 |
Review: OCZ Vector 256GB SSD |
Back in April 2012, I took a look at the OCZ Vertex 4 SSD,
and was very impressed by its performance. The Vertex 4 is a well rounded SSD,
with exceptional performance, and seven months on, has proved to be totally
stable and reliable. The Vertex 4 uses Marvell silicon with Indilinx firmware,
which has also proved to be a potent combination.
Today I'm taking a look at OCZ technologies first fully
in-house designed and manufactured SSD, in the shape of the new OCZ Vector SSD
which OCZ was kind enough to send me for review. Many Myce members will fondly
remember the first Indilinx BareFoot SSD controller which powered the original
Vertex SSD. Now it's time to meet the new Indilinx BareFoot 3 SSD controller.
The Vector series is going to be very important, perhaps the
most important SSD range that OCZ have released, to date. The controller silicon
and the firmware are all built and designed in-house, even the NAND packages
are built in-house from IMFT wafers, so OCZ have a lot riding on the Vector
series of SSDs.
OCZ Technology hasn't gone for straight out and out
performance with the Vector series of SSDs. They still have, as we will see
later in this article, astounding performance, but this time OCZ has also
focused heavily on reliability and endurance, and a much tighter validation
process for both the hardware and firmware.
The Vector series is available in three capacities, 128GB,
256GB, and finally 512GB. The version I'll be looking at today is the 256GB
version. The OCZ Vector is aimed at the high end consumer, and workstation
markets.
We will take a look at the new hardware on the next page of
this article, but for now, let's take a look at the complete Vector package.
OCZ Technology company information
OCZ Technology should need no introduction, but those of you
who would like to find out more about OCZ, can do so at their website.
The OCZ Technology Vector - 256GB SSD
Now it’s time to take a look at the drive itself and what it
came shipped with.
Packaging
Package front
Package rear
Inside the box
Complete package
The Vector package consists of the OCZ Vector SSD itself, a 2.5
inch to 3.5 inch converter bracket, eight fixing screws, an "I Love my
SSD" sticker, the quick start booklet (not shown), and finally a serial
key for Acronis True Image HD cloning software, which we will take a brief look
at further down this page.
OCZ Vector 256GB SSD
The top of the unit is made of metal, and looks extremely
nice with its high quality finish. Unfortunately, the scan of the top of the
SSD, doesn't do the product justice. It really does look very attractive indeed.
The metal top also acts as a heat sink for the BareFoot 3 controller.
Drive underside
On the underside of the drive we can see the SATA power and
data connectors, and four drive mounting holes. The bottom of the case is also
made of metal, and for an SSD, the Vector is quite heavy. We can also see that
the SSD was manufactured in Taiwan, and according to the label, that the review
sample is a prototype. Having contacted OCZ, I'm assured that the review sample
is the final retail hardware. There may be a minor firmware update for the
retail units, but this update will not affect performance.
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 converter
bracket.
Software
The software supplied via download from the OCZ Technology
website is as follows.
- OCZ SSD Toolbox
- Acronis True Image HD
OCZ SSD Toolbox
The OCZ SSD toolbox provides a means of updating the SSDs
firmware, Secure Erasing the SSD, and also providing useful information about
the OCZ Vector hardware via S.M.A.R.T.
Bundled Acronis True Image HD
As I mentioned a little earlier on this page, the OCZ Vector
is bundled with a serial key for Acronis True Image HD. Primarily this software
is provided to allow the consumer to easily migrate their existing system
partition over to their new Vector SSD. But, True Image HD also has a few other
very useful features. Let's take a brief look at the True Image HD software.
Note: Not all features are available in the OEM version.
Clone your existing system drive.
Recover the backup of your system drive to your new Vector SSD
Cloning your system drive to your new Vector only takes a
few simple mouse clicks, and enough HDD space for the backup data itself.
Recovering the backup to your new Vector SSD is once again a very simple task,
only requiring a few simple mouse clicks.
TRIM SSD
TRIM SSD feature
Acronis True Image HD also has a very useful TRIM SSD
feature, which is able to TRIM an SSD even when used with an operating system
that doesn't natively support the TRIM command.
All in all, the bundled software is a very nice addition.
Now let's head to the next page, where we look in more
detail at the OCZ Vector series SSD.....
A closer look at the OCZ Vector series hardware.
Let's take a look at the hardware found inside the OCZ
Vector 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 SSD controller, eight 25nm 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 SSD controller
Above we can see the brand new Indilinx BareFoot 3 SSD
controller, designated IDX500M00-BC.
