 |
Review: OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD |
It was only last month that I reviewed the OCZ Vertex 3.20.
The Vertex 3.20 was a refresh of the original Vertex 3, basically using the
same SSD controller, but this time using 20nm IMFT NAND.
This month I'm taking a look at OCZ's new Vertex 4 refresh,
the Vertex 450 series. For the Vertex 450 series, the transition to 20nm NAND
has been made. But it's not only the NAND that has been updated from the
original Vertex 4, the controller has also been updated. The original Vertex 4
used Marvell silicon, and in house Indilinx infused firmware. For the Vertex
450 series, OCZ has gone all in house, and used a new variant of the Indilinx
BareFoot 3 SSD controller, the BareFoot 3 M10, and their own Indilinx infused
firmware.
OCZ were kind enough to send me a review sample of their new
Vertex 450 SSD. The review sample they sent was the 256GB version, but OCZ also
offer a 128GB and 512GB versions of the Vertex 450. So let's find out how the
Vertex 450 performs in this review.
OCZ Technology company information
OCZ should need no introduction, but those of you who would
like to find out more about OCZ Technology, can do so at their website.
The OCZ Vertex 450 - 256GB SSD
Now it’s time to take a look at the drive itself and what it
came shipped with.
Packaging
The SSD I received was a retail unit, so let's start first with
the packaging.
Box front
Box rear
Inside the box
The complete package
The OCZ Vertex 450 package contained the OCZ Vertex 450 256GB
SSD itself, quick installation booklet, warranty information, and an 'I love my
SSD' sticker, 2.5 inch to 3.5 inch drive converter bracket, and eight fixing
screws.
Drive top
Drive bottom
On the underside of the SSD, I found a label which displays
the SSD model number, storage capacity, and indicates that the SSD was
manufactured in Taiwan.
The case itself is 7mm thick and designed to be housed in a
standard 2.5 inch drive bay, or a 3.5 inch drive bay using the supplied 2.5
inch to 3.5 inch converter bracket. The case is an all metal affair, and is
very nicely styled. The SSD itself is quite heavy, and feels very solidly
built.
Now let's head to the next page, where we look in more
detail at the OCZ Vertex 450 SSD.....
A closer look at the OCZ Vertex 450 hardware.
Let's take a look at the hardware found inside the OCZ
Vertex 450 SSD.
Inside the case.
PCB topside
As you can see in the above screenshot, the top of the PCB
houses the brand new Indilinx BareFoot 3 M10 SSD controller, eight 20nm sync
MLC NAND chip packages, DDR3 cache memory, and various support components.
PCB underside
On the underside of the PCB we can see another eight NAND
chips, the second DDR3 cache memory, and an SATA 6 Gbps interface controller.
Indilinx BareFoot 3 M10 SSD controller
Above we can see the brand new Indilinx BareFoot 3 M10 SSD controller,
designated IDX500M10-BC.
Indilinx BareFoot 3 M10 block diagram
The new Indilinx BareFoot 3 M10 is actually powered by two
CPU's. The first is an ARM Cortex, and the second one is much more interesting,
the OCZ Aragon co-processor. Aragon is an R.I.S.C. architecture co-processor
specifically designed for SSDs, and is there to efficiently manage the NAND
flash interface. The NAND interface has support for ONFI and toggle mode NAND,
and there are eight channels available to the NAND array. There is also support
for AES 256 encryption. The new BareFoot 3 M10 is also said to have lower power
requirements when compared to the BareFoot 3 found in the OCZ Vector, quite
possibly because it is clocked slightly slower than the original BareFoot 3.
DDR3 cache
There are two DDR3 cache memory chip packages mounted on the
256GB Vertex 450 SSD giving a total cache of 512MB on the 128GB and 256GB
Vertex 450 SSDs. The cache is doubled to 1GB on the 512GB Vertex 450 and is
manufactured by Micron.
NAND
20nm IMFT MLC sync NAND manufactured by Micron
BareFoot 3 M10 and Vertex 450 features
Please note that the following features and screenshots were
provided by OCZ Technology.
Specifications
Drive maintenance features
For Windows 7 and Windows 8 users, and some distributions of
Linux, the OCZ Vertex 450 series SSD supports ATA TRIM to keep the NAND clean.
The OCZ Vertex 450 series also has advanced garbage collection to clean the
NAND during drive idle periods.
OCZ SSD toolbox
The Vertex 450 series SSDs are also supported by the latest
version of the OCZ SSD Toolbox. The toolbox allows the user to update the
drives firmware, secure erase the SSD, and will also display S.M.A.R.T details
of the SSD.
Cloning software
The OCZ Vertex 450 series of SSDs will be shipped with a
serial key for a Windows 8 compatible version of Acronis cloning software, and
the software itself can be downloaded from a link on OCZ's technical support
website. At the time of writing this article, the serial key was not ready. I'm
assured by OCZ that the serial key will be provided in the package of the
retail Vertex 450.
Let’s head to the next page where we take a look at our
testing methods and the review PC....
Test machine
For this review I will be using a computer with the
following configuration:
Hardware:
- Motherboard: Asus P8Z77 V Deluxe (Intel Z77 chipset)
- Processor: Intel 3rd generation Core i7 3770K
- RAM: 16GB Samsung Green DDR3 1600MHz (dual channel)
- GFX: Onboard Intel HD 4000
- Sound: Onboard Realtek ALC898 HD audio controller
- Hard disk OS: OCZ Vector 256GB SSD
- Hard disk storage: 1X 500GB Samsung Spinpoint F3, and 1X 1TB
Samsung Spinpoint F1. - Case: Antec Performance One P280
- PSU: Antec True Power modular 550W
- Display: Dell UltraSharp U2412M 24” widescreen IPS LCD (HDCP
compliant) - Operating System: Windows 8 Professional 64bit
The OCZ Vertex 450 SSD was connected to the Intel native SATA
6Gbps (port 0) on the Z77 motherboard of our review PC and all tests on the drive
were carried out with the drive connected to this port.
AHCI mode was also selected for all drives in the UEFI of
our test PC, and all tests were carried out in this mode. The SATA 6Gbps drivers
used on our review PC were the Intel Rapid Storage Technology (RST) Version
11.6.0.1030.
CPU power saving states were disabled for consistency, and
all the SSDs in this article were tested with all CPU power saving states
disabled.
Test applications
To test the performance of the OCZ Vertex 450 series 240GB
SSD, I will be using the following test applications in this review.
- HD-Tune Pro
- ATTO
- Iometer
- AS SSD
Benchmark - CrystalDiskMark
- MyCE Reality Suite
- Anvil’s
Storage Utilities - PC
Mark Vantage
Test procedures
I will start off our testing procedures explanation by
stating that I did not run many synthetic benchmarks on the OCZ Vertex 450 SSD.
