Pretty impressive numbers and price on the 128GB...
However, I see no mention of onboard cache or what kind of controller is running in the SSD.... Anybody know?
http://legionhardware.com/document.php?id=804
Printable View
Pretty impressive numbers and price on the 128GB...
However, I see no mention of onboard cache or what kind of controller is running in the SSD.... Anybody know?
http://legionhardware.com/document.php?id=804
I think they use the same controller found in the ocz vertex drives and patriot warp v3. The review looks very impressive especially the write tests. These guys should take apart the drive and tell us who makes the controller
Well, at $300 for the $120 (their prediction), the Titan is a much better buy than the Vertex... IF it comes with the cache.
Hmm.... looks like I've found the replacements for my two 74gb raptors for my desktop rig. After seeing how insanely fast just a single G.Skill 128gb SSD (which is slower than these new ones) made my XPS m1530 notebook, two of these Titan's in Raid-0 would be incredible.
Given the look of the Titan and the read/write speeds being identical to the OCZ Vertex's claims, I'd say it's highly probably they're exactly the same product. Neither of these companies actually produces their SSD's, I believe OCZ uses Samsung and although I'm not 100% positive I strongly suspect G.Skill does too.
Well, what's up with the MASSIVE price difference? The Titan is priced $200 lower on the 120GB??
First: Is that price confirmed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahmzy
Second: I don't know. Greed on OCZ's part maybe? That's not a put down on OCZ, but looking at the numerous similarities... it just seems so likely that Samsung is the maker behind them both and that therefore they should be the same product that short of anyone pulling some real proof to the contrary I'm sure they are.
155/90 R/W?
That's Solid, not Vertex.
Vertex claims 200/160.
^No you confused the regullar Gskill 64GB SSD they used to compare it with.
They got exactly what was claime for these drives.
Quote:
G.Skill claims read speeds of up to 200MB/s with the Titan 128GB SSD, and that is exactly what we got once 128KB blocks or bigger. In fact, we reached 210MB/s, which was most impressive. This made the G.Skill Titan 128GB SSD roughly 30% faster than the standard G.Skill 64GB SSD, while it was around 15% slower than the Intel X25‐M 80GB SSD.
Price would be awesome, but I think the links on that page lead to their older model not this one. I the introduction they also mention that G.Skill is asking around $230 for their current 128GB SSDs...Quote:
G.Skill claimed an insane 160MB/s for the write speed of the Titan and what do you know, once we reached the 64KB blocks that is exactly what we got. There were quite a few instances where the G.Skill Titan 128GB SSD almost reached 170MB/s, making it more than twice as fast as the Intel X25‐M 80GB SSD, which is just simply mind blowing!
We'll see...
Thanks for the correction, this indeed looks like Vertex. :)
Can't wait to see the price of Super Talent 16 GB. :)
no cache on g-skill what I could notice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serra
that is one big difference.
ocz use new controller on vertex.
I simply wait for reviews heh.
looks very nice. i'd like to see everest benches too.
Pity no 64gb version :(((
Hard to believe the review would not have stated the drive had 64MB cache if it was the same as the Vertex.Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
NewEgg actually had a few in stock and got bought early this morning... only place that has (or had) them so far... and the price is a go.
I bet $100 there's no cache and these will suffer from write stuttering :( A real shame.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231242
A note:
G-Skill Titan, Super Talent ME, OCZ Vertex, (?) Patriot Warp 3 were supposed to be the same drive.
Only OCZ mentiones cache. So either these are different (I doubt it) or the others just don't talk about features most users don't understand (well, unusual too :D).
I put the question mark on Patriot because it's listed to have 240 MB/s reads.
I disagree. If it's the exact same drive, there would not be a cost delta of $200 between OCZ's 128GB and G.Skill's 128GB... SOMETHING is different - two hundred dollars different. Not even OCZ is that greedy.Quote:
Originally Posted by m^2
4 of them in RAID 10 for a server OS. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by m^2
For everybody
I would like to buy a $200 SSD drive mainly for Windows. What SSD brand would you recommend? (First 3 choices), and what models would you recommend?
How big? There's was sb. in here who needed 250 GB. Some need 20.
I agree that the price differential is perplexing. In fairness though, the prices in the review don't seem to be actual market price so there is still room for change there.
As to the cache/no cache thing - that may be the case. I'm sure it's no real trouble for (presumably Samsung) to just ship them without it... but why would they bother? And even then, the price drop shouldn't be so substantial. If they are all using the same basic box, there are a couple of options:
1. OCZ figures (correctly) that they have sufficient market share to get away with it.
2. G.Skill really wants to get themselves into this market and is prepared to take a hit on these sales to get their name out there
3. These things cost *that* little to make and we've been suckered all this time.
4. Some sort of purchase agreement between OCZ and Samsung is biting them (or the reverse for G.Skill) due to a contract stating that at time of purchase they would pay X dollars per unit, then Samsung decided they could in fact produce them for Y dollars instead thanks to some new plant or something.
I'm not sure what I'd go with. I would be interested to see an OCZ rep speak up about this. If the OCZ product is different in any way and the price points don't change, they should be letting us know how their product is different ASAP.
I'd recommend waiting for benchmarks to come out on OCZ Vertex and Apex drives. They should be out in a week at most (per OCZ), so we should have some more info by then.Quote:
Originally Posted by slim142
That's why I just posted the $299 NewEgg link above. The Titan reviewer was DEAD ON, price wise. As far as the OCZ goes, They MSRP for nearly twice as much as the Titan and are even MORE expensive on the pre-order sites...Quote:
Originally Posted by Serra
I'm just sick of waiting on all of this to be honest. I'm trying to build a new i7 box here and not having to rebuild the OS / apps 2 weeks later...
Oh well... price of early adoption.
Ok Ill wait for reviews. I think a 64Gbs (As minimum) SSD for windows would be great. Sometimes I download files and I forget to move them to the respective drive so thats why I want at least 64Gbs at least.
As for the OCZ drives, which one is faster, Vertex or Apex? What are the differences and which one has the cache?
Yeah to wait is actually the best advice.Quote:
Originally Posted by slim142
Apex = 2*Solid in RAID 0. According to specs, RAIDing gave little in terms of speed. JMicron, so avoid unless you're sure you can live with stuttering.
Don't remember price or exact specs, it's surely not an option for me, so I didn't bother.
Vertex = all new, with cache. Almost surely way better, but $249 for 60 GB.
The GSkill drive uses the JMicron controller JMF602. I asked the reviewer if it did and he posted some decent pictures of it. So now we know the difference.
So possibly same chips but cheaper controller and no cache (compared with Vertex)?
Hmmm. Whether the price difference is worth it will be up to the consumer if that's the case.
Even if that is the case, at these price points they'd make a good deal for anyone with a hardware RAID card or who plan on using it as a drive where SteadyState is an option (not that it would be the majority of people).