OCZ Announces Core Series V2 SSDs - 170MB/sec Reads, 98MB/sec Writes

[AlterBridge86]

Way to go OCZ!

Available in 30GB, 60GB, 120GB, 250GB capacities*
Read: up to 170 MB/sec**
Write: up to 98 MB/sec**
Slim 2.5" Design
100.2 x 70 x 9.3mm
Lightweight 77g
Operating Temp: -10C ~ +70C
Storage Temp: -55C ~ +140C
Low Power Consumption
Shock Resistant 1500G
RAID Support
Mini USB 2.0 Port
MTBF 1.5 million hours
2 year warranty

And props to OCZ as well for taking a step in the right direction as far as naming convention - the 30gb drive has 30gb available formatted - now if only the rest of the hdd manufacturers would follow suite...

*Consumers may see a discrepancy between reported capacity and actual capacity; the storage industry standard is to display capacity in decimal. However, the operating system usually calculates capacity in binary format, causing traditional HDD and SSD to show a lower capacity in Windows. In the case of SSDs, some of the capacity is reserved for formatting and redundancy for wear leveling. These reserved areas on an SSD may occupy up to 5% of the drive’s storage capacity. On the Core V2 Series the new naming convention reflects this and the 30 is equivalent to 32GB, the 60 is equivalent to the 64GB and so on.

No pricing info available as of yet...

[lowfat]

wow, already a core sucessor? Nice. Can't wait for pricing.

[[XC] hipno650]

OCZ really found the sweet spot. cheap SSD's!!! it's hard enough to find the original core series in stock any ware. now that they know that they can not make enough to satisfy demand why not make them better as well! i would buy a few if i can find them in stock any ware.

[Nanometer]

Glad to see OCZ giving the middle finger to the other makers. Maybe it will get the other developers off their asses and start inveesting more time into SSD.

[BossBorot]

I gotta say OCZ really is kicking it into gear recently. Its also nice to see them not giving to much premature info on their hit products for a change. Actions speak louder then words in the case of OCZ. Big thumbs up to what OCZ is doing in the SSD arena

[hecktic]

time to buy some OCZ stock...

whats the pricing going to be for these new SSDs ?

[Nanometer]

I hope not much more then their first generation of SSD.

[r4gm4n]

Hopefully v1 will drop in price a little bit and v2 can slot in that place with.

[LuckyNV]

I really want to get my hand in SSDs, but its something that will certainly drop like a rock at some point, I may try out a 60GB for my OS if its cheap enough though

[C0ncrete]

To be honest OCZ were the last company I thought would be leading the way in SSD.

It's very good and can't wait for the other products to be released from other companies.

[zanzabar]

Originally Posted by C0ncrete

To be honest OCZ were the last company I thought would be leading the way in SSD.

It's very good and can't wait for the other products to be released from other companies.

they are working with samsung, there is a reason why u cant buy MLC samsungs anymore through conventional channels

i like the sata and usb support (i hope sata still)

[Tony]

The plan is to make Core more affordable and Core2 just a little above it. SSD tech is moving at a furious pace, much faster than i have seen anything move for quite a while. The push to make the drives faster is a weekly thing, it really is quite scary at the moment.

Drives arrive with OCZ early next week I hear, in stores immediately after.


USB is for firmware upgrade only ( i will recheck) and the drives are sata

[Devil's Prophet]

Wait, what about the bad random write performance of the first series? Is it been fixed in this series? And even if it is not, there might be the possibility to do that later with the built in usb connection to flash a new firmware into the SSD. Aight.

[Nanometer]

Originally Posted by Tony

The plan is to make Core more affordable and Core2 just a little above it. SSD tech is moving at a furious pace, much faster than i have seen anything move for quite a while. The push to make the drives faster is a weekly thing, it really is quite scary at the moment.

Drives arrive with OCZ early next week I hear, in stores immediately after.


USB is for firmware upgrade only ( i will recheck) and the drives are sata

Scary in the computer world is a good thing =-)

[zanzabar]

Originally Posted by Devil's Prophet

Wait, what about the bad random write performance of the first series? Is it been fixed in this series? And even if it is not, there might be the possibility to do that later with the built in usb connection to flash a new firmware into the SSD. Aight.

it has to be mlc to be affordable so i think that stays

Originally Posted by Tony

The plan is to make Core more affordable and Core2 just a little above it. SSD tech is moving at a furious pace, much faster than i have seen anything move for quite a while. The push to make the drives faster is a weekly thing, it really is quite scary at the moment.

Drives arrive with OCZ early next week I hear, in stores immediately after.


USB is for firmware upgrade only ( i will recheck) and the drives are sata

if u can get data over usb, ever read only that would be a great help

[Tony]

Originally Posted by Devil's Prophet

Wait, what about the bad random write performance of the first series? Is it been fixed in this series? And even if it is not, there might be the possibility to do that later with the built in usb connection to flash a new firmware into the SSD. Aight.