You may ask why I have run so few synthetic benchmarks?
SSD technology has moved so fast in the last couple of years,
that basic synthetic benchmarks alone are now of very limited use, as they don't
really tell us much about performance and how the drive will behave in the real
world. I have therefore decided to show some basic benchmarks of the OCZ Vertex
450 series SSD, and will complement this with advanced benchmarks using IOMeter
and AS SSD benchmark. I will also show how the OCZ Vertex 450 series SSD performs
in the real world with our Myce Reality Suite test.
The reality of SSD performance
While I can easily show you which SSD is technically the
faster, when you use one of these modern SSDs as an operating system drive it
becomes very difficult to tell them apart as far as performance is concerned.
A typical use of a small capacity SSD at the moment is to
have your operating system and applications installed onto the SSD. The
performance difference compared to a traditional HDD is enormous, however when
you start to compare SSD to SSD the difference becomes almost impossible to
detect.
Let’s look at why this is the case.
Drive A can boot to the desktop in 8.11 seconds, and drive B
can boot to the desktop in 8.12 seconds, the difference in time is
milliseconds, and can one really tell the difference?
The fact is, all modern SSDs are only ticking over when they
are only running the OS and launching applications, it’s only when you get to
some of the larger capacity SSDs, with enough free space to be able to hold the
actual data that you’re going to be working with, be that video, audio or
pictures, for example, that you actually get a tangible difference in
performance. This is where the SSDs with the better sequential performance start
to pull well ahead of the SSDs which have lower sequential read/write
performance.
Small file random IOPS vs sequential performance
IOPS
This is a fairly complex subject, but I will do my best to
explain things in a manner that is easy to understand.
The term IOPS is the amount of input or output transactions
that can take place in a one second interval, so for example, if an SSD is
quoted as being able to cope with 20,000 4K random write IOPS, then the SSD
should be able to cope with 20,000 input transactions in a period of one
second. If the same SSD is said to be able to produce 20,000 4K random read
IOPS, then the same SSD should be able to produce 20,000 4K random read output
transactions in a one second interval.
Ok, now we have some figures to work with, the next question
is how many IOPS are actually required?
This will depend on your usage pattern. If you are a typical
desktop user who browses the internet, does some word processing or perhaps
some audio or video editing, and perhaps plays a few games, then in actual
fact, you don’t need to have massive 4K random read/write performance. The
actual amount of 4K random performance that is required for a fast and smooth
running system for a desktop user with a usage pattern similar to the above
will be well under 1,000 4K IOPS.
On the other hand, if the SSD is being used for running a
large and complex database server, then 4K random performance is the absolute
measurement of how fast that server will run, as this type of application does
most of its input and output transactions in the 4K domain.
So why would I need an SSD with 80,000 4K IOPS for a
desktop?
In fact you don’t need this type of performance for a
desktop, but an SSD which is capable of coping with 80,000 4K IOPS will be
faster than an SSD which can only cope with 20,000 4K IOPS.
OK, I just said if under 1,000 4K IOPS are actually required
for typical desktop usage, why is an SSD with 80,000 4K IOPS faster than an SSD
with only 20,000 4K IOPS, confused?
You may ask, if I only require 1,000 4K IOPS surely the rest
is wasted?
While you may never need 80,000 4K IOPS, IOPS is all about
latency. The reason that an SSD can cope with as much as 80,000 4K IOPS is
because latency in this domain is very low. With 4K files, even if you require
to process 500 of them at the same time, you are not talking about a huge amount
of data, it has far more to do with how long it takes the SSD to process a
single file, and the amount of time required to process a single 4K is all
about how long it takes for the SSD to access or store that data before it can
move on to the next transaction.
In other words an SSD with 80,000 4K IOPS performance will
handle those 500 files faster than the SSD with 20,000 IOPS.
So how will a desktop user even notice this faster speed if
so little 4K random IOPS and data are actually used?
Multitasking is a good example. The more tasks you run at
the same time, you more you will notice the speed difference.
Sequential performance
I have always maintained that sequential performance was
every bit as important as small random file performance for a desktop SSD. To
me this was always so obvious for a desktop user. For example, let’s say you
want to launch an application or game. Both have some fairly large files to
load, and also a great many small files, but the point is, even the smaller
files are sequential in nature. Now let’s say you’re into audio or video
editing. Video files tend to be huge, and the files are written or read
sequentially. Isn’t this how many users are using their PCs these days?
Summary
So how does this shape up in the real world? Which is
better, massive 4K IOPS or massive sequential performance?
In an ideal world you want both, as an SSD with massive
random 4K IOPS and sequential performance will always be faster than an SSD
that has high sequential performance and moderate 4K random IOPS performance,
and the same applies to an SSD that has massive 4K random performance and
moderate sequential performance. The SSD which has high performance in both
patterns will always be the faster SSD.
However, you can still have an SSD that is very fast for
desktop use that has moderate random 4K performance and massive sequential
performance, the same can be said about a drive having massive random 4K
performance and moderate sequential performance, as it is about getting the
balance right if you have to compromise on one or the other.
Test drives
- Intel 520 series 240GB
- OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD
- OCZ Agility 4 256GB SSD
- Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB SSD
- Samsung 830 256GB SSD
- OCZ Vector 256GB SSD
- Toshiba THNSNF512GCSS
512GB SSD - Samsung 840 Pro 512GB SSD
- Plextor M5 Pro 512GB SSD
- Samsung 840 250GB SSD
- Kingston V300 240GB SSD
- OCZ Vertex 3.20 240GB SSD
- OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD
Drive preparation for running the tests
All the SSDs used in this article were in a clean and fresh
state when the testing period started. From then on, each drive had to rely on
its own NAND cleaning effectiveness for the remainder of the tests.
For the sake of clarity, I now only include SATA 6Gbps SSDs
in these tests, and all were connected to the native Intel SATA 6Gbps (port 0)
of my motherboard for these tests.
- All SSDs used in this article had their partitions aligned
to the Windows 8 x64 defaults.
Where I use graphs in this article to display results, I
will use the following colours to make it easier, for our readers to see which drive
we are reviewing.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD
Comparison SSD
Now let's head to the next page, where I look at some
basic benchmarks...
Synthetic Benchmarks
HD Tune Pro
In this benchmark I am checking sequential reading speed.
With an average sequential reading speed of 521.5 MB/s the OCZ
Vertex 450 is showing an excellent turn of speed.
Let's see how this compares to other recently tested SSDs in
the table below.
The OCZ Vertex 450 has done extremely well in the HD Tune
Pro 5 sequential reading test, and finishes this test in fifth place, but hot
on the heels of the fastest SSDs.
ATTO disk benchmark
ATTO has become a standard tool for measuring the data
throughput of HDD and SSD. It measures the performance of reading and writing,
using different file sizes and block sizes.
