OCZ Vertex 4 SSD review

Review: OCZ Vertex 4 – 512GB SSD Reviewed by: Wendy Collins Robertson Provided by: OCZ Technology Model: VTX4-25SAT3-512G Firmware version: 05.10.31

Back in January I reviewed the OCZ Octane SSD,
and was very impressed by its performance. The Octane was the first SSD to use
OCZ own Indilinx Everest SSD controller. I was very curious as to how the
Octane performed so well in the real world, despite what its technical
specifications suggested. After all, the Octane had distinctly average small
file random performance, but what it could do was produce very good small
random file performance at low queue depths, and it had ultra fast file access
times which is ideal for a consumer grade desktop SSD.

Even before I had published the Octane review, OCZ had
demonstrated the Indilinx Everest 2 controller at the CES show in Las Vegas,
even as early as January the Everest 2 looked to have a lot more grunt and very
much improved performance, and I remember thinking that if OCZ could bring this
type of performance to the market at a reasonable price, then they would have a
real winner on their hands. Also I pondered the idea that this controller could
well be a replacement for the SF-2281 controller found in the current Vertex 3
range of SSDs. Of course this was pure speculation at the time, but it did make
a lot of sense.

So here we are in April 2012, and the OCZ Vertex 4 has
landed on my desk, and it does indeed contain the brand new Everest 2
controller. Before I go any further, let’s take a quick look at the history of
the OCZ Vertex range of SSDs.

Back in early 2009, the original Vertex SSD was launched,
using the original Indilinx BareFoot SSD controller. It became an instant hit,
and was a real rival to then dominant Intel G1 SSD. It was cheaper than the
Intel, and in many cases showed the G1 a clean pair of heels in the performance
stakes.

In 2010, the Vertex 2 appeared, and this time OCZ had
switched controller manufacturers and introduced the SandForce SF-1200 series
of SSD processors to the world. At the time, the performance of the Vertex 2
was untouchable, and it still remains one of the very fastest SATA 3Gbps SSDs.

In March 2011 OCZ introduced the Vertex 3 range of SSDs, and
once again went to SandForce for the controller. This time it was a very much
more powerful beast in the shape of the SATA 6Gbps SF-2281 controller, and the
Vertex 3 still remains right at the top with regard to performance.

Now in spring 2012 we find we have gone full circle, and the
Vertex 4 is back at its roots, using an Indilinx controller, the Everest 2. Of
course things have changed since this time last year. OCZ now own Indilinx, although
owning a company who designs and manufacturers an SSD controller won’t be
enough, if that controller can’t deliver the goods. Everyone will see the
Vertex 4 as an upgrade to the Vertex 3, so it must perform better, and it must
have a competitive price to match, a tall order indeed.

At launch, the OCZ Vertex 4 will be available in three
capacities, 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB. The Everest 2 controller can address up to
2TB of NAND, so OCZ could build a 2TB SSD if there was a demand for such a
product.

OCZ was kind enough to send me a review sample of their
Vertex 4 series of SSDs, in actual fact the 512GB version. In this review I
will be taking a look at the performance, and stability of OCZ’s new range of
SSDs.

So, let’s find out how this new SSD performs in our range of
tests.     

OCZ Technology company information

OCZ should need no introduction, but for those of you who
would like to find out more about OCZ Technology, you can do so at their website.

The OCZ Vertex 4 series 512GB SSD

Now it’s time to take a look at the drive itself and what it
came shipped with.

Packaging

Box front

Box rear

Inside the box

The package contained the OCZ Vertex 4 series 512GB SSD, a
pack of eight fixing screws, a 2.5 inch to 3.5 inch converter bracket, an
installation guide, and finally a bragging sticker to fix somewhere prominent
on the case of your PC.

OCZ Vertex 4 - 512GB SSD

The top of the OCZ Vertex 4 case is made from a strong but
flexible plastic.

