Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

ocz vertex 4


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#25 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15070 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 09 April 2012 - 07:57 AM

Your conjecture isn't fact. The Marvell chipset used isn't intended to be ultra high performance and that is why it is not integrated as such.

We all like the underdog to win but this is a fight with only one dog. :P

Posted Image

Booyah.


#26 FoxUlisse

FoxUlisse

    New Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 April 2012 - 11:19 AM

Hi, tomorrow I will buy a SSD for my PC. It has an Intel Core i7 980X 3.33Ghz with Sabertooth x58. I am very undecided between Vertex 4 and Crucial M4. I'd like to buy Vertex 4 but I'm afraid my motherboard cannot overwork Vertex 4. Somebody tell me my motherboard cannot overwork Vertex 4 and somebody tell me it can. I have to be sure 100%.
I will use Intel ports and these are the specifications:
Yes Vertex 4 or not?
Thanks a lot!

Attached Thumbnails

  • Sabertooth x58 screen.jpg

Edited by FoxUlisse, 22 April 2012 - 01:11 PM.


#27 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15070 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 22 April 2012 - 11:20 AM

Anyone who says an SSD will "overwork" a SATA port or vice versa is someone you shouldn't listen to for advice about computers.

Posted Image

Booyah.


#28 Marvell Chip

Marvell Chip

    New Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hvar,Croatia

Posted 22 April 2012 - 12:47 PM

Yes i will definitely like to see my SSD to "OVERWORK" my sata2.I will take ocz vertex 4 and dont be afraid to plug it into Marvell port (its 6 port).Did you see my results,you will never get this with sata2.Just a new Marvell driver and pci-e clock on 109.

Edited by Marvell Chip, 22 April 2012 - 12:58 PM.

Intel i7 930 - X58A-UD3R - Patriot Viper 3x2Gb - Crucial M4 128Gb - Corsair HX850 - ATI 5770 - Windows 7 64 bit

#29 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15070 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 22 April 2012 - 01:11 PM

Yes i will definitely like to see my SSD to "OVERWORK" my sata2.I will take ocz vertex 4 and dont be afraid to plug it into Marvell port (its 6 port).Did you see my results,you will never get this with sata2.Just a new Marvell driver and pci-e clock on 109.

He'll get higher performance using the Intel ports. The sustained read/write speeds are nowhere near as important as the 4K random read/write speeds.

Posted Image

Booyah.


#30 Tjj226_Angel

Tjj226_Angel

    Total Nerd

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fredericksburg, VA

Posted 22 April 2012 - 06:27 PM

Hi, tomorrow I will buy a SSD for my PC. It has an Intel Core i7 980X 3.33Ghz with Sabertooth x58. I am very undecided between Vertex 4 and Crucial M4. I'd like to buy Vertex 4 but I'm afraid my motherboard cannot overwork Vertex 4. Somebody tell me my motherboard cannot overwork Vertex 4 and somebody tell me it can. I have to be sure 100%.
I will use Intel ports and these are the specifications:
Yes Vertex 4 or not?
Thanks a lot!



By overwork I think you mean bottlenecked. And yes, with an X58 board, there is a tremendous bottle neck on the Sata III ports. The best choice would be the vertex 4. Curcial has a good controller, but it is outdated compared to the vertex 4. Not to mention that the vertex 4's performance will grow with new firmwares and updates, where as the crucial M4 has run dry of updates. Personally my suggestion would be to raid some smaller SSDs together, but since I know Waco will beat me with a stick if I say that, the vertex 4 is definitely the best choice.

#31 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15070 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 22 April 2012 - 07:06 PM

Personally my suggestion would be to raid some smaller SSDs together, but since I know Waco will beat me with a stick if I say that, the vertex 4 is definitely the best choice.

You're right. :lol:

RAID 0 with SSDs is a complete pain in the butt. I only did it for the increased space - the increased performance isn't really worth the hassle.


Anyway - the Vertex 4 is the best choice regardless. It'll absolutely fly on the SATA 2 Intel ports (the sustained speeds will suffer...but the random speeds are still great!).