The reading speed results on the OCZ Vertex 450 are
extremely impressive, topping out at nearly 548 MB/s, and writing speed is
equally impressive topping out at over 526MB/s.
Let's find out how this compares with other recently tested
SSDs.
ATTO Reading performance
ATTO - Reading performance at various block sizes
The OCZ Vertex 450 is one of the fastest SSDs when reading, but
it does tend to do better with increasing block sizes. The little anomaly I
noted with the OCZ Vector at a block size of 32K is still present in the Vertex
450 SSD.
ATTO Writing performance
ATTO - Writing performance at various block sizes
The OCZ Vertex 450 is once again amongst the fastest SSDs
when writing data, especially with increasing block sizes.
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
Crystal Disk Mark is quite a handy benchmarking application,
as it focuses on the file sizes that can cause a problem on a system drive.
As we can see from the above screenshot, sequential reading
speed is excellent, random reading speeds at higher queue depths are very
impressive, and writing speeds across the board are excellent.
AS SSD Benchmark
AS SSD benchmark is a benchmarking tool specifically
designed to test SSDs. The application tests sequential reading and writing
performance, 4K random reading and writing performance.
AS SSD benchmark also tests 4K threaded performance. This is
very exciting, as this test is the first available test that I am aware of,
that simulates how a PC operating system actually works. A modern PC and OS,
such as Windows 7/8 does not just run a single thread at a time, it runs many
threads. The AS SSD benchmark "4K 64Thrd" tests run 64 threads
simultaneously throughout the test. If this result is good, then you can be
pretty sure the drive will perform extremely well as a system drive.
After the tests complete, AS SSD benchmark derives a total
score for the drive being tested. This is based on all aspects of the test
results, and gives an indication of how the drive is performing overall.
Now let’s look at the result from the OCZ Vertex 450 SSD in
the form of a screenshot. All our other comparison drives’ results are
presented in the form of a graph.
As we can see from the AS SSD test run, the OCZ Vertex 450
has excellent reading and writing speeds, and finishes this test in fifth
place.
Summary:
The OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD has performed extremely well in
the basic synthetic benchmarks. Random reading and writing performance is very
impressive, and not to be outdone, writing speeds are top notch.
Let's head to the next page for our IOMeter test
results.....
I/O Performance
There is little point of having an SSD drive that has
blazing sustained reading and writing speeds, if the drive can't handle reading
and writing of small random files. If you intend to use your new SSD drive to
store and run your operating system, then the drive must be able to cope with
the many small random files that Windows will write to the drive continually.
So I feel it is very important to test how many of these random files that a
drive can handle in one second. I believe that anything over 1,000 I/O’s per
second would be enough for most users running a consumer grade mainstream PC,
and should provide a smooth running system. But obviously, the more I/O's that
a drive can handle, the faster the drive will feel and leave more headroom for
those huge multitasking sessions that users sometimes engage in.
IOMeter is probably the most versatile of all the synthetic
benchmarks. Its ability to be configured to generate a multitude of different
I/O traffic is unmatched. Another great feature of IOMeter, is the capability
to test any storage metric that you can think of, providing you know how to configure
the assignments. The reviewer also has complete control over things like queue
depth, block size, whether the traffic is random, sequential, or even a mixture
of both.
Partition alignment and sector boundaries
Windows 8, Windows 7, and Windows Vista will automatically
align a partition to 4k boundaries during partition creation, Windows XP won’t.
It is imperative that an SSD’s partition is aligned. Windows XP is also
restricted to sector boundaries, while Windows 7 and 8 will use 4k boundaries
if they can. The OCZ Vertex 450 series is 4k boundary aware, and will use these
boundaries if possible. Of course it will also remap LBAs for compatibility
with the sector boundaries so that the drive can be used with Windows XP.
IOMeter allows us to set the sector boundaries for
conducting the tests, and I have therefore set the sector boundaries at 4K,
which means the IOMeter tests are valid for Windows 7, Windows 8 and Windows
Vista users. XP users will not be able to obtain such results.
I will provide a screenshot of the tests on the review drive
for those of you who like to see the actual test result. All the comparison
drive results are represented in the form of graphs.
If any of you would like to see a screenshot from any
IOMeter test on a particular drive, please feel free to request one, and I’ll
post the screenshot in the forum thread.
All the IOMeter tests create a 10GB data set on the target
drive, and each test is run for a duration of 3 minutes.
IOMeter 4K random write test with repeating data.
The first test involves creating continual 4KB random files
on the target drive with IOMeter. I use a 4KB file size, as it is believed that
Windows will create and modify many of this size of file constantly in the
background during a typical Windows session. It is said that most 4K random
writes take place at a queue depth of only one, and I have been requested to
include this test in my reviews.
Queue depth 1
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD – 4K random write (QD 1)
At 143.36 MB/s the OCZ Vertex 450 is performing extremely
well, and finishes this test in third place.
Our next test involves creating continual 4KB random files
on the target drive with IOMeter. I use a 4KB file size, as it is believed that
Windows will create and modify many of this size of file constantly in the
background during a typical Windows session. I will use queue depths of 4 and
32 for these tests.
Queue depth 4
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD (QD 4)
At a queue depth of 4, the OCZ Vertex 450 delivers excellent
performance, and finishes this test in fifth place.
Queue depth 32
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD (QD 32)
The OCZ Vertex 450 at high queue depths is very impressive,
and finishes this test in fourth place.
IOMeter 4K random write test with fully random data.
This test is exactly the same as the test above except that
the test data is fully random and is therefore much more difficult to compress.
This test was requested as SandForce based SSDs gain a lot of performance by
being able to compress data on the fly. While the above test shows the
SandForce based SSDs in a best case scenario, the following test will show the
SandForce based SSDs in a much more realistic scenario.
Queue depth 4 with fully random data
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD – 4K random write (QD 4 with fully random data)
The OCZ Vertex 450 pays no penalty when writing data which
is incompressible, and with 292.56 MB/s it finishes the test in fifth place.
4K random write queue depth profile
For this test I used various queue depths from 1 – 32 to
give you an idea how this SSD performs at different queue depths. For a normal
desktop user, with lightweight multitasking, the queue depth will rarely rise
above 2. For heavy multitasking, the queue depth is unlikely to rise above a
value of 8.
The results are shown below.
As we can see, the OCZ Vertex 450 scales well all the way up
to queue depth 32.
Below I present a table of the results in more detail.
IOMeter 4K random read test.
If there are many 4k files created, then that must also mean
that many 4k files need to be read. This test measures 4k reading performance.
It is said that most 4K random reads take place at a queue
depth of only one, and readers have requested that I include this test in my
reviews.
Queue depth 1
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD - 4K random read (QD 1)
While 25.35 MB/s at a queue depth of one is impressive, the
OCZ Vertex 450 is still somewhat slower than many of the SSDs in this test, and
finishes in tenth place.
Queue depth 4
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD - 4K random read (QD 4)
Although 4K random reading performance is still very good at
a queue depth of four, the OCZ Vertex 450 isn't scaling as well as some of the
other SSDs in this test.
Queue depth 32
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD - random read (QD 32)
If the OCZ Vertex 450 was a little bit behind at lower queue
depths, it certainly makes up for this at higher queue depths, where it returns
a very impressive result.
4K random read queue depth profile.
This test shows how the review drive scales with increasing
queue depths.
Below I present a table of the results in more detail.
If we look at the OCZ Vertex 450 4K random read performance
in detail, we can see that it scales almost perfectly from queue depth one to
queue depth two, then scaling drops off, and it's not until it reaches a queue
depth of eight that the Vertex 450 really starts to motor.
IOMeter 512KB write test with repeating data.
Sequential writing performance is also very important; in
this test sequential writing performance is measured.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD - 512K Sequential write with repeating data
The OCZ Vertex 450 is showing an excellent turn of speed,
and finishes this test in fifth place.
512K sequential write - Queue depth profile
While most sequential writes will rarely rise above a queue
depth of two, it has been noted from SATA analyzer traces that with more
demanding tasks, queue depths can rise very close to a queue depth of four.
This is why I now include queue depth profiles for sequential read and write.
Please note that in the following graph, I do not have the
lowest possible score set at zero. This is purely to allow the graphs to be
easier to read, but starting with a lowest possible score other than zero,
gives the impression that there are large differences between competing SSDs with
regard to performance, so please keep this in mind.
512K sequential write - Queue depth profile
Below I present a table of the results in more detail.
The OCZ Vertex 450 reaches peak performance at a queue depth
of four, and is among the fastest SSDs in this test.
IOMeter 512KB sequential write test with fully random data.
This test is almost exactly the same as the test above
except that the test data is fully random in nature. This test was requested as
SandForce based SSDs gain a lot of performance by being able to compress data
on the fly. While the above test shows the SandForce based SSDs in a best case
scenario, the following test will show the SandForce based SSDs in a more
realistic light. In the real world, the data is neither 100% incompressible nor
100% compressible, it is somewhere in between. So please keep this in mind.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD – 512K sequential write with fully random data
With data that is not so easy to compress, the SandForce SF-2281
based SSDs take a big hit in performance, while the OCZ Vertex 450 returns a
very impressive 513.31 MB/s, and finishes this test in third place.
IOMeter 512KB sequential read test QD1.
This test measures 512k sequential reading performance at
very low queue depths.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD – 512K sequential reading test (QD 1)
The OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD has very good sequential
reading performance at very low queue depths, and finishes this test roughly in
the middle of the pack.
IOMeter 512KB sequential read test (dual threaded).
This test measures 512k sequential reading performance QD2.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD – 512K sequential reading test (QD 2)
At a more realistic queue depth the OCZ Vertex 450 256GB is still
showing excellent sequential reading performance, but is ultimately outgunned
by many of the comparison SSDs in this test.
512K sequential read - Queue depth profile
While most sequential reads will rarely rise above a queue
depth of two, it has been noted from SATA analyzer traces that with more
demanding tasks, queue depths can rise very close to a queue depth of four.
This is why I now include queue depth profiles for sequential read and write.
Please note that in the following graph, I do not have the
lowest possible score set at zero. This is purely to allow the graphs to be
easier to read, but starting with a lowest possible score other than zero,
gives the impression that there are large differences between competing SSDs with
regard to performance, so please keep this in mind.
512K sequential read - Queue depth profile
Below I present a table of the results in more detail.
The OCZ Vertex 450 is a very strong performer when it comes
to reading sequential data, with peak performance at a queue depth of four.
IOMeter Workstation simulation (outstanding I/Os = 64).
When running applications you will find that there is a
mixture of small random files, and larger sequential files, being created and
read. Not only that, it isn’t just one file at a time. In this test I measure a
simulated workstation pattern, with a queue depth of 64 (threaded).
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD – Workstation simulation
The other Indilinx BareFoot 3 based SSD in this test, the
OCZ Vector has mighty workstation performance, so it's no surprise to see the
OCZ Vertex 450 doing so well in this test, with a mighty 413.82 MB/s.
Summary
There is no doubt about it, the OCZ Vertex 450 has very impressive
reading and writing performance, with writing performance in particular being
absolutely top notch. It isn't quite as fast as OCZ's own Vector, nor the
Samsung 840 Pro, but it's at least a match for the Plextor M5 Pro Extreme.
Now let’s head to the next page where we will look at how
the OCZ Vertex 450 SSD performs using a new benchmarking application....
Anvil’s Storage Utilities
As well as performing SSD endurance tests. Anvil’s Storage
Utilities has a very nice SSD benchmarking application. The SSD benchmark tests
many different aspects of SSD performance, including 4K random at different
queue depths, and also sequential performance, but more importantly than this,
all using real test data.
Another very nice feature of Anvil’s SSD benchmark is the
fact that you can change the compression levels of the test data. The
compression levels of the datasets used for the tests can be varied from 0%
compression right up to 100% compressed data, and there are even a few data
profiles already included, such as database (8%) compression, and also an
application profile (46%) compression, which is designed to simulate real
application data being read and written to the SSD.
Anvil’s Storage Utilities is still in beta at the moment,
but the application is currently solid enough to use in this article, and I have
already verified the results obtained using an SATA analyser.
I will include a screenshot of the review drive, and all
comparison results will be presented in the form of graphs. If you would like
to see screenshots of the test results obtained on the other SSDs in this
article, you can do so by following the link here.
I will also be testing three different compression profiles,
which are as follows.
- 0 fill (100% compressible data)
- Application simulation profile (46% compressed)
- 100% (incompressible data)
So let’s begin the tests.
0 fill
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD (0 fill)
In the 0 fill test, the OCZ Vertex 450 has performed
extremely well and finishes this test in seventh place.
Application profile
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD (application profile)
The application test pattern is much more realistic in terms
of the type of data that real users will use, and this time the OCZ Vertex 450
has moved up the results table, and finishes in fifth place.
100% incompressible
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD (100% incompressible)
With test data that can't be compressed at all, the OCZ
Vertex 450 is still performing extremely well, and finishes this test in fifth
place.
Summary
One should keep in mind that although Anvil’s Storage
Utilities SSD benchmark is a very good benchmark, and tests many aspects of SSD
performance, ultimately it is demonstrating which SSD is technically the
fastest, and this may not be showing (for example) which drive will be fastest
in the real world with a home user's work pattern.
The OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD has however performed very well
in the Anvil's SSD benchmark tests.
Now let's head to the next page for some real world tests....
It has become clear that simply conducting endless
benchmarks on SSD drives is pointless. Real users may run a few benchmarks when
they first fit their SSD drive, but most users just want a drive that performs
well in the real world. They want their drive to work "out of the
box" and run fast and smoothly.
Most of the latest SSD drives can deliver very fast
sustained reading and writing speeds, but these alone tell you very little
about how the drive will perform in the real world.
If you intend to use your SSD as your primary system drive,
with an operating system and applications installed and running from the drive,
real world performance becomes much more important than just fast sequential
read and write speeds.
Real world copy
tests
I will now conduct a few real world copy tests. These tests
simulate what real people do with their drives. I will be conducting writing
tests, using a large single file, and I will then round off the tests by
copying a folder of MP3 audio files, and also a folder of JPG pictures.
In past reviews I simply used Windows copy and paste to copy
the files from one drive to the target drive, and then I measured the time
taken to complete the test with a stop watch. This method was flawed in a
couple of ways. Windows employs a cache, so even when the files had been
copied, some of the data was still in the Windows cache and hadn't yet been
written to the SSD. The other flaw was that a stop watch is not a very accurate
way of measuring the time taken to complete the test.
I had also noticed that copying the small file set had
become pointless, as most modern SSDs have a rather large cache, in fact large
enough to be able to take the complete file set in this cache without having to
commit that data to NAND before the test had completed. I could have increased
the amount of data in the test, but I felt this was moving away from the real
world. For example, who would copy 2GB of data containing only very small
files?
I concluded it was perhaps better just to drop this test
completely, and just focus on the large 8GB ISO file, the folder of MP3 audio
files, and the folder of JPG picture files. I also have taken the opportunity
to increase the amount of data to be copied in the MP3 and JPG tests, to make
sure the SSD's memory cache doesn't obtain an unfair advantage.
The other change is that I now use an application to copy
the data, which also times how long it takes to complete the test. This
application also supports "cache write-through". What this basically
means is, there is now no caching of the files, and instead the data being
copied must be committed to the target SSD as it's being copied.
Obviously making such changes to the methods of testing is
not taken lightly. To make changes means a lot of extra work, as all the
comparison drives have to be re-tested with the new method. However, here at
Myce.wiki, we believe we should always try to improve our reviews, and if that
means updating the testing methods and some initial extra work, then that benefits
the Myce community as a whole.
For the reading drive, I had to make sure that it was fast
enough not to be holding back the target drive. For the reading drive I have therefore
chosen the OCZ RevoDrive X2 PCIe SSD as the OCZ RevoDrive X2 is capable of
reading speeds of 740MB/s, and also sits on the low latency PCIe x16 system
bus.
For the tests themselves, I will show a screenshot of the
copy test for the SSD that I'm reviewing. All other results will be presented
in the form of a graph, so you can easily compare the results.
Single large file writing test (8144.6MB)
For this test I used a single DVD9 ISO file which had been
copied to the OCZ RevoDrive X2 240GB SSD. The file was then copied to the OCZ
Vertex 450 SSD and our comparison drives.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD
The large ISO file contains quite a lot of incompressible
data, which is detrimental to the SF-2281 based SSDs. There is no such problem
for the OCZ Vertex 450, which ploughs through the test in a very impressive
16.55 seconds.
Write a folder of JPG picture files.
For this test I copied a folder of JPG picture files from
the OCZ RevoDrive X2 SSD to the OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD, and our other
comparison drives. The folder contained 7861 JPG pictures, with a total
capacity of 8410.3MB.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 is the fastest SSD, even
beating its OCZ stable mate, the OCZ Vector.
Write a folder of MP3 audio files.
For this test I copied a folder of MP3 audio files from our
OCZ RevoDrive X2 SSD to the OCZ Vertex 450 SSD and our other comparison drives.
The folder contained 1691 MP3 audio files, with a total capacity of 9176.5MB.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD
Once again the OCZ Vertex 450 is the fastest SSD in this
test.
Summary
We already know the OCZ Vertex 450 has very strong writing
performance from the synthetic benchmarks, and this is confirmed in the real
world with these copy tests. The copy tests are essentially testing writing
performance, and it's very clear to see that the OCZ Vertex 450 has outstanding
writing performance in the real world.
Single drive copy tests
These tests are to simulate a single drive in a PC or
laptop. In other words, I will copy a series of files from one folder on the
tested drive to another folder on the same drive. This means the drive is simultaneously
reading and writing during the tests. I also want to make this a realistic test,
so I have used a folder of MP3 music files, and then repeated the test with a
folder of JPG picture files.
Single drive copy tests – 1,691 MP3 song files (9176.5MB total)
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD
With this test the SSD has to read and write data, and the OCZ
Vertex 450 is performing admirably, finishing the test in fifth place.
Single drive copy tests – 7,861 JPEG picture files (8410.3MB total)
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD
The OCZ Vertex 450 finishes in fourth place in this test.
We already knew from the synthetic benchmarks that the OCZ
Vertex 450 has outstanding writing performance and excellent reading
performance. Ultimately, there are a few SSDs that have even better reading
performance, and this pushes the OCZ Vertex 450 SSD slightly down the pecking
order in the single drive copy tests. However, I think we can all agree that
the OCZ Vertex 450 is still a very fast SSD in the real world.
Windows start-up and closedown
For these tests, I simply used a stop watch and tested the
amount of time taken for a full installation of Windows 8 to boot to the
desktop, and then timed how long it took for Windows 8 to close down by the
normal Start Menu method.
The timing was started once the BIOS had initialised and
reached the “loading OS message”.
Windows 8 boot time
Windows 8 closedown
There is very little difference in the time taken to boot
Windows 8 between the modern SATA 6Gbps SSDs, and the same applies to the time
taken to shut the PC down.
Installing applications
Installing applications is possibly something you don't do
that often. But should you replace your system disk, then you will most likely
have to re-install your applications. Most of the SSD drives I have tested up
until now are quite slow at installing applications, most likely because their
I/O performance was quite limited.
For these tests, we picked some popular applications and
copied the entire contents of the CD or DVD media to an OCZ RevoDrive x2 240GB
SSD. We did this to make sure that the reading speed of our CD/DVD reader would
not hamper the performance of the target drive.
We then installed these applications onto our comparison drives,
which were all running mirror image installations of our Windows 8 Professional
64-bit installation, and timed the amount of time taken to install the
application with a stopwatch on each of the drives.
MS Office 2007 Professional (full install)
MS Office is one of those applications that make you cringe
at the thought of re-installing it.
Let's find out how our drives coped with the MS Office 2007
full install.
The OCZ Vertex 450 showed an excellent turn of speed when
installing this large office suite, and finished the test in second place.
