Jump to content


Photo

OCZ Octane SSD Announced Discussion


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,293 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 08:19 AM

OCZ has announced their latest family of SSDs, the Octane. Leveraging the Indilinx Everest platform and SATA 6Gb/s interface, the OCZ Octane delivers read speeds up to 570 MB/s and writes of 400 MB/s. It's not all about performance though, the Octane is the first 2.5" SSD to hit the 1TB capacity mark and that's within a 7.5mm height.

Full Story

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#2 geshel

geshel

    Member

  • Member
  • 210 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 12:54 PM

Are these prices as aggressive as I think they are? I haven't done a google check yet, but seems like $500 for a 480GB 2.5" SSD is pretty darn good, and a 1TB for $1,000 is awesome.

This is getting *really* close to the point in the curve where I would switch from HDD to SSD for the bulk of my uses. . .

#3 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,293 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 03:59 PM

The pricing does look very good, part of the benefit of owning the controller and not having to pay a license fee to SandForce or someone else. OCZ is starting to look pretty brilliant for buying Indilinx. They took a processor that was generally a little stale, but apparently had a good foundation, and are using it throughout their line of SSDs. If OCZ can bring more parts in-house, their SSDs may become even more compelling. For anyone who missed it, OCZ is also contracting branded NAND now...not the same as making it, but you'll see more NAND in their products with OCZ branding on it and not IMFT (Intel/Micron).

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#4 EvilNewbie

EvilNewbie

    Member

  • Member
  • 28 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 11:02 AM

I am thinking about going for this drive instead of the OWC SSD... it seems this drive should "last" longer? Any comments about that?

#5 Beenthere

Beenthere

    Member

  • Member
  • 178 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 11:19 AM

I am thinking about going for this drive instead of the OWC SSD... it seems this drive should "last" longer? Any comments about that?


How did you conclude it would "last" longer and what is your definition of "last longer" ? ;)

#6 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,293 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 12:07 PM

Unless you're an extreme case, not many are writing to the drives enough to wear out the NAND. While the OCZ drives may be more NAND efficient, I wouldn't put that criteria very high on the buying decision list.

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#7 EvilNewbie

EvilNewbie

    Member

  • Member
  • 28 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 01:45 PM

How did you conclude it would "last" longer and what is your definition of "last longer" ? ;)


Well for instance the 240GB OWC drive is smaller than the 480GB OCZ for around the same price. The 480GB is using 2X nm NAND whereas the 240GB uses 3X nm NAND but the 2X nm NAND supposedly has as much write cycles as the 3X nm NAND from Indilinx controller... so it seems the OCZ Octane has "more" to write and so "lasts longer" as in last more years than OWC's drive? It also has "fast boot" which is nice but I am not sure if it is really as "fast" as it claims... I would be using the SSD for boot and playing online Diablo anyhow... occasionally doing work on it with MS Office and stuff... so it seems that OCZ Octane can do all that and "lasts" longer?

#8 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,293 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 02:27 PM

I guess my point before is that the life expectancy for SSDs is 5 years. If you get more you get more...but more write cycles availability is probably not going to be an issue for you for a very long time, if ever.

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#9 mike2h

mike2h

    Member

  • Member
  • 258 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 04:24 PM

I guess my point before is that the life expectancy for SSDs is 5 years. If you get more you get more...but more write cycles availability is probably not going to be an issue for you for a very long time, if ever.


the way i read that is- outside of write cycles avg life for ssd(i assume consumer) is 5 yrs. pls explain. i am still trying to figure out how to get an overall picture of expected durability:) ik now there are a LOT of factors involved but if u could pls give me a concise vers it would be great. or maybe the explanation is simple & i am making it to complicated...

#10 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,293 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 04:44 PM

The five year window is the expected minimum lifespan for an SSD...in general terms, it depends on who you ask. Consumers might cycle a drive 1000 times in those five years, so having 5000 write cycles available vs 3000 is kind of moot for most people. You're more likely to see the drive fail from some sort of corruption, electric failure or flat out irrelevance. SSDs are all made out of quality components these days, they really don't fail all that often.

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#11 udaman

udaman

    Member

  • Member
  • 642 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 05:59 PM

OCZ has announced their latest family of SSDs, the Octane. Leveraging the Indilinx Everest platform and SATA 6Gb/s interface, the OCZ Octane delivers read speeds up to 570 MB/s and writes of 400 MB/s. It's not all about performance though, the Octane is the first 2.5" SSD to hit the 1TB capacity mark and that's within a 7.5mm height.

Full Story


some important discrepancies btw ur article & anad:

$1.10/GB for 480GB drives an above, which puts the top capacity 1TB drive in the $1000 ballpark. OCZ expects to start shipping the Octane SSD this fall.


It's already "Fall" :D, winter comes in Dec.

Anad sez, just 10 days from now- w00t:

Capacities start at 128GB and will go all the way up to 1TB. OCZ is expecting pricing to fall somewhere within the $1.10 - $1.30 per GB range, which would put a 128GB drive at no more than $166 (in line with current Vertex 2 pricing) and a 1TB drive at just over $1300. Spare area is set at the standard ~7% you get from the GiB to GB conversion. No word on whether or not there's any additional NAND set aside for redundancy.

The Everest controller features 8 NAND channels and up to 16-way interleaving. With 25nm NAND that means peak performance should be achievable with the 128GB model, with the larger drives just offering higher capacity and no additional performance. TRIM is of course supported. OCZ indicates support for both standard wear leveling and background garbage collection (presumably at idle time).

The first Octane drives will be available in the channel starting November 1st. I've already dispatched a huge list of questions to OCZ about the controller and the drive's architecture so I'll update this post as I get any new information.


Also u missed this important part:

OCZ is touting incompressible data and sustained write performance as the two major strengths of Octane - obviously a jab SandForce and traditional SSD weaknesses. The controller is paired up with up to a 512MB DRAM cache, indicating that it is taking the more traditional route of storing both user data as well as page mapping tables in DRAM. There's no mention of power protection circuitry to flush the cache contents to NAND in the event of a power failure, but given the target market for these drives I don't suppose we'll see such a feature


Also there will be a legacy 3GB/s version using ASync NAND (same performance, parameters sans 6GB/s interface???...or different?), w/1TB as top capacity>pricing same???

With 25nm NAND that means peak performance should be achievable with the 128GB model, with the larger drives just offering higher capacity and no additional performance

...but will it in fact? In the 3GB/s version too?

Edited by udaman, 21 October 2011 - 06:00 PM.

#12 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,293 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 06:26 PM

Fall isn't over...but okay if you want to pick on that point. We didn't have a date at the time of our coverage. The pricing came from OCZ.

Anyway, we'll have them in the lab soon enough, so a lot of the questions about specs vs actual will be answered soon enough.

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#13 mike2h

mike2h

    Member

  • Member
  • 258 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 08:04 PM

The five year window is the expected minimum lifespan for an SSD...in general terms, it depends on who you ask. Consumers might cycle a drive 1000 times in those five years, so having 5000 write cycles available vs 3000 is kind of moot for most people. You're more likely to see the drive fail from some sort of corruption, electric failure or flat out irrelevance. SSDs are all made out of quality components these days, they really don't fail all that often.


ty.
ive also seem in a cpl of threads peeps talking about data loss/bsod/etc. is this something that is still fairly common or rare events that are just part of the tech for now? for me that counts in with life expextancy.
& sry for kinda hijacking the thread tho i guess it does play into the topic.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users