SSD: OCZ Vertex 4 Firmware 1.4

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

Paul Braren

Junior Member
May 22, 2012
2
0
0
tinkertry.com
Bluemars_ said:
Quote from the review:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5719/ocz-vertex-4-review-256gb-512gb

"If OCZ is able to improve its low queue depth sequential read performance through a firmware update in the coming weeks"


Apparently there's a new firmware out now:
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/05/08/ocz-vertex-4-firmware-1-4/1

Does 1.4 fix the sequential read issues at low queue depth?

Cheers,
Bluemars
Click to expand...

According to the release notes, 1.4 came out on 5/17/2012, and it sure seems to address read issues, seen in my informal test results here:
http://tinkertry.com/ocz-vertex-4-firmware-1-4
 
Last edited by a moderator:
G

groberts101

Golden Member
Mar 17, 2011
1,390
0
0
Bluemars_ said:
Does 1.4 fix the sequential read issues at low queue depth?
Click to expand...

yes it does help and has been proven to carry over into "light usage" workloads with improvements in efficeincy as a result. To be honest.. the drive is more of a workhorse than it would be intended for a simple web surfing/word processing machine(low q-depth usage) would require or possibly even see benefit from.

The thing that many don't understand when looking at benchmarks is that many of them will stress a controllers internal algorithms in varying fashion which of course can cause wild deviation of results. It's not just a Sandforce compression based deviation issue and much "tuning" is involved to come up with a drive that is fast with real data loads regardless of what the benchmarks may say.

Then add the fact that many mfgrs are implementing DRAM on the PCB in various ways?.. and it's not hard to imagine that benchmarks can be influenced manipulated even more so.. positively or negatively.
 
J

JSK0703

Junior Member
Sep 18, 2009
18
0
0
Ok guys, I have a quick question about this drive. I have one here waiting to go in my new build. Before I do anything should I update the firmware? Or can I do that after Windows is installed? I've read that updates usually wipe the drive but wasn't sure if this was one of them.
 
Rubycon

Rubycon

Madame President
Aug 10, 2005
17,768
485
126
Can't lie about it erring out though.
That is practically sudden death syndrome.
 
H

HK_sends

Junior Member
May 25, 2012
2
0
0
Should I update the firmware to the release version if I already have the release candidate on it?

Inquiring minds,
-HK sends
 
B

bradley

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2000
3,671
2
81
Rubycon said:
Firmware surely cannot fix low grade flash, however.

This is quite disturbing particularly if this is a trend with this product:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...25nm-Vs-34nm&p=5105033&viewfull=1#post5105033

D:
Click to expand...

Wouldn't be the first time, if OCZ got caught red-handed using a lower binned grade fla$h. That's not to say these latest Indilinx Infused™ SSDs with Ndurance2™ technology aren't full of mystery and exciting surprises for the average user. However, I'm happily sticking with my mundane Intel, Plextor, Crucial and Samsung drives. :)
 
B

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,235
1,611
136
Ok, OCZ seems to use cheap flash and drive just died but the guy says that happened at 390 TB of writes.

I have 1.8 TB of writes on my Intel 80 GB G2 after 2 years. So I guess it's save to the the average consumer will even have less writes and hence it's save to say for the average consumer it doesn't matter at all and enthusiasts will know to stay away from OCZ.
 
N

npaladin-2000

Senior member
May 11, 2012
450
3
76
You're forgetting what really matters. <sarcasm> The drive is OCZ and therefore it's a cheap piece of junk disguised as a high quality drive (you know like the Intel SandForces). It will always cough it up after a year because of cheap flash and badly designed firmware, while specifically testing to find the worst possible flash to put on their PCBs made of jello and chewing gum.</sarcasm>

Some people literally have to invent reasons to justify hatred of OCZ, and slamming a drive with 390 TB of writes and then calling the flash "cheap" for expiring is one of the more idiotic ones. If people don't like OCZ, yeah, fine, whatever, up to them. Maybe they got burned by one of their products, and it's understandable that they'd want to stay away from then on. But the whole 'it's cool to hate OCZ and I want to be cool so I'll hate OCZ too' it just silly and stupid, like most other instances of people trying (and failing) to follow a trend to look cool.
 
B

Burner27

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2001
4,452
50
101
npaladin-2000 said:
You're forgetting what really matters. <sarcasm> The drive is OCZ and therefore it's a cheap piece of junk disguised as a high quality drive (you know like the Intel SandForces). It will always cough it up after a year because of cheap flash and badly designed firmware, while specifically testing to find the worst possible flash to put on their PCBs made of jello and chewing gum.</sarcasm>
Click to expand...


I see you keep things internalized and never express your true feelings. :D
 
Arachnotronic

Arachnotronic

Lifer
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
I use only OCZ Vertex 4 SSDs in client machines these days (with the updated firmware) since they are well priced, fast, and reliable. I'm not sure what all the hatred for OCZ is. In fact, I was originally put off from getting a much, much more cost effective OCZ drive for my own machine from all the internet ramblings, but I learned my lesson.
 
S

sequoia464

Senior member
Feb 12, 2003
870
0
71
Intel17 said:
I use only OCZ Vertex 4 SSDs in client machines these days (with the updated firmware) since they are well priced, fast, and reliable. I'm not sure what all the hatred for OCZ is. In fact, I was originally put off from getting a much, much more cost effective OCZ drive for my own machine from all the internet ramblings, but I learned my lesson.
Click to expand...