Adobe Fireworks CS3
Adobe Fireworks CS3 is another popular package. Let's find
out how our drives coped with installing this application.
There isn’t a huge margin in the amount of time taken to
install this application with our modern SSDs. However, the OCZ Vertex 450
finishes in fourth place in this test.
Summary
Our real world tests, though not scientific in nature, I
feel are more realistic than simply running benchmarks. What is clear from these
tests is that the OCZ Vertex 450 has top notch performance in the real world.
Let’s check out application and game loading performance
on the next page of this article.....
These tests are very simple tests, but very important to
some users of SSD drives.
We simply started an application or game, and measured the
time taken for the application or game to fully load and start.
Application loading times
Adobe Fireworks CS3
These types of tests are becoming pretty pointless, as there
is so little difference in tangible performance between the modern SSDs.
However, the OCZ Vertex 450 loads this large application in 3.4 seconds, and
finishes the test in third place.
Corel PaintShop Pro 12
Again, I doubt anyone could tell difference from the fastest
to the slowest modern SATA 6Gbps SSD, as they are all very close.
Games loading times
FAR CRY 2
The OCZ Vertex 450 posts the fastest time along with three
other SSDs.
F.E.A.R. 2
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 posts the third fastest time,
but is only milliseconds behind the fastest SSD in this test.
Summary
By now it's is becoming very clear that the OCZ Vertex 450
SSD delivers excellent performance, and its excellent reading performance has
ensured that it's very close to being the fastest SSD in these tests.
Now let's head to the next page where we will see how the
OCZ Vertex 450 performs in PC Mark Vantage.....
PC Mark Vantage - HDD Suite
For these tests we will be using FutureMark’s PCMark
Vantage. This suite of real world test applications is highly regarded, as one
of the most comprehensive ways of testing a computer’s performance in the real
world. The PCMark Vantage test application also includes a HDD/SSD/USB Flash Drive
suite of benchmarking procedures, designed to fully test the performance of such
a device to its limits.
We will describe the basic way that each test is run above
the graph for each test.
Since this is the first time we have included results from
PC Mark Vantage in our reviews here at Myce.wiki, I will include screenshots of
results for all the SSDs that I tested. In future reviews I will only include a
screenshot for the review sample.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite results
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD results
Now let’s look at the individual PCMark Vantage HDD suite
scores, in the form of graphs.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Windows Defender
This test measures the drive's performance when running a
Windows Defender scan.
The test is approximately 99.38% reading and 0.62% writing.
The OCZ Vertex 450 takes second spot in this test, and is
performing extremely well.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Gaming
This test measures seamless data streaming performance from
the drive, in the game, Alan Wake.
The test is approximately 99.95% reading and 0.05% writing.
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 takes first place in this test,
showing an excellent turn of speed.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Picture import
This test measures the drive’s performance when importing a
large collection of images into Windows Photo Gallery.
The test is approximately 84.08% reading and 15.91% writing.
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 finishes the test in second
place, and not far behind the fastest SSD in this test.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Windows Vista start-up
This test measures the drive’s performance for a Windows
Vista start up.
The test is approximately 84.67% reading and 15.33% writing.
With a bit more writing involved in this test, the OCZ
Vertex 450 shows an excellent turn of speed, and finishes in second place.
PCMark Vantage HDD suite: Video editing
This test measures the drive’s performance by carrying out
various video editing tasks in Windows Movie Maker.
The test is approximately 53.41% reading and 46.59% writing.
Video editing inevitably means having to write large amounts
of data, and one would have expected the OCZ Vertex 450 to have finished near
the top of the table. As it happens, for some reason this test doesn't favour
the Indilinx BareFoot 3, and the Vertex 450 finishes the test in seventh place.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Windows Media Center
This test measures the concurrent drive performance of Media
Center tasks. Included in the test is, SDTV playback, SDTV recording, and SDTV
streaming to Extender for Windows Media Center.
The test is approximately 50.12% reading and 49.88% writing.
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 is showing excellent performance
and finishes the test in first place.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Windows Media Player
This test measures the drive’s performance when adding music
files to Windows Media Player 11.
The test is approximately 77.93% reading and 22.07% writing.
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 takes third spot in our table.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Application loading
This test measures the drive’s performance when loading
Microsoft Word 2007, Adobe Photoshop CS2, Internet Explorer 7, and Outlook
2007.
The test is approximately 87.17% reading and 12.83% writing.
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 finishes in sixth place.
PC Mark Vantage HDD suite: Overall score
The overall score is based on how the drive performed in
each of the individual HDD suite tests. They are then summed and an overall
score is derived from PC Mark Vantage.
As we can see from the results, the OCZ Vertex 450 is rated
a very impressive third fastest overall in these tests.
Now let’s round off the performance tests with the Myce
Reality Suite on the next page.....
Myce Reality Suite (storage).
So what is the Myce Reality storage test?
The Myce Reality Suite of tests is made from real everyday
applications and real data, there are no simulated tests, and everything is in
the real world. The only thing that's synthetic is that everything is automated
to make the tests fair, no matter which drive the tests are run on.
Recorded user sessions, by means of a script, are used to
launch the applications, load data, edit data, and then finally write that data
back to the target drive. The scripts do load the system much more than a human
could with these tests, as the scripts do not make mistakes, or pause to think
about what has to be done next.
Measurement system (revision 2)
The measuring system is part hardware and part software. The
hardware is proprietary and under an NDA, but what I can tell you is: The
measuring system can now accommodate SATA2, SATA3, and USB3.
Testing method.
Once all the test data files were complete, they were then
copied to a single folder. I then fitted an old 80GB HDD into the PC and did a
clean install of Windows 7 Home Premium x64. The latest hardware drivers were
installed and Windows update was run to install any new updates that were
available up to 08/01/2012. At this point the applications that were to be used
in the tests were installed and updated with the latest patches.
The folder containing the application test data files was
then copied over to our fresh Windows 7 HDD. The drive was cleaned up and then
the four test scenarios were recorded, with the scenario playback data file
which will run each test scenario saved to the desktop. A drive snapshot was
then taken of the complete HDD and the drive snapshot image copied to a second
HDD for safe keeping.
The image is then simply restored to each of the SSDs on
test. After imaging the drive the partition is then realigned “on the fly” and the
free space is filled and then deleted to force TRIM. A 20 minute settling time
is allowed before the tests are run, then each of the 4 tests is run and the
results gathered. This process is repeated for each of the drives I am testing.
The test scenarios are as follows.
- Graphics content
- Video editing
- Audio import and compression
- Application multitasking
Let’s begin the tests.
Myce Reality Suite – Graphics content.
