OCZ Vertex 2 SATA II 3.5" SSD 120GB

Zitat: Pro: + : + Enorm snel + Door tweaks in firmware sneller dan concurrenten met dezelfde controller + In veel capaciteiten verkrijgbaar + TRIM-ondersteuning + 3,5 en 1,8 inch varianten + Stil, koel en energiezuinig + Goedkoop in vergelijking met andere SSD’s Contra: - : - 3,5 inch bracket niet altijd te monteren - Duur in vergelijking met harde schijf Hoewel er in de vorm van de z-Drive, Ibis en RevoDrive X2 snellere alternatieven zijn, zijn die ook een stuk duurder. De prijs per GigaByte is voor SSD-begrippen laag, zeker als je kijkt welke prestaties je ervoor terugkrijgt. Een nadeel van de SSD in het algemeen is de lage capaciteit. Hoewel er nog maar 10GB over bleef, passen Adobe CS5 Master Collection, Office, een aantal games en je besturingssysteem makkelijk. Wellicht is het handig om voor je data een aparte HDD te houden, aangezien de ruimte op een SSD daarvoor te kostbaar (letterlijk) is. Een harde schijf kost slechts vijf eurocent per GB, en dat is toch een groot verschil met de 1,70 euro per GB van de Vertex 2. Toch zijn de prestaties uitmuntend, en geven wij ‘m daarom een:

Zitat: The OCZ Vertex 2 3.5" form factor SSD is a story of equality for the desktop. For years now SSDs have been designed for notebooks and the desktop remained silent. Those days are over and the desktop has finally spoken up and OCZ heard the cries for lower access times and higher data transfer speeds.

Zitat: OCZ continues to produce solid state drives that excel in access speed, read/write throughput and input/output operations per second. The 120Gb 3.5" Vertex 2 is equal to or better than its 2.5" SandForce-based siblings in most performance tests we´ve run, and the larger size means easier compatibility with desktop machines. OCZ also claims a lower cost per gigabyte with more room inside the enclosure to utilize less expensive, smaller capacity memory chips than the 2.5" notebook class drives. The 3.5" Vertex 2 scored the best out of nearly all other SSDs we´ve tested to date, with only two exceptions. The first is OCZ´s own RevoDrive, which uses an onboard RAID0 array featuring dual SandForce controllers. As you might expect, if one SandForce is capable of almost 300MB/s then two working in tandem should be close to double that, and in fact Shawn saw read/write speeds in the 400-500MB/s range in ATTO. However the RevoDrive needs a 4x PCI-E slot to achieve that kind of bandwidth, which introduces its own compatibility issues with some systems and configurations. The second is the Crucial 128Gb C300 RealSSD, which utilizes a Marvell controller compatible with the latest SATA 6Gb/s standard, able to hit 370MB/s read speeds in testing. But as the SandForce 1200 used in the Vertex 2 is only a SATA 3Gb/s interface, it has no hope of matching either of these other drive´s speeds. I would like to see more SSD manufacturers, OCZ included, start adopting the SATA 6Gb/s standard. To my knowledge, Crucial is the only one to do so thus far with the Marvell 9174 controller. As we´ve seen again and again over the last year or so, solid state drives are pushing the limits of SATA 3Gb/s, and as more chipsets and motherboards incorporate the new interface, is there a reason why we shouldn´t have drives to match? If OCZ can develop a product as elaborate as the RevoDrive with its PCI-E to PCI-X to dual SATA controller RAID0 layout, surely they could come up with something to work on a single SATA 6Gb/s port. Particularly given the large amount of room available in a standard 3.5" drive enclosure. SATA is not going away and I honestly don´t see PCI-E based drives replacing them due to the extra cost and complexity. One other thing to consider here is the lifespan of the SandForce 1200 series controller. This is pure speculation, but one would have to assume that a newer SandForce controller with even better performance can´t be too far out (CES 2011 maybe?). Unfortunately we haven´t heard much of anything regarding this, and as is, the 1200 series is still their top performer. I found the 3.5" Vertex 2 available online for right around $230, placing it roughly $20 cheaper than its 2.5" counterpart. Not quite the amount of savings I had in mind when I read, "lower cost per gigabyte", but if you´re willing to limit yourself to the 3.5" format you can save roughly 8% on the cost of the drive compared to its smaller 2.5" twin. And it seems you get a slight performance boost to boot.

Zitat: Points forts: + Excellentes performances brutes + Excellentes performances en pratique + Livré avec un adaptateur au format 3,5 pouces Points faibles: - La qualité se paye - Débit de la lecture aléatoire de petits fichiers en retrait des autres débits Un SSD sans concession, à l´aise dans tous les domaines. Notre nouvelle référence !