Contrast that with my 1TB Western Digital SATA 6Gig for $109 dollars. Yeah, it'd be nice to see SSD drives drop like this

 

[smarteyeball]

I intentionally don't count how much I have spent - I don't want to know

My storage box died yesterday and I'm trying to replace parts for under $100. But the lure to go overkill - it's killing me

 

[pparks1]

I paid $359 for a 730MB Western Digital Hard drive back in 1994/5 I believe. Also spent just over $200 for a 16 MEGABYTE SIMM module for my 486 and bumped it from 4 MEGABYTES to 20 MEGABYTES.

 

[whs]

Regarding SSD price drops_

-- Two years ago I paid $260 for an OCZ Vertex 60GB
-- Two months ago I paid $145 for an OCZ Vertex2 90GB

Both were from Newegg. The price drop is happening.

 

[sygnus21]

Regarding SSD price drops_

-- Two years ago I paid $260 for an OCZ Vertex 60GB
-- Two months ago I paid $145 for an OCZ Vertex2 90GB

Both were from Newegg. The price drop is happening.

Keep dropping boys, keep dropping

Myabe I can get one of these new gen 250gigers for under $400 by the end of the year

 

[whs]

sygnus, just curious. Why would you need such a big SSD. Is it for games?