OCZ announced yesterday via their Twitter profile that a 64GB version of their Vertex 4 will soon be available. Vertex 4 is based on a second generation OCZ/Indilinx controller, named the Indilinx Everest 2. However, it was later revealed that the hardware is actually from Marvell. We reviewed the 256GB and 512GB Vertex 4 SSDs about a month ago and came away very pleased with how the drives performed. The Vertex 4 product page has also been updated with specifications for the 64GB model, which we've summarized in the table below:

OCZ Vertex 4 Specifications
Capacity 64GB 128GB 256GB 512GB
NAND 2Xnm MLC
Number of NAND Packages 8 16 16 16
Number of Die per Package 1 1 2 4
Sequential Read 460MB/s 535MB/s 535MB/s 535MB/s
Sequential Write 220MB/s 200MB/s 380MB/s 475MB/s
4K Random Read 70K IOPS 90K IOPS 90K IOPS 95K IOPS
4K Random Write 50K IOPS 85K IOPS 85K IOPS 85K IOPS
Street Price N/A $150 $300 $650

As expected, there is a decline in performance when moving from a sixteen package design to an eight package design. Random write unsurprisingly takes the biggest hit but 50K IOPS is still great for a 64GB drive. For comparison, a 60GB Vertex 3 is rated at 60K IOPS and a 64GB Plextor M3 at 40K IOPS. Overall the 64GB Vertex 4 is at the upper spectrum of ~64GB SSDs and it presents very promising performance figures.

OCZ did not announce any specific availability other than "soon", but I contacted OCZ and will update this article once I receive a reply. Pricing is also unknown as of now. We will try to get our hands on a review sample as soon as possible, and Anand also has a 128GB sample in the house, so keep your eye on our SSD Bench section if you're in the market for a new drive.

Source: OCZ Twitter

POST A COMMENT

27 Comments

View All Comments

  • damianrobertjones - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    ...Money didn't stop the fast progression of tech.

    "As expected, there is a decline in performance when moving from a sixteen package design to an eight package design."
    Reply
  • Paul Tarnowski - Sunday, May 13, 2012 - link

    Looking at recent prices I am amazed at the number of SSDs that hover around $100 CA for 128 GB after rebate. Mind you, the ones that I'm thinking about are from ADATA, who seem to have been making a big push recently, but other drives are starting to mimick their pricing. Reply
  • LB-ID - Monday, May 14, 2012 - link

    OCZ still has a lot to prove to me before I'd ever touch one of their products again. Too long a history of buggy performance and crappy, blame-the-customer-first support. Reply
  • Bateluer - Monday, May 21, 2012 - link

    90% of the time, the customer is likely the problem, sadly. Reply
  • Pessimism - Wednesday, May 16, 2012 - link

    I specifically boycott products that are only competitively priced through use of a rebate. I understand the financial side of using a rebate vs a sale price from the vendor's perspective, but until they make great strides in making the process less hostile towards the customer (forms "lost", rejected over insignificant errors or imaginary reasons, 8 week processing times etc) they are an absolute deal-breaker for me.

    Give me an automated system that accepts an online form, optically recognizes a scanned image of the product UPC code, and accepts a scanned image of the receipt to be audited at random, which INSTANTLY transfers funds to you through paypal or interac email money transfer and we will talk.
    <end rant>
    Reply
  • zcat - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    Looks like the SSD Bench section is missing quite a few other current drives besides just the Vertex 4's:
    - Samsung 830 (the "best" mlc)
    - Crucial m4 128G (one of the most popular @ $125, though slower on writes)
    - Intel 520
    - Kingston HyperX
    - Mushkin chronos
    - Sandisk
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    Samsung 830 is in the bench, including all retail capacities (64GB, 128GB, 256GB and 512GB).

    128GB Crucial M4 is also in the bench: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/425

    60GB and 240GB Intel 520s are in the bench.

    240GB Kingston HyperX and HyperX 3K are in the bench.

    We don't have any SSDs from Mushkin yet, hence no data in the bench. However, due to the popularity of Mushkin, I'll try to get my hands on their Chronos series ASAP, but it will still take awhile.

    We'll have a 480GB SanDisk drive in the house in a week or two. However, keep in mind that all SF-2281 based SSDs are pretty much the same, thus we don't test every SF-2281 based SSDs that's out there.

    Also, keep in mind that some models may be missing some tests, i.e. we only ran the most essential tests and left some out to save time.
    Reply
  • zcat - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    Ah - yes - thanks for clearing up why I thought some drives were missing. The default 'Anandtech Storage Bench' just had the fewest drives, and I lazily ctrl-f searched the page ala cpu passmarks searchable list. Reply
  • zcat - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    One more thought:

    Perhaps add a new (default) benchmark that is simply the average bench of the intersection of all benches & drives?
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    I agree. Right now it defaults to 2010 Light Workload - Average IOPS test, which is something we don't even use anymore. I sent Anand a message about this and will let you know what's his take on this. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now