Drive underside

The underside of the drive is pretty boring; we can see the
SATA power and data connectors, and four drive mounting holes. We can also see
the drive's model and serial number. The bottom of the case is made from strong
metal which also acts as a heatsink for the Everest 2 controller, and removing
the case reveals a heat transfer pad, which is designed to transfer heat away
from the controller itself.

Now let's head to the next page, where we look in more
detail at the OCZ Vertex 4 SSD.....

 

OCZ Vertex 4 SSD hardware.

Let's take a closer look at the hardware.

Drive internals

OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD (PCB top-side)

On the top side of the PCB, we can see eight MLC NAND chip
packages, and the first of two 512MB of SDRAM cache packages. We can also see
what are thought to be channel muxing chips to provide optimum throughput to
the NAND array.

OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD (PCB underside)

On the underside of the PCB we can see another eight NAND
chips, the Indilinx Everest 2 controller, and the second 512MB of cache. Note
the strange orientation of the Everest 2 controller. OCZ didn’t place it that
way just to be different, and there are sound engineering principles why the
controller is orientated in this fashion.

Placing the controller in the centre of the PCB and placing
it at an offset angle allows the distance to each of the NAND chips to be
minimised. The shorter the distance a signal has to travel, then the faster it
will travel and will be less prone to picking up noise which then degrades the
signal, as a degraded signal will then require greater error correction. So orientating
the controller in this fashion has technical advantages.

Indilinx Everest 2 SSD platform controller.

Above we can see the brand new 400 series Indilinx Everest 2
SSD processor, designated IDX400M00-BC on the OCZ Vertex 4 series of SSDs.

Intel 25nm MLC NAND

The OCZ Vertex 4 series 512GB SSD has 512GB of Intel ONFI 2 synchronous
MLC NAND onboard, with a life expectancy of 5000 P/E cycles, and a user
capacity of 476GB.

Micron DDR3 SDRAM cache

Above we can see the cache chips that are fitted to the OCZ
Vertex 4. They consists of two 800MHz DDR3 SDRAM chip packages manufactured by
Micron, each chip has a capacity of 512MB giving a total of 1GB of cache. The
cache provides a stable read and write buffer for the Everest 2 controller, and
also provides space for things such as deferred writes, and other housekeeping
tasks.

Specifications

Specifications

From the above specifications we can see that the 512GB is
the fastest with the 256GB model not that far behind. The 128GB model has lower
sequential write, but still enjoys excellent small file random performance.

Features

From the “features” screenshot we can see that the warranty
on the OCZ Vertex 4 has been increased to five years. This is up from the three
years that was offered on the Vertex 3.

Advanced feature set

• Broadest NAND flash support,
  including 1xnm and TLC
• Up to 8 NAND flash channels with up
  to 16-way interleaving per channel
• Up to 535 MB/s transfer rates when
  using synchronous NAND
• HyperQueueing™ and Native Command
  Queuing (NCQ), with a queue depth up to 32 commands, and algorithms to
  optimize the order in which read and write operations are executed
• Up to 8Gb (1GB) of 800MHz DDR2/DDR3
  DRAM cache support
• Multi-Level ECC with 128-bit
  correction capability per 1KB of data
• RNA Redundant NAND Array to protect
  against catastrophic NAND flash failure
• True end-to-end data path protection
  performs data integrity checks at every juncture where data is
  transmitted, received, processed and stored to ensure that corrupted data
  will be detected and not propagated
• Power fail protection and optional
  Supercap support prevents data loss in the event of a power failure
• Auto encryption and AES-256
  encryption to protect and secure data
• Additional flash management
  techniques such as TRIM, background garbage collection, dynamic and static
  wear-leveling and advanced flash defect management

Ndurance 2.0

While not a lot is known about the inner workings of the
Everest 2 controller, I can now tell you a little bit about Ndurance 2.

