OCZ Vector (256GB) Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 27, 2012 9:10 PM ESTSequential Read/Write Speed
To measure sequential performance I ran a 1 minute long 128KB sequential test over the entire span of the drive at a queue depth of 1. The results reported are in average MB/s over the entire test length.
Low queue depth sequential read performance is among the better drives, but still slightly behind Samsung.
Write performance continues to be the Vector's strong suit, here only Intel's SSD 520 with easily compressed data pulls ahead.
AS-SSD Incompressible Sequential Performance
The AS-SSD sequential benchmark uses incompressible data for all of its transfers. The result is a pretty big reduction in sequential write speed on SandForce based controllers.
High queue depth sequential IO shows significant clustering at the top of the charts thanks to the limits of 6Gbps SATA. The Vector pushes performance pretty much as fast as possible here.
Switching to writes does shake loose some of the weaker competitors, but the Vector and 840 Pro still emerge as the strongest. Corsair's Neutron GTX does very well here.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
151 Comments
View All Comments
rob.laur - Monday, December 3, 2012 - link
the 840 Pro has terrible recovery when pushed hard.http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/vector-ssd-rev...
jwilliams4200 - Tuesday, December 4, 2012 - link
I certainly would not call it "terrible" -- it actually looks pretty good to me. And if you want even better performance under sustained heavy workloads, just overprovision the SSD.dj christian - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link
How do you overprovision the SSD?somebody997 - Thursday, April 11, 2013 - link
You don't. Most SSDs will come in 128, 256 or 512 GB sizes. If you have an SSD and you see a decrease in size, usually at 120, 240 or 480 GB sizes, it means the controller has already over provisioned the SSD for you.batguiide - Sunday, December 9, 2012 - link
Thanks for these tips!share a website with you :socanpower,ca,You will love it! I believe!
jdtwoseven - Monday, December 10, 2012 - link
I have WAY too much scar tissue from this vendor to ever buy their products again. I bought five of their SSDs, and was five for five RMAing them back. I have the replacements, but don't trust them enough to use them in anything other than evaulation work because them are just not dependable. I would avoid them like the plague.somebody997 - Thursday, April 11, 2013 - link
I have had multiple SSDs from OCZ, and none of them have failed up till today. I boot Mac OS X from my OCZ Vector, and from every OCZ SSD before that. In my experience, it's not the OCZ SSDs that have terrible reliability, it's Windows. Besides, have any of you guys complaining about OCZ SSDs ever tried turning off automatic disk defragmentation in Windows?Windows has an automated disk defragmenting tool to defragment HDDs, but when you plug in an SSD, the tool is automatically disabled.
Chances are, those of you with SSD problems have a PC with windows that did not successfully disable automated disk defragmentation, and have had your SSDs killed due to that.
Mac OS X does not have an automated disk defragmenting tool as it generally tries not to write in fragments. Without the automated defragmentation tool, my OCZ SSDs have never failed.
ewh - Tuesday, April 30, 2013 - link
My Vector 256 drive completely failed in just under 4 months. OCZ is going to replace it but if the replacement fails in less than 48 months I will look for alternatives.jhboston - Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - link
My OCZ VTR1-25SAT3-512G failed after just 33 days. This was 3 days after the vendors replacement agreement expired. Has to go to OCZ, OCZ is replacing the drive, but they are following a delayed time frame to get the new drive in my hands.djy2000 - Wednesday, July 31, 2013 - link
Ok my OCZ vector catastrophically failed within 3 months :-( Think I'll be going with intel or samsung next