OCZ Vector SSD (256GB) - A Challenger to Marvell & SandForce

Introducing Indilinx Barefoot 3

Earlier this year, we reviewed OCZ’s new Vertex 4 using what seemed to be an all-new Indilinx Everest 2 controller. However, upon further investigation, we found that its Indilinx Everest 2 controller was in fact based on Marvell’s new 88SS9187 controller, which has seen action in other SSDs such as the Plextor M5 Pro. Nevertheless, the Vertex 4 proved to be a competent SSD, recording some of the fastest write speeds we have ever seen.

For now, let’s turn the clock back to 2011. Early that year, OCZ acquired Indilinx, a South Korean firm specializing in SSD controllers and firmware. Prior to SandForce, Indilinx made pretty decent performance controllers in the earlier enthusiast SSD drives that we became fond of. Later in 2011, OCZ also acquired PLX Technology, a company which has experience in designing system-on-chip (SOC) solutions. The two acquisitions, made in quick succession clearly signaled OCZ’s ambitions. They wanted to develop their own controller and their own firmware.

While it is true that the quality of the memory chips plays an important part in determining an SSD's performance, the controller and firmware is just as crucial, if not more so. To that end, OCZ wanted their own controller and firmware for two main reasons: a) to differentiate itself from the competition which typically use either SandForce or Marvell controllers; b) to have as much control as possible over the performance of their drives.

The fruits of their labor are therefore realized in the all-new Vector drive that we have here. The Vector uses an all-new, in-house developed controller called the Indilinx Barefoot 3 and also a fully in-house developed firmware. Thus, the OCZ Vector is one of the most exciting new SSDs in some time.

The new controller consists of a single ARM Cortex processor and an OCZ Aragon co-processor. OCZ doesn’t detail what each of the processor is responsible for handling but OCZ's ex-CEO Ryan Petersen mentioned that it was specially designed to support an SSD-specific RISC instruction set, making it the world's first SSD-optimized processor. This allows most instructions and branches to be executed in a single cycle, thereby improving performance.

The OCZ Vector itself comes in the slimmer 7mm form factor, so it should fit in most notebooks and Ultrabooks with ease. Another thing we noted about the drive is just how hefty and study it felt. Compared to other SSDs, the Vector feels much more solidly-built.

Before we evaluate its performance, here’s a closer look at the drive and the accessories it came with. 

Test Setup

The drives tested on our new storage testbed, has the following system specifications:

• Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1GHz)
• MSI Z68A-GD80 (Intel Z68 chipset)
• 2 x 4GB DDR3-1600 memory
• MSI GeForce 8600 GTS
• Windows 7

The list of SSDs tested are as follows:

• OCZ Vector (256GB)
• OCZ Agility 4 (256GB) (Firmware 1.5.2)
• OCZ Vertex 4 (256GB) (Firmware 1.5)
• Transcend SATA III SSD720 (256GB) (Firmware: 5.0.2)
• Intel SSD 335 Series (240GB)
• Intel SSD 520 Series (240GB)
• Plextor M5 Pro (256GB) (Firmware 1.01)
• Kingston HyperX SSD (240GB)

In this review, the new OCZ Vector will face stiff competition from the likes of Intel, Transcend and Plextor, who make some of the quickest SandForce and Marvell SSDs around. We will also be looking closely at how it performs against its own kind, the Vertex 4 - OCZ’s previous flagship. An OCZ Agility 4 was also added to the mix to give us an overview of OCZ’s current lineup of consumer-grade SSDs.

The list of benchmarks used are as follows:

• AS-SSD benchmark 1.6.4
• HD Tune Pro 4.6
• CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1
• PCMark 7
• PCMark Vantage
• Iometer (version 2006.07.27) 

AS SSD Results

AS SSD is a benchmark that uses non-compressible and completely random data. What this means is that the drives using the SF-2281 controller cannot compress the data first, which takes away one of the strong advantages of this controller. Therefore this is a useful benchmark because drives that use the SF-2281 don't gain an upper hand.

OCZ has not revealed specifics about how their new controller works, but the results here are encouraging. Sequential read speed was amongst the highest while sequential write speeds broke records, managing 484.69MB/s, 6% faster than the previous highest record, which, incidentally, was achieved by the OCZ Vertex 4.

Elsewhere, the Vector claimed top honors in the 4k, 64 threads workloads, and was also stunning in the simulated copy work loads too. If this is any indication of the Vector’s overall performance, OCZ could have a winner in their hands.

 

CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 Results

CrystalDiskMark is an easy-to-run and quick utility to use to gauge a drive’s performance. It measures sequential read and write performance and random read and write speeds of random 4KB, 4KB (queue depth 32) and 512KB data.

Overall performance on CrystalDiskMark was pretty impressive. Sequential read and write speeds were amongst the best, but its performance took a slight dip in the 512k and 4k work loads. However, on the 4k, 32-process queue depth work load, which is arguably the most accurate representation of heavy everyday usage, the OCZ Vector stunned us with its blazing read performance - 367.7MB/s, a whopping 34% faster than the second-placed Plextor M5 Pro.