As NAND dies shrink, and costs drive manufacturers of NAND
to squeeze evermore bits of data into a single NAND cell, then the endurance of
the NAND takes a hit in the form of reduced write cycles. For this reason write
amplification must be kept as low as possible. The SandForce answer to this was
to compress data on the fly, thereby reducing the amount of data that had to be
written to the NAND array. This solution is very effective at reducing write
amplification, but the penalty for compressing data on the fly is reduced
performance with data that can’t be compressed.

Ndurance 2 takes a different approach. It does not compress
data, so there is no performance hit when reading or writing compressed data.
Ndurance 2 technology uses a suite of advanced NAND flash management
techniques, designed by Indilinx to work in tandem with the Indilinx Everest 2
SSD processor. The goal is to give consumer grade MLC NAND the same endurance
as enterprise grade SSDs.

Ndurance 2 technology uses several different techniques to
achieve this. For further clarification on how this works, the following
paragraphs in (italic) were supplied by OCZ Technology.

“Advanced Multi Level ECC

Ndurance 2.0 features an advanced, multi-level ECC engine
with progressive error correction capabilities that can adapt to the specific
error characteristics of different NAND devices. By combining a flexible and
programmable ECC engine with a sophisticated Flash Translation Layer (FTL),
Ndurance 2.0 can achieve an effective correction power of up to 128 bits per
1KB of data, far exceeding the requirements specified for current and
next-generation NAND flash devices while significantly reducing the
uncorrectable bit error rate (UBER).

Adaptive NAND Management and Signal Processing

Ndurance 2.0 does not rely on advanced ECC methods alone
to protect against data loss, but incorporates several capabilities to mitigate
the actual sources of data corruption. It applies both proprietary and
vendor-commands that such as internal voltage shifting and sophisticated signal
processing techniques to extend the life of the NAND cell. As a result,
Ndurance 2.0 minimizes the physical deterioration of NAND flash, reduces
disturbances that affect adjacent flash cells, and improves physical data recovery
capabilities, all of which maximize drive life.

Optional Redundant NAND Array™ (RNA) Technology

The optional RNA technology generates parity data
information and stripes it across multiple NAND flash cells. The redundancy created
by this block-level striping and distributed parity provides RAID-like
protection that enables data to be divided and replicated amongst multiple NAND
flash devices within the SSD. As a result, RNA safeguards against catastrophic
NAND flash failures and uncorrectable data errors beyond what ECC covers,
providing yet another mechanism for extending NAND flash life.

Reduced Write Amplification without Compression

Ndurance 2.0 additionally extends SSD life by reducing
the actual number of programming operations to NAND flash without the need for
performance-degrading data compression. To achieve lower write amplification,
several proprietary methods are implemented that improve the efficiency of
read-modify-write operations. By concatenating multiple write requests from the
host and minimizing wasteful copy back operations of unaffected data sectors,
excessive programming and read operations can be virtually eliminated, which in
turn, preserves precious program/erase cycles.”

Thanks to OCZ Technology for providing this information.

Drive maintenance features

For Windows 7 users and some distributions of Linux, the OCZ
Vertex 4 SSD supports ATA TRIM to keep the NAND clean. The Vertex 4 also has
advanced garbage collection to clean the NAND during drive idle periods. You
can also use the OCZ SSD toolbox to maintain the Vertex 4 series of SSDs.

OCZ SSD Toolbox

From the toolbox the user is able to monitor the SSD health
status via SMART. You can also securely erase the drive, and update the drive's
firmware.

Note: To update the drive's firmware, the drive needs to be
connected as a spare, since Windows cannot flash a drive that is running the
operating system. The same applies to secure erasing the SSD.

The OCZ SSD toolbox is functional, and it works very well
indeed.

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: AsRock Z68 Extreme 4 (Intel Z68 chipset)
• Processor: Intel 2^nd generation Core i7 2600K
• RAM: 8GB G.Skill RipjawX DDR3 1600MHz (dual channel)
• GFX: Onboard Intel HD 3000
• Sound: Onboard Realtek ALC889 HD audio controller
• Hard disk OS: OCZ Vertex 120GB SSD
• Hard disk storage: 1X 500GB Samsung Spinpoint F3, and 1X 1TB
  Samsung Spinpoint F1.
• Case: Antec 900
• PSU: Enermax Liberty 620W
• Display: Dell UltraSharp U2412M 24” widescreen IPS LCD (HDCP
  compliant)
• Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit with Service Pack 1

The OCZ Vertex 4 SSD was connected to the Intel native SATA 6Gbps
(port 0) on the Z68 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 10.8.0.1003

Test applications

To test the performance of the OCZ Vertex 4 512GB 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 Vertex 4 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
4 SSD, and will complement this with advanced benchmarks using IOMeter and AS
SSD benchmark. I will also show how the OCZ Vertex 4 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. Some
highly regarded people on other sites found this statement quite funny a couple
of years ago when I made it, but my, how times have changed in the world of SSD
reviewing.

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

• 120GB OCZ Vertex SSD (firmware 1.5) SSD
• 500GB Samsung SpinPoint F3 (HD502HJ) HDD
• Seagate Momentus XT 500GB (Hybrid drive)
• OCZ Agility 120GB (firmware 1.5) SSD
• Intel X25-M 80GB (series G1) SSD
• OCZ Vertex 2 100GB SSD
• 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
• OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD
• Plextor PX-256M3 256GB SSD
• OCZ Vertex 4 512GB 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.

• Both our spinning HDD drives were defragged before the
  start of each test.

• All SSD and HDD used in this article had their partitions
  aligned to the Windows 7 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 4 512GB SSD

 Comparison SSD

 Comparison HDD

Now let's head to the next page, where I look at some
basic benchmarks...

Synthetic Benchmarks

---

HD Tune Pro

At this point I would normally run the sequential read test
using HD-Tune Pro. Unfortunately HD Tune would not carry out this test on the
Vertex 4. OCZ are investigating and will report back in due course. However, my
own feeling as to why HD Tune cannot perform this test is due to how HD Tune
accesses the drive at low level. My feeling is that it can’t get past the FTL
(Flash Translation Layer) on the Vertex 4.

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 4 are extremely
impressive, topping out at just over 526MB/s, and writing speed is also very impressive
topping out at over 461MB/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 in the above screenshots, the OCZ Vertex 4 is
performing extremely well.

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 Vista/7 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 4 in the
form of a screenshot. All our other comparison drives’ results are presented in
the form of a graph.

The OCZ Vertex 4 is showing quite astonishing performance in
the AS SSD test run, and its miles ahead of the competition. 

Summary:

With only being able to show comparison data for other
drives in the AS SSD benchmark, it is difficult to summarise my findings. AS
SSD is one of the best synthetic benchmarks, and in this case the OCZ Vertex 4
is performing extremely well.

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 7 and 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 will use 4k boundaries if it can. The OCZ Vertex 4
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 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 4 SSD – 4K random write (QD1)

At 139.47 MB/s the OCZ Vertex 4 is showing astonishing
performance at this queue depth, and is an absolute mile ahead of all the other
SSDs 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 Vertex 4 (Queue depth 4)

At a queue depth of 4, the OCZ Vertex 4 performance is very
strong indeed, and is once again well ahead of the other SSDs in this test.

Queue depth 32

OCZ Vertex 4 (Queue depth 32)

The SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor is known to scale very
well with increasing queue depths, so it’s no surprise to see the two SF-2281
based SSDs doing very well in this test; however they still can’t keep pace
with the OCZ Vertex 4, which is once again the fastest SSD.

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 Vertex 4 SSD – 4K random write (QD4 with fully random data)

The OCZ Vertex 4 doesn’t compress data on the fly like the
SandForce based SSDs, so performance is not affected when it has to deal with
data that is not so easy to compress, and it is still miles ahead of the other
SSDs 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 result is below.

If there was ever a test that graphically leaves you in no
doubt as to which SSD is the fastest, then this is it. While the two SandForce
SF-2281 based SSDs offer huge performance at high queue depths, they are still
not as fast as the Everest 2 based OCZ Vertex 4, and what is even more
impressive is, the OCZ Vertex 4 reaches this level of performance at much lower
queue depths. Even at a queue depth of only 3, it is outgunning the SF-2281
based SSDs at queue depth 32, and for a desktop user this is very important, as
typical desktop user patterns are all pretty much at lower queue depths.

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 4 SSD (Queue depth 1)

The OCZ Vertex 4 is once again off to a great start in the
small random file reading tests, and is the fastest SSD by quite some margin.

Queue depth 4

OCZ Vertex 4 SSD (Queue depth 4)

The Crucial C300 has been King of 4K random read for a long
time, but just a few weeks ago the Plextor PX-256M3 run it very close. There is
now a new King of 4K random read, the OCZ Vertex 4 which lifts the performance
bar considerably.

Queue depth 32

OCZ Vertex 4 SSD (Queue depth 32)

There are no surprises here, and once again the OCZ Vertex 4
is out in front by a large margin.

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.

The OCZ Vertex 4 is once again exceptional. It’s faster at
low queue depths than any of the other SSDs in this test, but it doesn’t stop
there, as queue depths rise it pulls further and further ahead of the other
SSDs.

IOMeter 512KB write test with repeating data.

Sequential writing performance is also very important; in
this test sequential writing performance is measured.

OCZ Vertex 4 512K Sequential write with repeating data

The OCZ Vertex 4 has very good sequential writing
performance, but was never going to catch the two SandForce SF-2281 based SSDs
when writing data that is easily compressible.

IOMeter 512KB 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 Vertex 4 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. Not so the OCZ Vertex 4 with its
Indilinx Everest 2 controller, and the Vertex 4 is comfortably the fastest
drive.

IOMeter 512KB read test.

This test measures 512k sequential reading performance.

OCZ Vertex 4 SSD – 512K sequential reading test

Although the OCZ Vertex 4 has excellent sequential reading
performance, it is outgunned by quite a few other SSDs in this test. The margin
isn’t huge, but some firmware tweaking to improve “sustained” sequential
reading performance would be welcome.

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 4 SSD – Workstation simulation

With very high queue depths (64) the OCZ Vertex 4 just
couldn’t keep pace with the SF-2281 based SSDs, and the toggle mode NAND on the
Plextor PX-256M3 just shows what double data rate NAND can do. What we must
remember is the Indilinx Everest 2 within the OCZ Vertex 4 contains firmware
that is optimised for the desktop PC user. It produces its best results in this
work pattern when queue depths are low to medium (QD1 – QD8). There is no doubt
in my mind that the firmware could be optimised for the enterprise market, but
this would not be of much benefit to the desktop PC user.

As for the result itself, although the OCZ Vertex 4 can’t
keep pace with SandForce SF-2281 based SSDs; it is still showing excellent
performance in the workstation simulation.

120,000 IOPS from a SATA SSD?

OCZ claim that the Vertex 4 can achieve a maximum of 120,000
IOPS with 512 Byte random reads. This is not something that I would normally
test, but just for the fun of it, I decided to run the test and the result is
below.

OCZ Vertex 4 SSD (512B random read)

I couldn’t reach the magical 120K IOPS, but I did manage to
obtain 99,763.54 IOPS. For comparison, the OCZ Vertex 3 with its SandForce
SF-2281 SSD processor can manage just over 64K IOPS with the same test pattern.

Summary

As a desktop SSD, the OCZ Vertex 4 has raised the
performance bar by a large margin. At lower queue depths the Vertex 4 is
untouchable. It pays no performance penalty with data that is non compressible,
and at higher queue depths it is still a good deal faster with small file
random data than any of the other SSDs in this article. Sequential writing
performance is excellent especially with non compressible data, sequential
reading speed although excellent, is not quite as fast as some of the other
SSDs in this article.