Using ACDSee Pro 3, 100 JPG pictures with an average size of
10MB are imported into the ACDSee library, and then 12 of these JPG files are
then selected for a batch process, of resize, compress the quality to 80%, and
finally write the edited pictures back to the drive. The test is approximately
78% read and 22% write, with an average queue depth of 1.98.
The OCZ Vertex 450 performs extremely well in this test, and
finishes in third place.
Myce Reality Suite – Video editing.
Using Vegas Pro, a 14GB HD MPEG2 video stream is loaded into
the editor, from which 2 segments are then cut and pasted into new segments. There
is a lot of disc caching going on in this test, which is approximately 55% read
and 45% write, with an average queue depth of 1.89.
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 takes second place with a very
impressive 428.59 MB/s.
Myce Reality Suite – Audio import and compression.
Using Sony Sound Forge 10, a batch process is run consisting
of importing 30 24bit (192000 Hz sample rate) .wav files, and 100 16bit (44100
Hz sample rate) .wav files which are converted to MP3 audio files with a bit rate
of 128kbps, and the MP3s are then written back to the drive. The test is
approximately 72% read and 28% write, with an average queue depth of 2.62.
This time the OCZ Vertex 450 is nudged down to third place
by the Plextor M5 Pro.
Myce Reality Suite – Application multitasking.
For this test I used several popular applications, Microsoft
Word 2007, Microsoft Access 2007, Microsoft Excel 2007, Microsoft Outlook 2007,
Adobe reader, Adobe Photoshop CS3, uTorrent, Windows media player, and Internet
Explorer 9.
This session runs for approximately 12 minutes. The test is
started by downloading a Linux distribution via uTorrent, Windows media player
is then opened, and a 1080p video file is opened and played for the duration of
the test. Microsoft Outlook is opened and any new emails are received, read,
then replied too, a document in Adobe reader is opened and scrolled from start
to finish, 3 Microsoft Word documents with graphics content are opened, browsed
and some sections of the documents are copied and pasted into a forth document
and then saved back to the drive. The same applies to Microsoft Access and
Excel. 100 MP3 files are imported into Windows media library. Six JPG images
are loaded into Adobe Photoshop and some minor editing is done and the files
saved back to the drive.
Finally, Internet Explorer 9 is opened with 10 tabs, and the
contents of the 10 tabs refreshed, and browsed while the other applications are
busy in the background.
I would describe the multitasking pattern as moderate to
heavy.
During this test there is approximately 85% reading and 15%
writing, with an average queue depth of 6.73.
With queue depths higher, in this test the OCZ Vertex 450 is
able to show what it can really do when pushed hard, and performs well, finishing
the test in third spot.
Summary
I firmly believe that the Myce Reality Suite gives a very
good overall picture of how a drive can perform in the real world, and in this
case, the OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD is clearly a extremely capable performer.
Now let’s head to the next page, and see how well the
drive performs after heavy use....
Speed degradation after heavy testing
On this page I will test how the SSD performs after heavy
testing and usage, and also how the SSDs perform when the amount of data stored
on the SSD increases.
I now have a new policy as to how I go about testing an SSD.
In the past I would deliberately try and get an SSD into a “used state”, by
filling the drive several times before starting the tests. This seemed to work
quite well up until the SandForce based SSDs appeared, but because of the way
the SandForce controller works, it was near impossible to tell if deliberately
trying to get a SandForce based SSD into a “used state” had actually worked or
not.
A new strategy was required. So now I begin the tests with
the SSD in a clean state and allow it to look after itself during the testing
period. I start off the tests by running AS SSD benchmark. This gives me the
“as new” reading and writing performance of the SSD.
Once all the tests have been completed, the drive is then
tested as a system drive, and just used normally for many days which will also
includes idle time (this is something I have always done with a review sample).
At the end of the period, the drive is filled to capacity and then all files
are deleted from the drive and then a “quick format” is performed.
The last test is a rerun of AS SSD benchmark, and the result
from the final test is compared with the first run when the SSD was in an “as
new” state.
Let's find out what happens.
New state 20/05/2013
Used state 21/05/2013
With 3.52 Terabytes of data already written to the drive
during a testing period of only 34 hours, one would have expected the
performance to have dropped off slightly, and this is the case, although I
think it would be fair to say that the slowdown is marginal.
Filling up the SSD with data
For obvious reasons, when an SSD is tested, the drive is
always tested as a spare drive, and is generally always empty (no data on the
drive) during the synthetic benchmarks. There is no other way of having a level
playing field for all the SSDs under test. This of course changes during the
real world tests we conduct here at Myce.wiki.
Real users of course don't buy an SSD for it to remain
empty, and how full the SSD will eventually become varies from one user to the
next. What I thought would be useful is to run tests on the SSDs with real data
on the drives, and at different levels regarding how full the drive is.
For these tests the SSD is connected as a spare, and I test
at three different levels.
- Level 1: There an operating system installed on the
SSD, and all the applications that I use are also installed. In my case
that amounts to approximately 44GB of data on the SSD. - Level 2: The SSD is filled to 60% of its formatted
capacity. - Level 3: The SSD is filled to 80% of its formatted
capacity.
For the 60% and 80% tests, the type of data varies from
compressible to incompressible data, and file sizes range from a few Kilobytes
to very large files of several Gigabytes, then a single run of Anvil's SSD
Benchmark is run (100% incompressible).
It is also worth noting that the larger capacity SSDs will
tend to slow down less than their smaller counterparts, as the larger SSDs will
have more free NAND available to work with, and this is only a quick burst test
that all members will be able to run for themselves. The real test is the Myce
Sustained Performance test, which you can find a little further down the page.
Level 1: Operating system and applications installed.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD - Operating system and applications installed.
Level 2: SSD filled to 60% of its formatted capacity.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD - Filled to 60% of the drive's formatted capacity.
Level 3: SSD filled to 80% of its formatted capacity.
OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD - Filled to 80% of the drive's formatted capacity
In the graph below, I present the results.
Filling up an SSD with data can certainly cause a slowdown
to occur on some SSDs, as we can see from the table above. Filling up the OCZ
Vertex 450 with data had no real affect to the performance of the OCZ Vertex
450, in fact if anything the scores have gone up slightly. Of course this is
just a quick burst test.
Myce Sustainable Performance Test
Over the last few months I have been studying countless
analyzer traces of real computing workloads, and also developing a test that
would accurately emulate and measure how performance is sustained over a period
of time. For obvious reasons, it is not possible to test an SSD review sample
over several months before publishing a review. The solution was to condense
this down to a manageable test, that doesn't take too long to run.
I will make it clear right from the outset that this is not
a torture test. Bringing any SSD to its knees is not helpful in the least, as I
for one would not use any SSD that had slowed down to crawl, just to prove a
point. The Myce Sustainable Performance test, I believe is a tough, but
sensible test pattern to use for measuring how an SSD will be behave once it's pushed
hard over a period of time.
