OCZ Vertex "Mac Edition"

[sjwaste]

Does anyone know what the difference is between the regular (PC?) and Mac Edition, other than a massive price gouge?
See Here

I mean, that's a $50 difference. I was under the impression that HD's didn't necessarily have to support anything in particular to be Mac compatible, so long as they were SATA compliant.

What gives? Just a gouge? $50 to preformat with HFS+?

 

[aphex]

I would assume the preformat HFS+ as well, but i'm not 100% sure.

 

[MagicConch]

I looked this up awhile ago and this is what I found.

Originally posted by: Theo Valich
OCZ had to slow down its SSDs because Mac OSX can't handle the speed
4/9/2009 by: Theo Valich - Get more from this author


Recently, OCZ introduced its line-up of products for Apple platform, as we covered it in our news story. What was weird was the fact that the Vertex Mac Edition SSDs come with different speeds compared to its PC version. If you compare the PC Version of Vertex SSD to a Mac-certified one, you will see that unfortunately, Mac SSDs endured a spec-down by 10MB/s, both in the areas of read and write.
I am a PC - I can handle speed. I am a Mac - I am cute and cuddly, but fast things break me.
I am a PC - I can handle speed. I am a Mac - I am cute and cuddly, but fast hard drives can break my soft soul.

Now, this is quite unusual, and we decided to ask OCZ directly. We received an unexpected answer from Mr. Tobias Brinkmann, OCZ's Director of Marketing EMEA: "The Mac version has different read and write specs due to Mac OS limitations. The product was tested by Apple's ADC but works on other systems as well."

You might be wondering, "what limitations?"... we conducted some research and discovered a reason. Folks, Mac OS X has an issue with couple of things, and this was bound to happen - the Apple-written SATA controller driver can get saturated by a single SSD drive on ocassion, but two will definitely saturate the bus. The underlying issue is the fact that Mac OS X comes with journaling filesystem, a feature not present on Windows-based file systems.

Regardless of this, OCZ had to modify the specifications their Vertex drive in oder to qualify/certify the part for usage on Macs. If you use a latest-gen, SATA 2.0-spec busting SSD and the drive manufacturer didn't qualify the parts, you might experience some technical difficulties over the course of time - nothing radical, though. We thank Tuan for this clarification.

The only way to avoid this is by buying an external RAID controller that comes with its own drivers, independent of the built-in SATA drivers. Now, brace for impact - upcoming Mac OSX Snow Leopard WILL NOT fix this one in its initial release, we will have to wait for an Apple Update, if it ever comes out. The issue is present in all Mac OS X releases with SATA drive support, so you lose 10MB/s if you use a very fast SSD drive.

Bear in mind that OCZ's Mac drives currently are the fastest certified SSDs you can get for your Mac, so they had to be slowed down by 10MB/s in order to avoid saturation on the software side.

© 2009 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.

 

[Zaap]

I can understand the need for a speed decrease, as outlined in that article, but not a $50 price gouge.

I am a PC - I know what stuff costs and I want a fair price. I am a Mac - I pay more for slower stuff as long as it has a cute Mac logo on it.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: MagicConch
I looked this up awhile ago and this is what I found.

Originally posted by: Theo Valich
OCZ had to slow down its SSDs because Mac OSX can't handle the speed
4/9/2009 by: Theo Valich - Get more from this author


Recently, OCZ introduced its line-up of products for Apple platform, as we covered it in our news story. What was weird was the fact that the Vertex Mac Edition SSDs come with different speeds compared to its PC version. If you compare the PC Version of Vertex SSD to a Mac-certified one, you will see that unfortunately, Mac SSDs endured a spec-down by 10MB/s, both in the areas of read and write.
I am a PC - I can handle speed. I am a Mac - I am cute and cuddly, but fast things break me.
I am a PC - I can handle speed. I am a Mac - I am cute and cuddly, but fast hard drives can break my soft soul.

Now, this is quite unusual, and we decided to ask OCZ directly. We received an unexpected answer from Mr. Tobias Brinkmann, OCZ's Director of Marketing EMEA: "The Mac version has different read and write specs due to Mac OS limitations. The product was tested by Apple's ADC but works on other systems as well."

You might be wondering, "what limitations?"... we conducted some research and discovered a reason. Folks, Mac OS X has an issue with couple of things, and this was bound to happen - the Apple-written SATA controller driver can get saturated by a single SSD drive on ocassion, but two will definitely saturate the bus. The underlying issue is the fact that Mac OS X comes with journaling filesystem, a feature not present on Windows-based file systems.