All in all, the OCZ Vertex 4 is one very fast SSD.

Now let’s head to the next page where we will look at how
the OCZ Vertex 4 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 Vertex 4 512GB (0 fill)

Total score

Writing score

Reading score

With a total score of 4826.72, the OCZ Vertex 4 is way out
in front, with particularly strong writing performance.

Application profile

OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD (application profile)

Total score

Writing score

Reading score

With data that isn’t so easily compressible, the OCZ Vertex
4 pulls out a larger lead over the two SandForce SF-2281 based SSDs, and with a
total score of 4859.69, it is a long way ahead of all the other SSDs in this
test.

100% incompressible

OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD (100% incompressible)

Total score

Writing score

Read score

For once the Vertex 4 is beaten, and in this case it’s the
read score in the 100% incompressible data test. However, the OCZ Vertex 4 is
still overall the fastest drive in this test with a total score of 4848.72.

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 4 has performed extremely well in these tests
and is by a large margin the fastest SSD.

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 Vertex 4 SSD and our other comparison
drives.

Our test copy contained 1,772 files of various sizes with a
combined capacity of 307MB.

The OCZ Vertex 4 is the fastest is SSD in this test, and is almost
twice as fast as its nearest rival.

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
Vertex 4 512GB SSD and our comparison drives.

The large ISO file contains quite a lot of incompressible
data which is quite a handicap to the SF-2281 based SSDs, so much so that the OCZ
Vertex 4 steams ahead, and is by quite some margin the fastest SSD in this
test.

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 Vertex 4 SSD, and our other comparison drives.
The folder contained 3,714 JPG pictures, with a total capacity of 5.16GB.

Once again, the OCZ Vertex 4 proves to be the fastest SSD in
this test by quite a large margin.

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 Vertex 4 SSD and our other comparison drives. The
folder contained 851 MP3 audio files, with a total capacity of 3.85GB.

Once again the OCZ Vertex 4 has claimed first place in our
table, with the OCZ Octane, Intel 520, and the OCZ Vertex 3 close behind.

Summary

With the OCZ Vertex 4 having massive performance at low
queue depths, and it not paying a performance penalty with incompressible data,
it is no surprise to find it is the fastest SSD in these tests, and not by just
a small margin, the OCZ Vertex 4 is a mile ahead of all the SSDs in most of
these copy tests.

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)

In this test the OCZ Vertex 4 is once again the fastest SSD.

Single drive copy tests – 3,714 JPEG picture files (5.16GB total)

Once again the OCZ Vertex 4 SSD is the fastest.

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 7 to boot to the
desktop, and then timed how long it took for Windows 7 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 7 boot time

Windows 7 closedown

There is very little difference in the time taken to boot
Windows 7 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 HDD
drives, which were all running mirror image installations of our Windows 7 Home
Premium 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 4 was the fastest when installing this large
office suite.

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 4 is the
fastest.

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 4 512GB 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, but
for the record, the OCZ Vertex 4 is 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 OCZ Vertex 4 is the fastest.

Games loading times

---

FAR CRY 2

I was beginning to think that showing game loading results
were becoming a pointless exercise, as the results were always so very close
between the modern SATA 6Gbps SSDs. However, for the first time in a long time,
we have an SSD that is tangibly faster at loading a game, and that SSD is the
OCZ Vertex 4.

F.E.A.R. 2

This time there isn’t a huge difference between the SATA
6Gbps SSDs, but the OCZ Vertex 4 is the fastest.

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, USB3, PCIe, and DMI.

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 drives on
test. In the case of SSDs the partition is then realigned “on the fly” and for
SSDs that support TRIM, the free space is filled and then deleted to force
TRIM. All other HDDs and SSDs in the system are then disconnected to make sure
the complete test can only run on the drive I am testing.

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 Vertex 4 is the first SSD to break the 400 MB/s
barrier, being the fastest SSD in this test, and quite a bit faster than the
OCZ Vertex 3.

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.

With data that isn’t compressible you would have expected
the OCZ Vertex 4 to have done very well in this test, and it hasn’t
disappointed as it is the fastest SSD.

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.

Once again, the OCZ Vertex 4 is way out in front. Its
excellent low queue depth performance, and ultra low access times playing a
handsome dividend.

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.

This is another very clear demonstration of how fast the OCZ
Vertex 4 is, with its ultra low access times, and exceptional performance at
low queue depths clearly demonstrating its superiority.

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 4 512GB SSD has raised the performance bar substantially.

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.

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 (which 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.

Given that I have only had the OCZ Vertex 4 for a matter of
a few days, and a deadline to meet. The Vertex 4 has not had much idle time for
garbage collection to work its magic.

New state 30/03/2012

Used state 1/04/2012

With 2.38 Terabytes of data already written to the drive
during a testing period of just three days, one would have expected the
performance to have dropped off slightly. I have to say there is no evidence of
this having taken place, in fact the overall score in AS SSD has gone up.

If this is an indication of how the OCZ Vertex 4 will behave
in general use, then there is no need to worry about the drive grinding to halt
caused by dirty NAND, as the Vertex 4 seems very capable of maintaining
performance even when being pushed very hard.

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 7 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 from the system drive as and when they are required.

The fact of the matter is this. If you are running a mainstream
or high end modern PC with a powerful CPU and graphics card, and are still
running a traditional HDD as a system drive, regardless of how fast that HDD
is, it is still bogging the system down substantially. It has long since passed
the stage where one can meaningfully debate if an SSD is really faster than a
traditional HDD. The fact is they are, and not just by a little bit: they are
much faster.

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 Vertex 4 512GB SSD has all of the above attributes
in abundance. The Indilinx Everest 2 is quite simply the most powerful SSD
processor available at the moment, and there is nothing else that can really
compete, not even the mighty SandForce SF-2281, which had been top dog for
nearly a whole year.

Stability

I have only had the OCZ Vertex 4 SSD for a few days, so it’s
not possible to comment on the drive's long term reliability. But what I can tell
you now is that during the testing period, the OCZ Vertex 4 has been 100%
stable, with not a single issue to report.

The OCZ Vertex 4 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 Vertex 4 begins now, and I will
report back if I should encounter any reliability issues with the 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.
• Outstanding 4K random I/O performance at low and high queue
  depths.
• SATA 6Gbps support.
• TRIM support under Windows 7.
• Ultra fast access times.
• Completely silent operation.
• Fast operating system start-up and shutdown times.
• 5 years warranty.

Negative:

• Nothing to mention

---

To sum up, this is what I
would say:

Throughout this review, the OCZ Vertex 4 has gone head to
head with the best of the rest, and that includes SSDs such as the Intel 520,
the Crucial M4, Plextor PX-256M3, and OCZ’s own Vertex 3. In all but a couple
of instances the Vertex 4 has been by far the best performer, and in some cases
has been an absolute country mile ahead of the rest. Its ability to produce
breathtaking performance at very low queue depths, and those ultra fast access
times mean that the OCZ Vertex 4 is by far the fastest SATA SSD we have ever
tested here at MyCE.com.

A new performance bar has been set for consumer grade SSDs,
and the OCZ Vertex 4 is now the drive to beat.

The five year warranty is also a welcome addition and shows
that OCZ are confident about the reliability of the Vertex 4, which also brings
the OCZ Vertex 4 in line with the Intel 520, and the Plextor M3, who also offer
a five warranty.

Price

As I write this article, the OCZ Vertex 4 range of SSDs is not
available in the shops, but they should be appearing soon. The prices in the
table below for the Vertex 4 are the suggested prices. Prices in Euro and UK
pounds are derived from the current US dollar exchange rates.

 

The parting sentence is

“The OCZ Vertex 4 512GB is an outstanding SSD; it has
breathtaking performance, and is backed by a 5 year warranty”.

You may comment on this review below.

Thanks to:

---