The test pattern is "workstation" based, and
closely emulates a typical video or graphics workstation environment. The
results are measured using the same hardware I use for the Myce Reality Suite
tests, however, the test data and measuring system use a different method.
From the 80% full test listed above, I already have an SSD
with a lot of data on it. Adding to the data that is already there, the
"Sustainable Performance" test data is added. This test data is
approximately 20GB is size, so once this is added the SSD is pretty full.
The test is then run for a period of 20 minutes. 60
performance measurements are taken for every minute of the test, and an average
performance figure is generated after each minute. At the end of the test I
have 20 performance measurements which are then used to generate the graph
below.
The faster SSDs will obviously sustain more writes then the
slower SSDs. For the fastest SSD in this test, the test pattern generated 146GB
of writes, and 193GB of data was read from the SSD during the test.
When reading the graph, you should not pay too much
attention to which drive is the fastest, but instead look at the sustainable
performance curve of each SSD, as this is what this test is all about.
For the SSD that I am reviewing, I will also add a second
graph which looks at the result in more detail.
So let's look at the results.
Sustainable Performance test
Detailed results for the review drive
We knew from the previous Anvil's SSD benchmark tests that
the OCZ Vertex 450 could maintain performance pretty well in a short burst test
when it was pretty full of data. The Myce Sustained performance test is a much
tougher challenge for any SSD. The test pattern used for the test is
workstation based, and we already know that OCZ Vertex 450 is very strong in a
simulated workstation environment from the IOMeter workstation test run.
What this test does show, is that garbage collection on the OCZ
Vertex 450 can pretty much keep pace when the SSD is pushed hard. There is a
slowdown, but the speed hasn't dropped by a large margin.
This concludes our review. To read the final thoughts and
conclusion, click the link below....
Final thoughts and the conclusion
User experience
A modern operating system such as Windows 8 rarely does one
thing at time; it processes hundreds of threads at once. Just take a look at
the processes and services that are running in task manager for an idea of how
much is going on, even with the PC idling at the desktop. When you start
running applications on top of this, the workload increases in line with the number
and type of applications you are running. It’s also fair to say that many of
these processes are already loaded into system RAM, but many are also loaded into
and unloaded from RAM to the system drive as and when they are required.
If we look at the 4 basic requirements for a really fast
SSD, they are as follows.
- Small file threaded performance needs to be high.
- Small random file performance needs to be high.
- Sequential read and write speeds need to be high.
- Fast access times.
The OCZ Vertex 450 SSD has all of these attributes in
abundance, and feels very snappy in use as a system drive.
Stability
I have only had the OCZ Vertex 450 SSD for a few hours, so
it’s not possible to comment on the drive's long term reliability, but I will
now be undertaking a long term test of the OCZ Vertex 450 and will report any
problem that may arise. What I can say is that during the testing period, the OCZ
Vertex 450 has been 100% stable, and has caused no problems whatsoever.
The OCZ Vertex 450 is as “plug n play” as it gets. There are
no special tweaks needed other than simply making sure that AHCI SATA mode is
enabled in the system UEFI (BIOS), and installing the latest Intel RST SATA
drivers, if you want to get the best performance and compatibility out of this
SSD.
Conclusion:
Let us summarise the most important positive and negative
points below:
Positive:
- Silky smooth operation as a system drive.
- Excellent sequential reading and writing performance, even
at very low queue depths. - Outstanding 4K random reading performance at high queue depths.
- Outstanding 4K random writing performance at low and high queue
depths. - TRIM support under Windows 7 and Windows 8.
- Completely silent operation.
- Fast operating system start-up and shutdown times.
- Windows 8 compatible Acronis HDD cloning software
included. - Very competitively priced.
- 3 year warranty.
Negative:
- Nothing worth mentioning at this price point.
To sum up, this is what I
would say:
As a system drive with the operating system and applications
running from the OCZ Vertex 450, this SSD is pretty hard to fault. Its
excellent reading performance ensures that applications launch very quickly, and
writing performance is outstanding across the board.
The BareFoot 3 M10 SSD controller that powers the OCZ Vertex
450, is maybe a down clocked version of the original BareFoot 3, but it still
packs a mighty punch. The Vertex 450 series is not as fast as OCZ's flagship
Vector SSD, but with a slower clocked SSD controller and 20nm NAND, it should
use less power than the Vector, which will be important if you were intending
to purchase the Vertex 450 for installing in a laptop.
The IMFT 20nm MLC NAND is still a very new technology, and
as yet unproven. Write cycles will of course have been reduced compared to the
25nm node process that was previously used. The transition to 20nm NAND is
however inevitable. It has lower power requirements, and it should be cheaper
than 25nm NAND. OCZ already has plans to expand the use of 20nm NAND with a
Vector series refresh (Vector 150) in Q3 2013. They are also planning a
replacement for the RevoDrive X3 PCIe based SSD in the shape of the OCZ Vector
PCIe SSD, also due for release in Q3 2013.
So where does this place the OCZ Vertex 450 series?
The Vertex 450 is a performance part, placed below the
flagship Vector series enthusiast part. Performance wise, the OCZ Vertex 450 is
a little slower than the Vector and the Samsung 840 Pro, but it is cheaper.
This allows the Vertex 450 to join the top flight of SSDs currently available
in my opinion, and joins the aforementioned OCZ Vector, Samsung 840 Pro, and
the Plextor M5 Pro, in the top tier of consumer grade SSDs currently available.
The OCZ Vertex 450 series is not just a refresh of the
original Vertex 4. The Vertex 450 can truly be seen as an upgrade, as its
faster, and more polished than the original Vertex 4.
What I really have liked about OCZ over the last year, is
their attention to detail. Their current crop of performance SSDs just look,
and feel like high quality products, and this can be seen from the case design
and finish, right through to the stability and performance of the Vertex 450
series SSD.
Price
The OCZ Vertex 450 series should be appearing in the shops
very soon, but for the moment I am only able to give you the suggested selling
price. The 256GB which I've reviewed in this article has a suggested selling
price of $234.99, with the 128GB and 512GB versions having a suggested selling
price of $129.99 and $499.99 respectively.
|
Product |
Available user capacity |
Price |
Price per |
|
OCZ Vertex 450 |
238GB |
$234.99 |
$0.99 |
The parting sentence is
“The OCZ Vertex 450 is a very fast SSD, competitively priced,
and is a worthy successor to the original Vertex 4 series SSD”.
Rating system
The editor rating is based on the following key factors.
- Performance
- Stability (is the device stable?)
- Price
- Warranty
- Supplied accessories (what is included in the package)
Thanks to:
|
|
EFD Software for |
|
|
Alex |
|
|
|
|
|
FutureMark for |
You may comment on this review below.