Regardless of this, OCZ had to modify the specifications their Vertex drive in oder to qualify/certify the part for usage on Macs. If you use a latest-gen, SATA 2.0-spec busting SSD and the drive manufacturer didn't qualify the parts, you might experience some technical difficulties over the course of time - nothing radical, though. We thank Tuan for this clarification.

The only way to avoid this is by buying an external RAID controller that comes with its own drivers, independent of the built-in SATA drivers. Now, brace for impact - upcoming Mac OSX Snow Leopard WILL NOT fix this one in its initial release, we will have to wait for an Apple Update, if it ever comes out. The issue is present in all Mac OS X releases with SATA drive support, so you lose 10MB/s if you use a very fast SSD drive.

Bear in mind that OCZ's Mac drives currently are the fastest certified SSDs you can get for your Mac, so they had to be slowed down by 10MB/s in order to avoid saturation on the software side.

© 2009 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.

That blurb is not only technically incorrect, but it makes no sense. NTFS is a jounaling file system, and it has been for quite some time (I want to say NT4, but it may be even earlier). Given that this is the only technical detail, the rest of the article is bunk.

 

[sourceninja]

But if there wasn't a technical reason, why would OCZ advertise they are intentionally reducing the speed of their product as a feature if they didn't need to? I could buy it has something to do with HFS+ file system.

 

[sjwaste]

So would the regular (I'm not going to say PC version) of the drive work in a Macbook? I'm not yet ready to spend the money to find out, but I suppose I could slap it in my PC as a boot/app drive if it doesn't.

 

[KeithP]

Couldn't the drive just be formatted with Journaling turned off? It is easy to do with Disk Utility. The explanation doesn't make sense to me. I can certainly believe OCZ's explanation that there is some issue with OS X, but I think the "research" they conducted is simply wrong.

-KeithP

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: KeithP
Couldn't the drive just be formatted with Journaling turned off? It is easy to do with Disk Utility. The explanation doesn't make sense to me. I can certainly believe OCZ's explanation that there is some issue with OS X, but I think the "research" they conducted is simply wrong.

-KeithP

Yeah, journaling is an optional feature. You can turn it off at any time. However the utter incompetence of the article leaves me doubting that journaling is the issue.

 

[sourceninja]

Actually, thinking about it, WHY would you use a journaling file system on a SSD? They don't have write buffers do they? I mean I have a mini 9 with a flash disk and multiple sites recommend not using ext3, but using ext2.

 

[mmntech]

Originally posted by: sjwaste
So would the regular (I'm not going to say PC version) of the drive work in a Macbook? I'm not yet ready to spend the money to find out, but I suppose I could slap it in my PC as a boot/app drive if it doesn't.

Yes. I don't see why it wouldn't. The article sounds like FUD from a PC fanboy to me. The biggest red flag is no benchmarks provided. It would be interesting if we could take a brand new Macbook with fresh installs of Leopard and Vista and compare the two using this drive.

Any intelligent Apple user knows never to buy special "For Mac" upgrades because they do gouge you. It's not like in the past when Macs used different buses than PCs did. Even knowing this, sometimes I still have jaw dropping moments.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820233082

 

[TheStu]

I think it would make your jaw drop more effective if you also had linked to the non-Mac specific version

Corsair 4GB DDR3-SODIMM

Just over a $100 difference in price. I mean, that is the difference between $700 and $950 to put 8GB RAM into your MacBook/Pro... that is quite the jump when you look at it that way.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: sourceninja
Actually, thinking about it, WHY would you use a journaling file system on a SSD? They don't have write buffers do they? I mean I have a mini 9 with a flash disk and multiple sites recommend not using ext3, but using ext2.

Journaling is still necessary on a SSD to ensure consistency. SSDs can be made inconsistent by a power failure just like anything else.

 

[sjwaste]

Originally posted by: mmntech

Originally posted by: sjwaste
So would the regular (I'm not going to say PC version) of the drive work in a Macbook? I'm not yet ready to spend the money to find out, but I suppose I could slap it in my PC as a boot/app drive if it doesn't.

Yes. I don't see why it wouldn't. The article sounds like FUD from a PC fanboy to me. The biggest red flag is no benchmarks provided. It would be interesting if we could take a brand new Macbook with fresh installs of Leopard and Vista and compare the two using this drive.

