by Kristian Vättö on 2/20/2013 5:19 AM EST
Posted in Storage , SSDs , OCZ , Vertex 3 , Vertex 3.20 , SandForce

Yesterday OCZ introduced an updated version of their Vertex 3: The Vertex 3.20. The name derives from the fact that the new Vertex 3.20 uses 20nm IMFT MLC NAND, whereas the original Vertex 3 used 25nm IMFT NAND. OCZ did the same with Vertex 2 and it's a common practice to move to smaller lithography NAND when it becomes cost-effective. At first the new lithography NAND may be more expensive and limited in availability but once the process matures, prices start to fall and eventually will overtake the old process node. Fortunately OCZ has learned from their mistakes and now the Vertex 3 with new NAND is easily distinguishable from the original Vertex 3, unlike with the Vertex 2 when OCZ silently switched to 25nm NAND.

  Vertex 3.20 Vertex 3
Capacity 120GB 240GB 120GB 240GB
Controller SandForce SF-2281
NAND 20nm IMFT MLC NAND 25nm IMFT MLC NAND
Sequential Read 550MB/s 550MB/s 550MB/s 550MB/s
Sequential Write 520MB/s 520MB/s 500MB/s 520MB/s
4KB Random Read 20K IOPS 35K IOPS 20K IOPS 40K IOPS
4KB Random Write 40K IOPS 65K IOPS 60K IOPS 60K IOPS

I asked OCZ why only Vertex 3 was updated with 20nm NAND and OCZ told me that the 20nm NAND is slower than 25nm. Intel initially told me that their 20nm NAND is as fast as their 25nm NAND (only erase time is slightly slower but that shouldn't impact end-user performance), though it should be kept in mind that OCZ uses NAND from Micron too and their binning process may be different from Intel's. Either way, it doesn't make sense (at least yet) for OCZ to update their high-end SSDs with the slower 20nm NAND, which is why Vertex 4 and Vector will stick with 25nm IMFT NAND. 

In other news, OCZ is also looking to phase out Agility 3 and 4 models. If you've been reading about OCZ's new business strategy (in a nutshell, fewer products and more focus on high-end market), this move makes a lot of sense because Agility has always been a compromised budget lineup. In the near future the Vertex 3.20 will be OCZ's mainstream model, which is why it was important for OCZ to cut the costs by moving to smaller process node NAND. 

Source: OCZ Press Release

Slower, but how? by mayankleoboy1 on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
How come some of the values have improved for 120GB ? Firmware magic, or moar over provisioning, or a combination of the two ?

Will you do a re-review ?
mayankleoboy1
RE: Slower, but how? by Kristian Vättö on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
It's hard to say. For the original Vertex 3, OCZ reports Iometer and AS-SSD numbers, but for the new Vertex 3.20 OCZ only reports one set of unspecified numbers. I'm assuming they are Iometer scores and hence I'm using Iometer scores for the Vertex 3. Anyway, it could be a difference in firmware too.

I currently have quite a few drives to review so I'm not sure if I'll have time to squeeze another drive in. I'll try my best though :-)
Kristian Vättö
RE: Slower, but how? by ahar on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Do you have time to correct "less products" to "fewer products"? ;-)
ahar
RE: Slower, but how? by Kristian Vättö on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Sure, thanks for the heads up! :-)
Kristian Vättö
Random read speed by ShieTar on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Is it correct that the 240GB version has lower random read speeds (35k) than the 120GB version (40k)? It would seem more logical the other way around.
ShieTar
RE: Random read speed by Marlowe on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
I don't know why I took the time out of my work day to write this on the internet in a comment section.. To make it look right I even had to learn how to insert a "tab" space in a text area without the browser selecting the next element on the page. (Keyboard shortcut Alt + 09).
Vertex 3.20 Vertex 3
Capacity 120GB 240GB 120GB 240GB
4KB Random Read 20K IOPS 35K IOPS 20K IOPS 40K IOPS
4KB Random Write 40K IOPS 65K IOPS 60K IOPS 60K IOPS

Anyway long story short: the 40k should've said 20k. The rest was correct.
Marlowe
RE: Random read speed by Marlowe on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Apparently the comment system removed my painfully organized tab-table.. It also thought my comment was spam, so I had to remove the source links to make it pass.
Marlowe
RE: RE: Random read speed by geekfool on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Marlowe, the comment system did kept your tabs. It is visible in the HTML source code, but unfortunately still not very readable. What happened was that the comments do not have the "pre" (meaning pre-formatted) white-space style, and so all the white-spaces (tabs, double spaces, multiple spaces) are compressed into a single space. This compress all white-space into a single space is the default behaviour for HTML rendering.

You could try with "non-breaking spaces", but lining things up with spaces on non-monospace fonts is iffy.

This message was to let you know that at least someone does appreciate your attempt. Have a nice day!
geekfool
RE: Random read speed by Kristian Vättö on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
According to OCZ's site, that's what the specifications are. SandForce has always been a bit weird, for example 480GB Vertex 3 is noticeably slower than the 240GB model, even though more NAND should result in increased parallelism and hence enhanced performance.

Since our comment system thinks every link is spam, I can't link the datasheet but just check the Vertex 3 product brief PDF at OCZ's site.
Kristian Vättö
RE: Random read speed by Kristian Vättö on Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Oops, my bad, you're correct. The 120GB is rated at 20K IOPS for random read, not 40K. Fixed.
Kristian Vättö
Latest from AnandTech