Posted Image

Booyah.


#32 Tjj226_Angel

Tjj226_Angel

    Total Nerd

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fredericksburg, VA

Posted 22 April 2012 - 07:26 PM

You're right. :lol:

RAID 0 with SSDs is a complete pain in the butt. I only did it for the increased space - the increased performance isn't really worth the hassle.


Anyway - the Vertex 4 is the best choice regardless. It'll absolutely fly on the SATA 2 Intel ports (the sustained speeds will suffer...but the random speeds are still great!).


Speaking of which waco, once I got my raid setup to work, I actually have noticed a great performance increase. It shaved 4 seconds off my boot time (which to me is nice) and I also notice a huge difference in load time for games. Nor have I had any real trouble with the raid after getting past my weird install issues. So far I am much happier with raid 0 than I was with a stand alone drive. Maybe your experience was a fluke? Maybe your onboard raid controller was a crappy one? I would be interested to see if your thoughts would change if you tried to run a new raid 0 setup on your newly repaired i7 platform?

#33 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15070 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 22 April 2012 - 07:37 PM

I ran my Vertex 3s in RAID 0 with my i7. :P

The boot times on my board are terrible regardless...between the RAID controller initialization and the LOOOOOONG POST, there's no point in trying to shave time off of boots. I see literally zero difference between what I'm running now (an old Seagate 750 GB drive with my old first-generation Indilinx SSD using Intel SRT) and my RAID 0 array.

Sure, the RAID 0 array was amazingly fast in benchmarks, but in real world use I honestly can't tell the difference between it and my hybrid setup. It's not that the RAID array wasn't fast...it's just that it was no faster than my older RAID array (of SATA 2 Vertex equivalents) or my new setup.

Re-imaging with a RAID array is the reason it's a pain in the butt. Even a slight change in capacity (which usually happens if you switch RAID controllers) will cause the Windows imaging tool to flip out and say that you don't have enough space for the disk image. On top of that, you have to load your RAID drivers every time you boot to the recovery console. It got old really quick when I was trying to revive my system from my motherboard failure.

Posted Image

Booyah.


#34 Marvell Chip

Marvell Chip

    New Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hvar,Croatia

Posted 22 April 2012 - 08:42 PM

He'll get higher performance using the Intel ports. The sustained read/write speeds are nowhere near as important as the 4K random read/write speeds.

I dont know man what are you talking about my Marvell sata3 4k are better then 4k with sata2.He just have to tweak some settings in bios,one of them is
P1010239 (640x480).jpg
by pass marvell chip firmware in decoding data.

Edited by Marvell Chip, 22 April 2012 - 08:47 PM.

Intel i7 930 - X58A-UD3R - Patriot Viper 3x2Gb - Crucial M4 128Gb - Corsair HX850 - ATI 5770 - Windows 7 64 bit

#35 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15070 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 22 April 2012 - 08:48 PM

I dont know man what are you talking about my Marvell sata3 4k are better then 4k with sata2.

I've used both. Obviously you're a bit biased considering your name. :lol:

The Intel chipset, even running at SATA 2 speeds, is faster than the Marvell SATA 3 chipset included on most boards.

Posted Image

Booyah.


#36 Tjj226_Angel

Tjj226_Angel

    Total Nerd

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fredericksburg, VA

Posted 23 April 2012 - 04:36 AM

I've used both. Obviously you're a bit biased considering your name. :lol:

The Intel chipset, even running at SATA 2 speeds, is faster than the Marvell SATA 3 chipset included on most boards.



Actually I am with Marvell on this one. I don't know to to test real world performance in a way that I can show you the proof, but I did have my vertex 3 on a sata 2 port, and the marvell sata III port. The sata three is still faster, but not by a whole lot. I would say that the sata III has a 8% real world performance gain over sata 2. In my benchmarks, sata III was about 15% better than sata II. Unfortunately I am kind of stuck right now because I sold my stand alone drive to El Captain, which means I don't really have anything to show you what I mean. Maybe Marvell wouldn't mind making some graphs? ;) ;) ;) :thumbsup: