POST A COMMENT

53 Comments

Back to Article

  • Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Is Everest 2 then using the brand new Marvell 88SS9187 controller? Reply
  • josephjpeters - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    No, this is their own design just fab'd by Marvell. It has a different clock speed as Anand mentions. Reply
  • gunblade - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    You're joking right? Marvell is fabless company. In this case, it is marvell designed controller with a Indilinx name on it Reply
  • josephjpeters - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Sorry about the fab comment, I was wrong. Regardless, it's not the same controller. Reply
  • jwilliams4200 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Yes, the Everest 2 is very nearly identical to the Marvell 88SS9187. Reply
  • iceman98343 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    can you elaborate further on this development? Reply
  • josephjpeters - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Why would they just give this silicon away? Reply
  • jwilliams4200 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    You're joking, right? Marvell does not give anything away. OCZ obviously pays for it. Reply
  • josephjpeters - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    It's not a joke because until now, OCZ has implied it was their own controller.

    The next logical question is how much do they pay?
    Reply
  • josephjpeters - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Answered my own question:

    For those of you who want to know, OCZ pays the same as they would with any fab (ie. TSMC).
    Reply
  • ckryan - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    OCz was very careful to couch their marketing -- "indilinx infused" etc. Reply
  • iceman98343 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    i'm guessing inidlinx played a mjaor role in writing the firmware. thus "indlinx infused" Reply
  • gunblade - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Isn't it mentioned here in AT that Petrol is also using the same silicon? Or is the Petrol using the real Indilinx controller instead of a re-badged Marvell? Reply
  • kensiko - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    petrol is the same as Octane 1. Only the Nand is different. Reply
  • gunblade - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    I have searched and haven't found any PCB board pic of the Petrol. On the OCZ firmware update page, the firmware is not listed at the same column and have vastly different revision. The other similar controller based products ( Agility3 with Vertex 3, Vertex with Agility) are all sharing the same firmware. Reply
  • ICBM - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    I would assume Petrol uses the same controller. From reading this, there is no real Indilinx controller.

    I have been using an Octane since November and it has rocked, though I feel like OCZ blatently lied to me though. I bought the Octane, because I was a fan of the old barefoot controller from Indilinx.
    Reply
  • josephjpeters - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Again, as I wrote above this is not true. It's their own controller design and it's not available through any other 3rd parties. In fact, OCZ will be selling the design to other SSD manufacturers.

    As much as some would want you to believe, OCZ is not scamming you.
    Reply
  • extide - Friday, April 13, 2012 - link

    Nobody said OCZ is scamming anyone. However it is pretty clear this is an off-the-shelf Marvell controller using OCZ/Indilinx's own custom designed firmware. Honestly, there is nothing wrong with that. If the silicon is fast enough and has the correct capabilities, then the firmware is the secret sauce anyways. Reply
  • yottabit42 - Friday, April 13, 2012 - link

    I echo ICBM's comment.

    My first SSD was the original OCZ VERTEX based on the Indilinx controller. Years later it is still performing admirably and without any problems ever. But compared to newer generations of SSDs it was slow, and I only had the 64 GB version since it was so expensive at the time when they were first released.

    Then I bought a Crucial C300, a Marvell-based solution, because I have much respect for Crucial/Micron memory quality, but was very frustrated because of an apparent incompatibility with the Intel 5-series chipset that was being used in my lappy at the time, causing random I/O locks/pauses for 2 minutes at a time every 20 to 60 minutes. I tried numerous driver and registry fixes, and all the new firmwares, but nothing ever completely solved the problem. I put that SSD in my newly built AMD-based system and it's performed perfectly.

    To replace the unusable Crucial C300 with the I/O locks, I bought the latest Corsair SandForce-based SSD. The first one lasted 2 days. The second one, 2 weeks. The third one, 1 week. When I received the fourth drive back on RMA from Corsair I just sold it on eBay. Good riddance.

    Finally when OCZ released the OCTANE--with the stellar benchmarks and commitment to IMFT NAND and the Indilinx name--I bought one right away. I had a complete partition corruption with it the first week of use, but then updated to the new firmware (the destructive update) and haven't had a problem since, for nearly four months now of everyday intensive use. I have the 128 GB version and am using it in a new Core i7-based lappy with 8 GB of RAM and the Intel 6-series chipset. I Hibernate the entire 8 GB to the SSD at least once per day on average, too.

    I also have Chrome doing intensive things, usually gobbling up 4-5 GB of RAM, plus have a huge Outlook store open, much abuse of Excel doing database-like data manipulations, and some other engineering applications with heavy I/O workloads. I still backup my drive at least once per day using Macrium Reflect since I've been bitten so often by failures of the SandForce-based Corsair drive, but luckily other than that one strange corruption that happened that first week (and I haven't seen anyone else report a likewise corruption on the OCZ forums) it has been a stellar success for me.

    I've also sold a few PETROL drives to customers in AMD-based new builds and haven't had any reports of problems. I'm considering buying my entire team of 18 field engineers the OCTANE for use in their lappies in the field since the speed and solid-state reliability will enhance their work productivity.

    I should mention that I have had very occasional I/O locks/pauses with the OCTANE drive. They were occuring once or twice per week, and the event would last 30 seconds. Earlier this week I applied a Registry patch to disable all Intel chipset power management features for that SATA port which reportedly fixes the problem. I've yet to see another I/O lock/pause, but it has been less than a week. I'm hopeful that problem has gone away.

    Funny enough, when that I/O lock/pause first occurred, it immediately brought back the dread and despair I felt with the Crucial C300 Marvell-based SSD. Luckily it only lasted 30 seconds and only rarely occurred, so I pressed on and was willing to live with it since at that duration and frequency it was only a very minor inconvenience for all of the other advantages.

    Now that I find out it's a Marvell-based controller after all, I feel a little cheated because had I known this, I wouldn't have bought it because of the problems I had with the Crucial drive and Intel chipsets.

    However, with the endurance I've seen so far, and the possible I/O pause/freeze workaround I have in place now, I'm planning to still purchase these drives into the future--especially now that the price dropped 35% after release of the VERTEX 4!

    I'm sure the VERTEX 4 is amazing, but quite honestly, the OCTANE is incredible enough, and a much better value. :o)
    Reply
  • klmccaughey - Saturday, June 02, 2012 - link

    Either you are making that all up or you have something dodgy in your system. That many drive failures, my guess is they got the drives back and found they were working fine. Since when does Chrome tae 4Gig? Reply
  • ckryan - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    A01 to the rescue. Reply
  • ckryan - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    This is something that has been alluded to for a while now over on XS. The FW is all indilinx and OCZ, at least on the Vertex4. The Octane is suspiciously like older Marvell drives. The FtL and FW are what is really important though. Look at Arrowana vs. Cognac. Reply
  • surfsupdude - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Looks like Indilinx to me - where is the Marvell proof? Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    OCZ confirmed it to me today.

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • iceman98343 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    so what are the implications for ocz? does this hurt them?> Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    I don't believe so - the drives remain unchanged, who provides the silicon doesn't really matter but it's an interesting distinction. The firmware and validation are much more important in this case.

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • iceman98343 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    from your past reviews and i gather from what ryan p has said, it seemed like OCZ was giving us the impression that this controller was exclusive to indlinx. Seems like a bad slap in the face. Why pay $30 million then for indilinx if they can't even release a controller... Reply
  • extide - Friday, April 13, 2012 - link

    This controller/firmware combination IS exclusive to OCZ. And they bought indilinx for the engineers who can write that firmware. They made out just fine. Reply
  • jwilliams4200 - Friday, April 13, 2012 - link

    LOL. I'm pretty sure they could have hired two or three excellent firmware engineers for a LOT less than a $32 Million signing bonus. Reply
  • darkfoon - Sunday, May 20, 2012 - link

    Do you have any idea how difficult firmware is to write? Buying a company with proven firmware engineers (and associated IP) is much smarter than just hiring a few good engineers. You buy a team of people who have worked together successfully, and you buy the IP and experience they have together so you aren't starting from nothing. That alone is worth the $32 million.
    Also, in case you didn't know, excellent firmware engineers aren't just floating around waiting to be hired like fruit dangling from a low-hanging branch.
    Reply
  • iceman98343 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    so are you saying this is the same marvell controller as the plextor m3? we need more information.... Reply
  • Beenthere - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Yeah and we know how well that's worked out for Intel in the past... or NOT. Reply
  • dgingeri - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    I just got a 120GB Vertex 4, and now I find this out. I feel lied to. While I was considering getting an m4, and finally decided to get the Vertex 4, I could have had the m4 for $40 cheaper at the same store. Now I find out they're pretty much the same. I am really disappointed, OCZ. Reply
  • jwilliams4200 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    Actually, the m4 uses the Marvell 88SS9174, while the Vertex 4 uses a rebadged 88SS9187, so the V4 has a better controller.

    But the V4 firmware is OCZ, and they did a poor job with low QD sequential reads.

    The Plextor M3P (which uses the older 9174) is still a better SSD than the Vertex 4, and I expect Plextor will release a new model soon (using the 9187) that will be even better.
    Reply
  • ajp_anton - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    If you bought it for the name, it's your fault if you're not satisfied.
    If you bought if for the performance, this doesn't change anything. It's still the same drive you saw in the reviews.
    Reply
  • dgingeri - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    you have a point there. I saw the performance, I wanted a drive without the issue I've heard about the Sandforce drives. this one seemed to fit the bill. Reply
  • extide - Friday, April 13, 2012 - link

    It still had the OCZ exclusive firmware so it's NOT the exact same drive as a Crucial M4 or Plextor M3 Reply
  • jwilliams4200 - Friday, April 13, 2012 - link

    Both the Crucial and Plextor models have their own excellent firmware. The fact that OCZ's people wrote some firmware is not an advantage. Reply
  • Movieman420 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    I'd be willing to bet that it won't be long until Ocz gets the Everest 2 fw how they want it (ie better low queue depth performance). Once that's accomplished I fully expect that they will start using 24nm toggle.It'll probably be deemed the Vertex 4 MaxIOP. I'll be holding out for the 24nm version to launch before getting a pair of 128's for a R0 boot array.

    Anand said his tip was that the V4 is using the 9174 marvell...but there are a few posts by peeps who think it's the 9187. If I had to guess, I'd say they're using the 9174 for the Octane line and the 9187 in the V4. We know for sure that at least one of the two (prolly the V4) have been tweaked by Ocz via a faster clock and possibly their latest FTL and maybe faster ram for the cache...but not sure what ram is in the other Marvell makers drives using the 9187. I'm sure more of the details/blanks will be filled in soonish...I hope anyway.
    Reply
  • jwilliams4200 - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    No. Anand did NOT say that the tip was that the V4 is using the 9174. He said the tip was that the Everest controller is a 9174.

    Anand said that he confirmed that both the Everest and Everest 2 controllers are based on Marvell hardware.

    The Vertex 4 uses what OCZ calls the "Everest 2" controller, which (although Anand did not write it) appears to be nearly identical to the 9187.
    Reply
  • kamm2 - Thursday, April 12, 2012 - link

    Hats off to you jwilliams4200. I saw your comments last weekend about this (http://www.anandtech.com/show/5719/ocz-vertex-4-re... and no one believed you. Reply
  • iwod - Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - link

    So what does indilinx brings? If they are just simple Marvel Controller with different Firmware? Then they are nothing more then an M3 Pro / M4 / 520 etc.... Reply
  • grahamnp - Thursday, April 12, 2012 - link

    Yes, this was very disingenuous of them. They basically attempted to mislead customers into thinking they had their own controller when they effectively no different from any of the other Marvell using drive manufacturers.

    To be fair it does seem like the firmware is quite a radical departure from the typical Marvell drive but to tout the advantages of the "Everest" when it is effectively somebody else's drive is deceptive.
    Reply
  • CoreDuo - Thursday, April 12, 2012 - link

    at least they're decent controllers either way, so I suppose it isn't all bad. Reply
  • Coup27 - Thursday, April 12, 2012 - link

    OCZ leading people up the garden path... Never. Reply
  • hackztor - Friday, April 13, 2012 - link

    Does not matter if it is good performing ssd or not. OCZ hid the truth from people even the reviewers. Reviews came out good, people jumped to buy then they find out the truth. ocz acts like its no big deal. If it is not a big deal why not tell everyone right away? They tried to hide it and it is the last time I will buy from them. Reply
  • aaloto - Monday, April 16, 2012 - link

    Hacztor, please can you shut the f#@? up, you are beginning to irritate the hell out of me. I hope you never buy from OCZ again, you stupid ignorant twat. I wonder why the hell you bother to read reviews or bench marks. I come here to read quality scientific based reviews by Anand, and intellectual discussions based on his findings on the review. This is not the place to come and lament, if you have shares in OCZ nor the place to come and do a song and dance if you dislike the company, for whatever reason.

    As much as it is interesting to know that the Vertex 4 and indeed the Octane were based on Marvel hardware, I dont give a damn whether or not you've been deceived by OCZ. Go sue them if you like but get the f#@? off the thread would you, pretty please! :o(

    Does anyone else think OCZ might be able to improve the Vertex 4 firmware for better read performance without affecting its excellent write capabilities? Or is there some feature of the SSD's design that suggests, optimising its WRITE capability will adversely affect its READ?
    Reply
  • jwilliams4200 - Tuesday, April 17, 2012 - link

    I vote for kackztor stays, and the rude aaloto goes away. Reply
  • aaloto - Wednesday, April 18, 2012 - link

    hacztor, I am sorry for my outburst, it was meant for jwilliams4200 who got on my nerves for derailing the initial discussion.

    Sorry again.
    Reply
  • alan1476 - Saturday, April 14, 2012 - link

    I have made a little discovery on my own, with all Vertex drives and yes I have many of them, its always wise to wait until a few firmware updates ahve been indroduced before plunking down you cash, jmho, but people will do what they choose, its just my way of doing things with OCZ SSDs. Reply
  • aaloto - Wednesday, April 18, 2012 - link

    I think that is the only sensible approach to take, I have the vertex 3 120GB maxiops on my PC rig, but looking to get an SSD with a higher capacity and better WRITE performance for my Mac, I have no loyalty to any particular brand, performance and price rules the waves for me. But we dont know if OCZ sees the relative poor READ performance of the vertex 4 as something they want to fix. One would hope so! I hope they do and sometime soon too.

    I Wonder if Anand has any info on that.
    Reply
  • Zarathustra[h] - Wednesday, July 25, 2012 - link

    The reviews on Anandtech were with the release firmware of the Vertex 4.

    There are two more recent revisions of the firmware out, and it seems to have addressed the queue depth issue with the Vertex 4, bringing read speeds up to par with write speeds...

    I'm hoping Anandtech will consider revisiting their Vertex 4 review with the new firmware.
    Reply
  • Zarathustra[h] - Wednesday, July 25, 2012 - link

    Is it just me, or does that chip look like its been sanded down, and then restamped with the indilinx logo? :p Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now