Indilinx BareFoot 3 block diagram
The new Indilinx BareFoot 3 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. Unfortunately, there is not much
more known about this processor, but it is most likely clocked at around
400MHz.
DDR3 cache
There are two DDR3 cache memory chip packages mounted on the
256GB Vector SSD giving a total cache of 512MB on the 128GB and 256GB Vector SSDs.
The cache is doubled to 1GB on the 512GB Vector and is manufactured by Micron.
25nm IMFT MLC sync NAND
The NAND wafers are manufactured by IMFT. OCZ build the NAND
chip packages from those wafers, and there are sixteen NAND chip packages
onboard the OCZ Vector 256GB SSD, with each NAND package having a capacity of
16GB.
BareFoot 3 and Vector features
Please note that the following features and screenshots were
provided by OCZ Technology, with the exception of the performance specification
screenshot.
Specifications
Drive maintenance features
For Windows 7 and Windows 8 users, and some distributions of
Linux, the OCZ Vector series SSD supports ATA TRIM to keep the NAND clean. The OCZ
Vector series also has advanced garbage collection to clean the NAND during
drive idle periods.
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 3nd 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 Vertex 4 512GB 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
A makeover for my SSD reviews, and a new test
In fact several things are new in this review, but first the
graphs used to display the results have undergone a makeover. The new graphs I
hope will look more professional, and easier to read.
I have also made the transition to Windows 8, meaning that a
lot of effort went into making sure that the results obtained on Windows 8 are
consistent with those previously obtained with Windows 7. In fact the basic
benchmarks are all very consistent, but the real world tests were not. For this
reason, I reran the real world tests on 6 other popular SSDs, and discarded the
other results. This means there are now no HDD results in the reviews. This
should not be a problem as comparing an SSD to an HDD has long since become a
pointless task.
The Myce Reality Suite tests still use a Windows 7 test
image, and this will remain the case for the near future.
I have also developed a new test that meaningfully measures
"sustainable SSD performance over time", and you can read about this
on the appropriate page in this article.
The OCZ Vector series 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
Test applications
To test the performance of the OCZ Vector series 256GB 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
Test procedures
I will start off our testing procedures explanation by
stating that I did not run many synthetic benchmarks on the OCZ Vector series 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 Vector
series SSD, and will complement this with advanced benchmarks using IOMeter and
AS SSD benchmark. I will also show how the OCZ Vector 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
- Plextor PX-256M2S SSD
- Crucial RealSSD C300 128GB SSD
- OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD
- Intel 510 series 120GB SSD
- Crucial M4 256GB SSD
- OCZ Octane 512GB SSD
- Plextor PX-256M3 256GB SSD
- OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD
- Kingston Hyper X 3K 240GB SSD
- SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD
- OCZ Agility 4 256GB SSD
- Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB SSD
- Samsung 830 256GB SSD
- OCZ Vector 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 Vector series 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 519.3 MB/s the OCZ
Vector series is showing an excellent turn of speed.
Let's see how this compares to other recently tested SSDs in
the table below.
Although there is not a big difference in the sequential reading
performance of the top eight contenders, the Vector finishes the test in fifth
place.
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 Vector series are
extremely impressive, topping out at 559 MB/s, and writing speed is also excellent
topping out at nearly 537 MB/s.
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
and writing speeds are excellent, and random read and write speeds, especially
at higher queue depths, are very impressive.
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 Vector series in
the form of a screenshot. All our other comparison drives’ results are
presented in the form of a graph.
The OCZ Vector series is showing excellent performance in
the AS SSD test run, and is the fastest SSD in this test by quite a large
margin.
Summary:
The OCZ Vector series has performed well in the basic
synthetic benchmarks. Random reading and writing performance is excellent, and
not to be outdone, sequential reading and writing speed is also excellent.
However, as we have learnt over the years, synthetic benchmarks don't really
tell us much about how an SSD will perform in the real world. So let's wait and
see how the OCZ Vector performs in the real world a little later in this
article.
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.
The things that I will look at are the total I/O per second and
total MB/s.
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 it can. The OCZ Vector 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 Vector series SSD – 4K random write (QD1)
At 151.24 MB/s the OCZ Vector series is showing excellent
performance at this queue depth, and is the second fastest SSD in this test.
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 Vector series (Queue depth 4)
At a queue depth of 4, the OCZ Vector gets its skates on,
and is the fastest drive in this test.