If you look at their forums - there seem to be FAR fewer issues with the Vertex4's than there were with the sandforce drives. Hopefully the Marvell controller works out for them.
 
Arachnotronic

Arachnotronic

Lifer
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
sequoia464 said:
If you look at their forums - there seem to be FAR fewer issues with the Vertex4's than there were with the sandforce drives. Hopefully the Marvell controller works out for them.
Click to expand...

It seems to be. Of the 10 or so V4 drives I've installed, none of 'em seem to be causing problems.
 
J

jwilliams4200

Senior member
Apr 10, 2009
532
0
0
sequoia464 said:
If you look at their forums - there seem to be FAR fewer issues with the Vertex4's than there were with the sandforce drives. Hopefully the Marvell controller works out for them.
Click to expand...

True, but preliminary newegg reviews don't look great for the V4, even though it does seem a bit better than the OCZ Sandforce models -- the Vertex 4 has 14.3% below-average reviews on newegg, which is significantly worse than comparable Plextor and Crucial models with a Marvell controller.

Saying that the OCZ Vertex 4 is better than the OCZ Sandforce models is similar to a car salesman saying that THIS car is better than a Yugo. Not exactly a ringing recommendation!

I just went through the newegg reviews for current (and recent) SSD models from Plextor, Samsung, Crucial, Intel, and OCZ. I computed the percentage of below-average (1- or 2-egg) reviews for each manufacturer, and in some cases, for particular models.

Overall percentage of below-average reviews by manufacturer:

3.5% Plextor
6.5% Samsung
7.2% Crucial
10.1% Intel
25.4% OCZ

Here are the percentage of below-average reviews for some specific models, also included the old Intel G2 model which is not included in the overall Intel percentage above (all capacities of a given model grouped together):

3.7% Plextor M3
4.3% Intel G2 X25-M/V
6.5% Samsung 830
7.2% Crucial m4
9.5% Intel 510
10.3% Intel 320
11.0% Intel 520
14.3% OCZ Vertex 4
23.3% OCZ Agility 3
26.2% OCZ Vertex 3
26.7% OCZ Solid 3
27.7% OCZ Vertex 3 Max IOPS
34.5% OCZ Octane
53.3% OCZ Petrol


NOTE: These are the percentages of below-average REVIEWS. You should NOT assume that this is the percentage of buyers who are unhappy, since many buyers do not write reviews. These percentages should only be used for RELATIVE comparisons between manufacturers and models, since such comparisons can be valid with the reasonable assumption that each manufacturer and model has roughly the same chance of an unhappy (or happy) buyer submitting a review.
 
Last edited:
M

MacGyverSG1

Member
May 11, 2012
57
0
0
I would wait for Plextor to release their M4 Series using the new Marvell controller. It could be 6-8 months from now, but should be worth the wait. SATAIII is not getting any faster, so I wouldn't worry about newer controllers from Intel, Samsung, or Sandforce wiping the floor with it. Being the first one out (OCZ) is usually not good.
 
S

sequoia464

Senior member
Feb 12, 2003
870
0
71
MacGyverSG1 said:
I would wait for Plextor to release their M4 Series using the new Marvell controller. It could be 6-8 months from now, but should be worth the wait. SATAIII is not getting any faster, so I wouldn't worry about newer controllers from Intel, Samsung, or Sandforce wiping the floor with it. Being the first one out (OCZ) is usually not good.
Click to expand...

Even the M3's look good.

You would think that Crucial should be releasing a new drive based on that controller fairly soon as well. I do an occasional search for information on a new drive from them but haven't seen anything yet. Anyone seen anything on this??
 
Last edited:
bryanW1995

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Intel17 said:
I use only OCZ Vertex 4 SSDs in client machines these days (with the updated firmware) since they are well priced, fast, and reliable. I'm not sure what all the hatred for OCZ is. In fact, I was originally put off from getting a much, much more cost effective OCZ drive for my own machine from all the internet ramblings, but I learned my lesson.
Click to expand...

How long is your warranty? And, really, how much cheaper is a 120 or 240gb Vertex 4 than a drive with an excellent long-term reliability record like the m4? Based solely upon OCZ's record of releasing beta or worse firmware + their destructive firmware updates, I would hesitate to install any of their ssd's into a client's PC if I was going to have to warranty said PC.
 
bryanW1995

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
MacGyverSG1 said:
I would wait for Plextor to release their M4 Series using the new Marvell controller. It could be 6-8 months from now, but should be worth the wait. SATAIII is not getting any faster, so I wouldn't worry about newer controllers from Intel, Samsung, or Sandforce wiping the floor with it. Being the first one out (OCZ) is usually not good.
Click to expand...

How much better/faster are they going to be than the m3? If you're going from an hdd I would absolutely take the better deal on an m3, if for no other reason than the m3 would likely have any/all bugs already worked out by then. Generally speaking, with ssd's reliability > speed.
 
Hugo Drax

Hugo Drax

Diamond Member
Nov 20, 2011
5,647
47
91
Been happy with my 128GB Vertex4 (1.4) so far. Using it as my SRT cache drive, I was using it for days in enhanced mode with no issues, just switched today to maximized (and got a big boost due to async writes VS synced writes with the DASD)

I wonder if I should switch back to enhanced.
 
bryanW1995

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
I found that stability in my old setup was compromised when I switched to maximized mode, though it was definitely snappier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom