OCZ Vertex 460 (240GB) Review
by Kristian Vättö on January 22, 2014 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
- SSDs
- OCZ
- Indilinx
- Vertex 460
Final Words
The biggest problem I have with the Vertex 460 is OCZ's current situation. The Vertex 460 won't be affected by the acquisition terms because it'll be available after the deal closes, meaning that Toshiba will be covering the warranty. However, I don't feel comfortable recommending OCZ's products until the dust settles and we know more about the future. The drive itself is good, just like the Vector 150, but it doesn't enjoy any major advantage over drives from manufacturers that are stable and proven in long-term reliability.
Update 1/22: We have just received word that Toshiba has finalized the purchase of the OCZ Technology group, making it a wholly owned subsidiary of the Toshiba Group Company. OCZ will still act independently as OCZ Storage Solutions, focusing on SSDs, meaning that the future of OCZ products is essentially confirmed for the future.
| NewEgg Price Comparison (1/21/2013) | |||
| 120/128GB | 240/256GB | 480/512GB | |
| OCZ Vertex 460 (MSRP) | $100 | $190 | $360 |
| OCZ Vector 150 | $120 | $215 | $440 |
| OCZ Vertex 450 | $90 | $160 | - |
| Samsung SSD 840 EVO | $110 | $175 | $345 |
| Samsung SSD 840 Pro | $130 | $200 | $465 |
| Crucial M500 | $90 | $155 | $310 |
| SanDisk Extreme II | $120 | $230 | $300 |
| Seagate SSD 600 | $110 | $170 | $300 |
OCZ's pricing is relatively competitive, although I'd like to see the 480GB SKU being priced a little more aggressively. $300 is really starting to be the sweet spot for 480-512GB drives and with drives like SanDisk Extreme II, there is barely any reason to pay more than that. 120GB and 240GB SKUs are priced a bit more competitively but there are still better deals to be found.
In summary, then, the Vertex 460 is a reasonable replacement for the Vertex 450, but pricing on the old model is actually a bit lower for now when resellers are clearing their stocks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
69 Comments
View All Comments
melgross - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
This site is obsessed with this company. There are so many manufacturers, and so many drives, but they keep coming back to OCZ.Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
Is there a manufacturer or drive we've missed? We don't favour any OEM over another and if there's a new product we'll review it.However, a lot depends on the company's PR. OCZ has always been good at this as they approach us and provide samples under NDA prior to the launch, so the review process is smooth for us. Some companies are fairly poor at this as we always have to approach the OEM after the launch to get a sample at all.
GrizzledYoungMan - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
Since you asked, there are some SSD-related reviews I'd love to see from Anandtech:1. The Sandisk X210. It promises Extreme II performance with many of the reliability features of an enterprise drive and excellent pricing.
2. 'Hybrid' RAID 5 or RAID 6 configurations, with caching software such as LSI's Cachecade 2.0 or Adaptec's I-can't-remember-right-now. I've been specc'ing out such a system and found it startling how little in-depth, useful information there is out there about what sort of SSDs are appropriate (and why) and what configurations yield good price/performance outcomes.
3. Along those lines, I'd really like to see how enterprise SSDs you've tested like the Intel DC S3500 perform in your client testing environment. It feels like your enterprise SSD testing is woefully truncated on the false assumption that no one would use enterprise SSDs in a client/workstation setting. Testing those drives more thoroughly would seem to be a much better use of your time than testing the Nth variation of whatever OCZ drive came out this week.
I hope you find this comment helpful, it's intended as constructive criticism. Still love the site!
Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
This is definitely helpful. In the end we do this for you, our readers, not four ourselves or manufacturers :)1 and 3 should definitely be possible and 2 very likely too (as long as LSI/Adaptec can deliver us the samples). I'll do my best!
GrizzledYoungMan - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
Awesome! Looking forward to reading those reviews.A recommendation regarding which LSI controller to choose: go for the 9271-8i. At this point, it's the natural choice for most new system builders because it offers better performance (and Fastpath enabled by default) as the 9266 or 9261 for roughly the same price.
Also, if LSI gives you any trouble about providing samples, just tell 'em that some random guy from the internet who calls himself grizzledyoungman wants to see that review. Should do the trick.
romrunning - Thursday, January 23, 2014 - link
1) I also would like to see more tests of SSDs in RAID arrays (RAID-5/6/10 - not just 0/1).2) I would love to see some enterprise controllers tested like the Adaptec ASR-72405 and ASR-8885.
3) In addition to that, let's test more enterprise SSDs (like HGST's SSD800MM and the DC3700).
4) For SMBs who want to build a fast server with awesome I/O, it would be good to see how these SSDs perform in a database server or as a virtual host server.
lever_age - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
Yeah, when products don't get reviewed, it's usually time to start bugging the company PR teams. The bigger and reputable sites have enough work already reviewing the stuff that gets sent to them by the brands that do have their acts together (and want things reviewed).JDG1980 - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
I don't think it's good practice to rely upon free review samples. How do you know the company isn't cherry-picking? I believe it would be best to do what Consumer Reports does with all the items it tests: buy anonymously off-the-shelf.blanarahul - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
Cherry picking MLC SSDs affects performance? That's new. Or maybe, you are wrong.chrnochime - Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - link
How is cherry picking NOT useful for better test results? That's what the definition of cherry picking is. Sounds like you either are ignorant of that fact or are defending OCZ for whatever reason.