SSD is not HDD, plus when you factor in the massive improved seek times with SSD it can actually work out faster. There is nothing wrong with the first series, its just SSD is new, and we are all getting used to it. A very small amount of people have had issues but this is no different then end users having issues with some HDD on some boards.

Its early days, improvements in hardware and software will come moving forward, you will see this from all SSD suppliers.

Regards firmware flash im still looking into that, i feel there may be a way without USB...we have to wait and see

[m^2]

USB is a great idea, it's bigger than a pendrive, but the speed is worth it.

[axan]

I'm in for 60gb as soon as I can find 1 in stock

[Devil's Prophet]

Originally Posted by Tony

SSD is not HDD, plus when you factor in the massive improved seek times with SSD it can actually work out faster. There is nothing wrong with the first series, its just SSD is new, and we are all getting used to it. A very small amount of people have had issues but this is no different then end users having issues with some HDD on some boards.

Its early days, improvements in hardware and software will come moving forward, you will see this from all SSD suppliers.

Regards firmware flash im still looking into that, i feel there may be a way without USB...we have to wait and see

A very small amount is maybe too little. I heard about quite a deal of users complaining about the random write speed. All this, though, is mostly due to the combination of the OCZ Core SSD with an Intel ICHR9 chip or something like that. But since most users have an Intel based system, I don't think it's just a small minority that has problems with it. I don't have hard numbers to back that up though.

[Tony]

Originally Posted by Devil's Prophet

A very small amount is maybe too little. I heard about quite a deal of users complaining about the random write speed. All this, though, is mostly due to the combination of the OCZ Core SSD with an Intel ICHR9 chip or something like that. But since most users have an Intel based system, I don't think it's just a small minority that has problems with it. I don't have hard numbers to back that up though.

Please don't blame a specific chipset, that just creates panic. I actually fully believe most of the issues some end users are see are bios related. We have a growing list of boards now working just fine with all sorts of chipsets, other boards with the same chipsets though may have odd issues...this can only mean BIOS is the issue.

Again SSD is not HDD, most apps testing SSD were built for HDD, so its hard to correlate any results from these tests.

[RejZoR]

*Consumers may see a discrepancy between reported capacity and actual capacity; the storage industry standard is to display capacity in decimal. However, the operating system usually calculates capacity in binary format, causing traditional HDD and SSD to show a lower capacity in Windows. In the case of SSDs, some of the capacity is reserved for formatting and redundancy for wear leveling. These reserved areas on an SSD may occupy up to 5% of the drive’s storage capacity. On the Core V2 Series the new naming convention reflects this and the 30 is equivalent to 32GB, the 60 is equivalent to the 64GB and so on.

Thats nothing but load of bolox. How do we measure storaga capacity? In butterflies and crickets? Of course it's binary format stupid idiots.
I have aboslutelly no clue why the heck they measure everything with factor 1000. It's 1024 ever since computing exists. But noooooooooo. They sell you 750GB drive and you get less than 700GB of actual space in freakin BINARY format. Like they discovered America or something... heh

[Helmore]

Yes they sell you a 750 GigaByte drive, but the PC will report the amount of storage in GibiBytes and a GibiByte is 1024^3 while a GigaByte is 10^9 bytes.

BTW, doesn't write performance have a lot to do with write block size and stuff like that? By that I mean that write blocks of 4 kB each will give much lower results than blocks of 64 kB each, something that is not the case with HDDs (at least not to the extent that is seen on SSDs).

[m^2]

Originally Posted by RejZoR

I have aboslutelly no clue why the heck they measure everything with factor 1000.

It's so simple..because you can advertise your drive as something bigger.

[m^2]

Originally Posted by Helmore

Yes they sell you a 750 GigaByte drive, but the PC will report the amount of storage in GibiBytes and a GibiByte is 1024^3 while a GigaByte is 10^9 bytes.

BTW, doesn't write performance have a lot to do with write block size and stuff like that? By that I mean that write blocks of 4 kB each will give much lower results than blocks of 64 kB each, something that is not the case with HDDs (at least not to the extent that is seen on SSDs).

You meant: SI Gigabytes and SI Gibibytes.

[Levish]

Originally Posted by Devil's Prophet

A very small amount is maybe too little. I heard about quite a deal of users complaining about the random write speed. All this, though, is mostly due to the combination of the OCZ Core SSD with an Intel ICHR9 chip or something like that. But since most users have an Intel based system, I don't think it's just a small minority that has problems with it. I don't have hard numbers to back that up though.

in all honesty random writes is nearly 10% tops of what my hdd is doing. I'm not saying random writes are irrelevant but its not nearly a big issue.

If random write performance is important invest in a battery backed caching controller with a lot of ram.