Any intelligent Apple user knows never to buy special "For Mac" upgrades because they do gouge you. It's not like in the past when Macs used different buses than PCs did. Even knowing this, sometimes I still have jaw dropping moments.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820233082

Considering the Mac and its present and history as being the "exception" to what everyone else is using, I see my question as perfectly legitimate.

Just because it's electrically and protocol-compatible, there's still the basis to question whether there is some firmware issue in the drive that affects performance on a Mac differently than on a PC. For one, filesystems are different. Second, it's not far-fetched to realize that Windows accesses the hard drive in different patterns than OSX. Last, SSDs operate differently than mechanical HDs, including all of the issues that we've seen with them in the past.

So I don't think it's up to the "intelligent Mac user" to just assume it'll work. The question, anyway, was whether there was some difference in the product worth buying.

 

[mmntech]

Originally posted by: TheStu
I think it would make your jaw drop more effective if you also had linked to the non-Mac specific version

Corsair 4GB DDR3-SODIMM

Just over a $100 difference in price. I mean, that is the difference between $700 and $950 to put 8GB RAM into your MacBook/Pro... that is quite the jump when you look at it that way.

No kidding. I'd just like someone who works for these companies to explain to me what the difference is between "Mac compatible" hardware and the PC stuff. It's not as if Apple is using special parts themselves.

 

[MagicConch]

I seriously doubt they lowered the speeds for absolutely no reason . I would not be surprised if the author was completely wrong about his extrapolation, but assuming from that fallacy they both work w/o any potential issues despite OCZ's direct quote seems odd to me. I assume the next step in this train of thought is that we wait for one random person from the internet to say his has no problems to and once and for all confirm this is a non-issue.

 

[Ciber]

I have two 120GB Gskill Falcon's(Basically a Vertex) and they are working just fine in two Mac mini's. I think this is just marketing BS.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: MagicConch
The issue is present in all Mac OS X releases with SATA drive support, so you lose 10MB/s if you use a very fast SSD drive.

Bear in mind that OCZ's Mac drives currently are the fastest certified SSDs you can get for your Mac, so they had to be slowed down by 10MB/s in order to avoid saturation on the software side.

Okay so...if I understand this correctly:

1. The PC Vertex has issues with Macs, which makes you lose 10MB/s
2. The Mac Vertex has special firmware, which slows the SSD down by 10MB/s to avoid the glitch

So...the end result is the same...you lose 10MB/s either way you go? And you're paying $50 for OCZ to install firmware that "allows" you to lose 10MB/s?

:laugh:

 

[MagicConch]

Originally posted by: Kaido

Originally posted by: MagicConch
The issue is present in all Mac OS X releases with SATA drive support, so you lose 10MB/s if you use a very fast SSD drive.

Bear in mind that OCZ's Mac drives currently are the fastest certified SSDs you can get for your Mac, so they had to be slowed down by 10MB/s in order to avoid saturation on the software side.

Okay so...if I understand this correctly:

1. The PC Vertex has issues with Macs, which makes you lose 10MB/s
2. The Mac Vertex has special firmware, which slows the SSD down by 10MB/s to avoid the glitch

So...the end result is the same...you lose 10MB/s either way you go? And you're paying $50 for OCZ to install firmware that "allows" you to lose 10MB/s?

:laugh:

No matter how much you play with your quoting in your post, I didn't write that. But I'll play along w/ the "shoot the messenger" thing

The issue for you seems to be $50, my concern in this case would be data corruption and dealing with hassles. If the specs were identical I probably would chalk it up to bs marketing, but since they are different I probably would buy the Mac version since $50 is not a huge deal to me vs. hardware problems down the line or having to work to get this thing functioning, especially given posts like this on newegg from 3 days ago :

"If you like taking apart macbook pros and having to flash firmware on hard drives on windows, then this is the drive for you. The drive causes massive issues due to not knowing what to do when you put your mac to sleep. There are over 30 pages of work-around attempts at the manufacturer webset, none of which have been successful. I have been using Ridata SSD drives for over 5 months with zero issues. The OCZ drive did not work for a single day. Buyer BEWARE!!"

w/ the following msg from the manufacturer:

"Manufacturer Response:Hello, we are sorry that you have had difficulties. We can work with you on getting your system working as it should. Please visit the link below and create a support ticket to start the process. On another note, OCZ has released a line of Mac series Vertex drives that will work just fine for Mac applications. The Mac drives have been fully tested and approved by Apple. Mac series drives are available here at Newegg."

Is this where I stick this symbol to also seem witty and smart? -> :laugh:

 

[HodyOne]

If macs can't handle OCZ speed, then how does Intel do it? Aren't their SSDs faster than OCZ's drives and I'm not aware of an Intel "Mac Edition" SSD?

 

[spincontrol]

Originally posted by: mmntech
The article sounds like FUD from a PC fanboy to me. [..]
Any intelligent Apple user knows never to buy special "For Mac" upgrades

I ordered a 2GHz Mac Mini and had the internl HDD swapped with a 60GB OCZ Vortex, normal non-mac-special 250MB/s read version (write speed on those is lower than on the bigger models).

Installed OS by myself, updated it online... as the time of writing the OS/X hangs again, spinning wheel of rainbow madness.... reboots so far without any apparent extra errors due to journalling fs, which is checked as being correct.

I checked the RAM as far as I could using rember.. no errors. Spin Control doesn't manage to display the occuring error once it occurs. I'm not a total dumbass even though this is my first Mac ever. Maybe it's my last, too. What lousy way of not being forward-compatible with third party vendor hardware. I mean ... harddisks ... gtfo!

I guess I'm going to have the HDD replaced again.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: MagicConch

Originally posted by: Kaido

Originally posted by: MagicConch
The issue is present in all Mac OS X releases with SATA drive support, so you lose 10MB/s if you use a very fast SSD drive.

Bear in mind that OCZ's Mac drives currently are the fastest certified SSDs you can get for your Mac, so they had to be slowed down by 10MB/s in order to avoid saturation on the software side.

Okay so...if I understand this correctly:

1. The PC Vertex has issues with Macs, which makes you lose 10MB/s
2. The Mac Vertex has special firmware, which slows the SSD down by 10MB/s to avoid the glitch

So...the end result is the same...you lose 10MB/s either way you go? And you're paying $50 for OCZ to install firmware that "allows" you to lose 10MB/s?

:laugh:

No matter how much you play with your quoting in your post, I didn't write that. But I'll play along w/ the "shoot the messenger" thing

No, no, please don't be offended, I'm not playing 'shoot the messenger', I promise! :laugh: I'm making fun of OCZ's statement - they say that attaching it to a Mac makes the performance 10 MB/s slower, so instead they released a special "Mac" firmware that makes it 10 MB/s slower...that kind of sounds like they didn't really do anything but add $50 to the price lol. And according to one Newegg review, the firmware version is the same for the Mac version as it is for the PC version:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820227434

So to me, it's like saying your Ford truck goes 10mph slower off road, so instead Ford slaps an "off-road" sticker on it, says in the specs that it goes 10mph slower off-road, and charges and extra $1,000 for it. lol.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: spincontrol

Originally posted by: mmntech
The article sounds like FUD from a PC fanboy to me. [..]
Any intelligent Apple user knows never to buy special "For Mac" upgrades

I ordered a 2GHz Mac Mini and had the internl HDD swapped with a 60GB OCZ Vortex, normal non-mac-special 250MB/s read version (write speed on those is lower than on the bigger models).

Installed OS by myself, updated it online... as the time of writing the OS/X hangs again, spinning wheel of rainbow madness.... reboots so far without any apparent extra errors due to journalling fs, which is checked as being correct.

I checked the RAM as far as I could using rember.. no errors. Spin Control doesn't manage to display the occuring error once it occurs. I'm not a total dummy even though this is my first Mac ever. Maybe it's my last, too. What lousy way of not being forward-compatible with third party vendor hardware. I mean ... harddisks ... gtfo!

I guess I'm going to have the HDD replaced again.

Have you tried updating the firmware on the SSD? Barefeats did some extensive testing on both the PC & Mac version and said they perform exactly the same on their Mac Pros:

http://www.barefeats.com/hard118.html

And I quote:

IS THE APPLE CERTIFIED MAC EDITION WORTH THE EXTRA $$$?
No. We tested both the Mac Edition (OCZSSD2-1VTXA120G) and non-Mac Edition (OCZSSD2-1VTX120G) of the OCZ Vertex 120G. We measured the same performance in all tests. It makes no sense to us to pay $100 more for the Apple logo.

Also did you zap the PRAM and reset the PMU after the upgrade?

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1379

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2183

Give those two things a try because sometimes the Mini can keep power settings from your previous setup and screw things up. iirc, I had some weird bugs when I upgraded the CPU in my old Mini until I did that.

 

[Plester]

MAC tax in action, it's borderline unethical.