Queue depth 32
OCZ Vector series (Queue depth 32)
Once again the OCZ Vector is out in front with a massively
impressive 377.55 MB/s in this test.
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
OCZ Vector series SSD – 4K random write (QD4 with fully random data)
The OCZ Vector pays no penalty when writing data which is incompressible,
and is once again the fastest SSD in this test.
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 for 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.
Just like the previous generation SSD the OCZ Vertex 4, the OCZ
Vector reaches very high performance at very low queue depths, and doesn't stop
there, it gets faster and faster as queue depths rise.
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 Vector series SSD (Queue depth 1)
The OCZ Vector series is performing extremely well in this
test, and finishes in fourth place.
Queue depth 4
OCZ Vector series SSD (Queue depth 4)
With a slightly higher queue depth the Vector is not scaling
as well as it might, and finishes the test in the middle of the pack.
Queue depth 32
OCZ Vector series SSD (Queue depth 32)
If the OCZ Vector was slightly disappointing at a queue
depth of 4, it has certainly made up for it at a queue depth of 32. The Vector
is a long way in front, and is the first SATA based SSD to reach over 400 MB/s
in this test.
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 Vector series 4K random read
performance in detail, we can see that up to queue depth 2, the Vector is
scaling perfectly, it then takes a dip at queue depth 3, and it's not until
it's at queue depth 8 that it recovers that excellent scaling. Now, it could be
that the firmware needs a little tweaking, or it could be just a characteristic
of the Vector's performance profile. In either case, even with the dip at queue
depth 3 and 4, for a desktop PC user, this should never be noticeable in the
real world.
IOMeter 512KB write test with repeating data.
Sequential writing performance is also very important; in
this test sequential writing performance is measured.
OCZ Vector series 512K
Sequential write with repeating data
The OCZ Vector series has excellent sequential writing
speed, and even with data that is easily compressible by the SandForce based
SSDs, the OCZ Vector is still the fastest SSD in this test.
IOMeter 512KB sequential write test with fully random data.
This test is 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 Vector series 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. On the other hand, the OCZ Vector
series is performing extremely well, and is by quite some margin the fastest
SSD in this test.
IOMeter 512KB sequential read test QD1.
This test measures 512k sequential reading performance at
very low queue depths.
OCZ Vector series SSD – 512K sequential reading test QD1
The OCZ Vector series has exceptional sequential reading
performance at very low queue depths, and is once again the fastest SSD.
IOMeter 512KB sequential read test (dual threaded).
This test measures 512k sequential reading performance QD2.
OCZ Vector series SSD – 512K sequential reading test QD2
At a more realistic queue depth the OCZ Vector series is still
showing excellent sequential reading performance, and is marginally the fastest
SSD in this test.
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 Vector series SSD – Workstation simulation
As I said at the start of this article, OCZ are aiming the
Vector at the high end consumer and workstation market. In the IOMeter
workstation simulation, the OCZ Vector is showing massively good performance,
and is very comfortably faster than any other SSD in this test, even crunching
its OCZ stable mate, the Vertex 4.
Summary
Overall the OCZ Vector series SSD is giving excellent
performance, and in most of these IOMeter tests it is the fastest SATA SSD I
have tested. Low queue depth performance in most parts is excellent, and at higher
queue depths it pulls further and further ahead in most of these tests.
Now let’s head to the next page where we will look at how
the OCZ Vector series SSD performs using a brand 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 data sets 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% (non compressible data)
So let’s begin the tests.
0 fill
OCZ Vector series 256GB (0 fill)
Total score
Writing score
Reading score
In the 0 fill test, the OCZ Vector is overall the fastest
SSD, with writing performance being better than reading performance.
Application profile
OCZ Vector series 256GB SSD (application profile)
Total score
Writing score
Reading score
The application test pattern is much more realistic in terms
of the type of data that real users will use, and in this case the OCZ Vector
is performing extremely well, finishing the test in first place.
100% incompressible
OCZ Vector series 256GB SSD (100% incompressible)
Total score
Writing score
Reading score
With test data that can't be compressed at all, the OCZ
Vector series 256GB SSD is once again doing extremely well in this test, and is
overall the fastest SSD in this test.
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 Vector series has however performed exceptionally well
in these tests, and is the fastest SSD in these 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 work 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 a multiple file copy of various file
sizes. Then I will round off the tests by copying a folder of MP3 audio files,
and also a folder of JPG pictures.
I should point out that this is not a scientific way of
measuring performance. These timings were taken with a stop watch; I have
however ensured that the reading drive is well able to supply a data stream to
our writing drive, which is high enough not to be slowing down the performance
of the writing drive.
I will once again be comparing the obtained results with our
comparison drives, and will present the results in the form of graphs.
Multiple file copy writing test
For this test I copied the Nero Burning Rom install folder
from our review PC to the OCZ RevoDrive X2 240GB SSD, and then copied the
contents from the RevoDrive X2 to the OCZ Vector series SSD and our other
comparison drives.
Our test copy contained 1,772 files of various sizes with a
combined capacity of 307MB.
The OCZ Vector series is showing excellent performance, and
is in first place in this test.
Single large file writing test (7.95GB)
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
Vector series SSD and our comparison drives.
The large ISO file contains quite a lot of incompressible
data which is a handicap to the SF-2281 based SSDs. Incompressible data is no
problem for the Indilinx BareFoot 3 controller, and the OCZ Vector is showing
excellent performance.
Write a folder of JPG picture files.
For this test I copied a folder of JPG picture files from
our OCZ Vertex 3 SSD to the OCZ Vector series SSD, and our other comparison
drives. The folder contained 3,714 JPG pictures, with a total capacity of
5.16GB.
Once again, the OCZ Vector series is showing excellent
performance, and finishes this test in first place.
Write a folder of MP3 audio files.
For this test I copied a folder of MP3 audio files from our
OCZ Vertex 3 SSD to the OCZ Vector series SSD and our other comparison drives.
The folder contained 851 MP3 audio files, with a total capacity of 3.85GB.
Once again the OCZ Vector is the fastest SSD.
Summary
We already know the OCZ Vector has excellent writing
performance, and essentially these tests are based on writing performance. What
these tests do show is that even in the real world the OCZ Vector maintains
this excellent writing performance.
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 – 851 MP3 song files (3.85GB total)
With this test the SSD has to read and write data, and what
this test does show is that the OCZ Vector has excellent performance, finishing
the test in first place.
Single drive copy tests – 3,714 JPEG picture files (5.16GB total)
Once again, the OCZ Vector is showing excellent performance,
and is comfortably the fastest SSD in this test.
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 7 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 Vertex 3 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 Vector showed an excellent turn of speed when
installing this large office suite, and finished the test in first 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 Vector finishes
in first 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 Vector 256GB SSD has excellent 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 Vector loads this large application the fastest.
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, but for
posterity the Samsung 830 is marginally the fastest.
Games loading times
FAR CRY 2
The OCZ Vector is marginally the fastest.
F.E.A.R. 2
This time the OCZ Vector is beaten by the Corsair Neutron.
Summary
By now it's is becoming very clear that the OCZ Vector
series has excellent performance, and its excellent low queue depth sequential
reading speed is paying a handsome dividend.
Now let’s round off this article with the Myce Reality
Suite tests 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.
The OCZ Vector has done extremely well here, and is
comfortably the fastest SSD in this test.
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, and the test is approximately
55% read and 45% write.
Once again the OCZ Vector is showing exceptional performance.
MyCE Reality Suite – Audio import and compression.
Using Sony Sound Forge 10, a batch process is run consisting
of 30 24bit (192000 Hz sample rate) .wav files, and 100 16bit (44100 Hz sample
rate) .wav files are imported and then converted to MP3 audio files with a bit rate
of 128kbps, and the converted files are written back to the drive. The test is
approximately 72% read and 28% write.
Yet again the OCZ Vector is performing extremely well, and
finished this test in first place.
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 queue depths higher in this test the OCZ Vector is able
to show what it can really do when pushed hard, and is by quite some margin the
fastest SSD in this test.
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 Vector series is clearly an extremely fast SSD.
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.
New state 15/11/2012
Used state 24/11/2012
With 6.42 Terabytes of data already written to the drive
during a testing period of just 9 days, one would have expected the performance
to have dropped off slightly, and this is the case. Low queue depth 4K random
write has dropped off slightly, and reading latency has increased. Given that
so much data has been written to the OCZ Vector is such a short timeframe, my
opinion is the OCZ Vector has done remarkably well in maintaining performance.
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.com.
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 53GB 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.
Level 1: Operating system and applications installed.
OCZ Vector series 256GB - Operating system and applications installed.
Level 2: SSD filled to 60% of its formatted capacity.
OCZ Vector series 256GB - Filled to 60% of the drive's formatted capacity.
Level 3: SSD filled to 80% of its formatted capacity.
OCZ Vector series 256GB - Filled to 80% of the drive's formatted capacity
In the graph below, I present the results.
One would expect as the SSD fills with data the drive will
slow down slightly. Remarkably, this wasn't the case with the OCZ Vector. In
fact the OCZ Vector achieved its highest score with the SSD filled to 80% of
its stated capacity.
Myce Sustainable Performance Test
Over the last four 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.
Since this is the first time I have used this test, I have
only used a selection of SSDs for the test, but I have chosen SSDs that use
different SSD controllers, so I could cover as much as possible.
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 of the review drive
Ok, I have the first results, but since this is the OCZ
Vector review, I will first look at how the Vector has performed. As we see
from the above graph, performance has only varied by a very small amount, in
fact no more than 4MB/s. It's quite clear from this result that the OCZ Vector
has no problem in maintaining performance, even when pushed very hard.
Let's look at the other SSDs in this test.
The Intel 520 has done very well, no doubt thanks to the large
NAND over-provisioning, and also the SandForce SF-2281 controller being able to
compress some data on the fly, resulting in less writes to the NAND. The
Corsair Neutron has also done well, again most likely because of its large NAND
over-provisioning.
The Crucial M4 and the Samsung 830 didn't do quite so well.
Clearly the garbage collection couldn't clean the NAND quite fast enough to
keep up with the sustained loading of this test. However, both these SSDs are
still performing well, and they haven't ground to a halt. All in all, I
wouldn't be worried about any of these SSDs not being able to maintain
performance during a normal user session on a desktop PC.
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 needs to be high.
- Fast access times.
The OCZ Vector series SSD has all of the above attributes in
abundance, and feels very snappy in use as a system drive.
Stability
I have only had the OCZ Vector series SSD for a few days, so
it’s not possible to comment on the drive's long term reliability. However, OCZ
certainly have faith in the drive as they provide a 5 year warranty, and I have
to say that the OCZ Vector has been 100% stable, and has caused no problems
whatsoever.
The OCZ Vector series 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.
Long term testing on the OCZ Vector series begins now, and I
will report back if I should encounter any reliability issues with this SSD.
Conclusion:
Let us summarise the most important positive and negative
points below:
Positive:
- Silky smooth operation as a system drive.
- Excellent sustained performance under a heavy workload.
- Outstanding sequential reading and writing performance,
even at very low queue depths. - Outstanding 4K random writing performance at low and high queue
depths. - Excellent 4K random reading performance at low queue depths.
- Astounding 4K random reading performance at high queue
depths. - Very good software bundle.
- SATA 6Gbps support.
- TRIM support under Windows 7 and Windows 8.
- Ultra fast access times.
- Good price.
- Completely silent operation.
- Fast operating system start-up and shutdown times.
- 5 year warranty.
Negative:
- Nothing to mention.
To sum up, this is what I
would say:
I have to take my hat off to OCZ Technology. Each year they
manage to bring out a new state of the art SSD, and not only that, each
generation is faster and more durable. OCZ also seem to know exactly what is
required with regard to an SSD's performance profile.
In the past OCZ have always relied on controller silicon
from another manufacturer, and until the Octane series of SSDs, they also
relied on someone else providing the firmware. The OCZ Vector is a different
animal. OCZ own Indilinx and PLX Technology, and those two teams are
responsible for the Vector SSD controller and firmware. So, OCZ now have an SSD
that they have complete control over, with regard to quality, and reliability.
During the short time that I've had my hands on the OCZ
Vector, I can say without any reservation that the Vector just oozes quality,
from the strong metal case, circuit board layout, and attention to detail regarding
how the drive looks. Then of course there is the performance of the OCZ Vector.
I can sum that up in a few words. "The OCZ Vector goes like a bat out of
hell".
Price and availability
The suggested price of the OCZ Vector is as follows.
- Vector 128GB - $149.99
- Vector 256GB - $269.99
- Vector 512GB - $559.99
The OCZ Vector certainly isn't cheap, but in my opinion is reasonably
priced considering the performance. As for availability, this is a hard launch
of the OCZ Vector series, so the OCZ Vector should be available for purchase
within 48 hours of reading this article.
The parting sentence is
“The OCZ Vector goes like a bat out of hell, and during
the testing period proved to be 100% stable, and reliable”.
You may comment on this review below.
Thanks to:
|
|
EFD Software for |
|
|
Alex |
|
|