HD Tune Pro 4.6 Results

After the impressive performance on AS SSD and CrystalDiskMark, we were hoping for a similar showing on HD Tune Pro 4.6, but we were left disappointed. Read performance was significantly below par, something that seems to be the trend with OCZ drives as the Vector, along with the Vertex, recorded much slower read speeds than the competition. Write speeds were about as quick as the current crop of high-end SSDs.

In the past, OCZ drives had problems with the random read and write tests and the Vector is not different. Random read performance was abysmal, recording a mere 2 IOPS. However, random write performance was much better, with the Vector managing 903 IOPS - only the Intel SSD 520 Series was faster. 

Futuremark PCMark 7 Results

PCMark 7 is the latest benchmarking suite from FutureMark that evaluates the performance of Windows 7 machines. It tests a wide range workloads and aspects of the system ranging from computation, image and video manipulation and storage. We’ll be looking solely at the storage test here.  

The Vector managed 4550 PCMarks, a 15% improvement over the Vertex 4, but some ways off when compared to the Marvell-powered Plextor M5 Pro. The SandForce-powered Transcend, Intel and Kingston drives have a clear advantage here as they were the only drives to record more than 5000 PCMarks.

Futuremark PCMark Vantage Results

PCMark Vantage might have been around for quite some time, but it is still a fairly accurate representation of how the drives might be used in real-world scenarios. We are focusing on the hard drive test suite which comprises of tasks such as loading of applications to media creation. 

Previously, most of the Marvell drives have a problem completing the full PCMark Vantage test suite, and strangely, the OCZ Vector is no different. However, looking at the individual breakdown, it is clear that even if it did, it won’t have scored well as it’ performance on most of the individual work loads was pretty disappointing. 

Iometer Results (Part 1)

Lastly, we put the drives through the rigorous grind of Iometer, with different workloads and I/O queue depths. We have chosen to show results from a queue depth of 1 to 5 as this better represents the workloads a typical consumer might face.

Generally, the OCZ Vector put in a very decent showing on Iometer. 64k streaming reads and writes IOPS were amongst the highest. Performance on the File workload was unusually lackluster, but the Vector did pick up when it came to the Web workload as it was considerably faster the Vertex 4, and also the other SandForce drives, and was almost a match for the Plextor M5 Pro.

Iometer Results (Part 2)

Finally, we look at the I/O response times for the workloads reported on the previous page. Thanks to its high IOPS, the OCZ Vector consequently also recorded very low response times. It was consistently recorded one of, if not the lowest response times for all but the File workload.

Move Over, Here Comes The Vector

In the world of haute horology, many watchmakers are striving to become what is known as a manufacture. A manufacture refers to a watchmaker that produces most, if not all of its components in-house. By doing so, they have absolute control over the quality of the parts and thus can make better timepieces.

We see parallels of this in OCZ’s recent acquisition and in its development of their new Indilinx Barefoot 3 controller. With the new controller and firmware, OCZ has now up its game and have greater control over its SSD products. All that is left now is for them to produce their own NAND memory chips - right now they source their memory from IMFT.

In terms of performance, the OCZ Vector is easily one of the fastest drives in the market now. Performance on AS SSD and CrystalDiskMark was very impressive, and it was pretty good on Iometer too. On the flip side however, it was pretty average on PCMark 7 and HD Tune Pro 4.6, and had some problems coping with PCMark Vantage. Still, that was only one problematic benchmark and we would rate the Vector is one of the quickest drives in the market right now.

Price-wise, the 256GB variant of the Vector that we have tested is available locally for around S$399. This means it commands a considerable premium over the Vertex 4 (S$313), and also other drives such as the Intel SSD 520 Series (S$313), Plextor M5 Pro (S$290), Transcend SSD720 (S$335). It is also one of the priciest SSDs in the market right now.

Is it worth it though? It may be too early to tell. For sure, the Vector is blazing quick in almost most instances, but Intel's SSD 520 series remains to be the most consistently performing high performance drive across the board. Furthermore, it's still early days yet for the OCZ Vector SSD and it is too early to tell if the controller and firmware are going to perform reliably. Remember, early SandForce drives were bugged by a BSOD issue?

However, as tested right here, we are impressed with the OCZ Vector. The Indilinx Barefoot 3 controller looks to be a viable alternative to the SandForce SF-2281 and Marvell 88SS9187 controllers and we wonder if OCZ would capitalize on it by licensing to other SSD makers.

In closing, if you are dissatisfied with the current crop of SandForce and Marvell SSDs, the OCZ Vector is definitely worth checking out if you want to be on the cutting edge of technology. Unfortunately, such products usually carry a premium which the OCZ Vector exhibits as well.

Our articles may contain affiliate links. If you buy through these links, we may earn a small commission.