The results from today's re-test of the OCZ Octane 512GB drive really weren't what I expected to see when I started.
I hoped that some of the magic OCZ found for Everest II would somehow start to appear in Octane's Everest controller, but the magic just isn't there. The new firmware increased performance in a couple of real-world tasks, but when you sum it all up, the drive lost more performance than it gained. That doesn't mean Octane is a bad product, just one that isn't as special as say a Vertex 3, the pinnacle of SSD performance.
There are some things to remember if you have an Octane and are updating the firmware. This release is a destructive update; the drive will be erased in the update process when it changes the blocks from 16k to 8k. If you want to keep the data from the drive, you'll need to back it up. Also, when we updated the Octane on our Z68 motherboard we had to install the drive to the Marvell SATA port, the Intel port with the latest Intel drivers wouldn't see the drive from the OCZ Update Tool. There is also an issue with OCZ's Update Tool and X79 motherboards. The issue is documented in the releases notes, so we didn't even try to mess with X79. The last issue is universal for all HDD/SSD products; you can't update the firmware on your boot drive.
A big reason why I wanted to run this drive back through the benchmark mill is because of the association with Vertex 4... or potential association, whatever. I'm not sure how this architecture is going to change to go from Octane to Vertex 4, but the changes will need to be pretty big for that to happen.
At CES OCZ had a Vertex 4 candidate on display and the Indilinx controller number was different than that of the controller in Everest. I guess we'll all just have to wait until June or July to see what tips up. Hopefully 20nm flash is ready by then too so we can all share in the experience of having 512GB of flash storage for much less than $800.
- Page 1 [Introduction and Specifications and Pricing]
- Page 2 [Packaging and The Drive]
- Page 3 [Benchmarks - Test System Setup and ATTO Baseline Performance]
- Page 4 [Benchmarks - HD Tune Pro]
- Page 5 [Benchmarks - AIDA64 Random Access Time]
- Page 6 [Benchmarks - CrystalDiskMark]
- Page 7 [Benchmarks - PCMark Vantage Hard Disk Tests]
- Page 8 [PCMark Vantage - Drives with Data Testing]
- Page 9 [Benchmarks - AS SSD]
- Page 10 [Benchmarks - Passmark]
- Page 11 [Final Thoughts]
Right of Reply
We at TweakTown openly invite the companies who provide us with review samples / who are mentioned or discussed to express their opinion of our content. If any company representative wishes to respond, we will publish the response here.
Further Reading: Read and find more Storage content at our Storage reviews, guides and articles index page.
Do you get our RSS feed? Get It!
Latest News Posts
- Report: 5 billion Google Android apps are vulnerable to cyberattack
- Mobile payment market is up for grabs among companies pushing services
- Dropping phablet prices putting pressure on smaller-sized smartphones
- Secret Service plans to test drone flights in Washington, D.C
- Tim Cook: Apple Watch could replace car keys for newer vehicles
- win crash
- PC-K65 and PC-K69
- Ga-ep31-ds3l dead after flashing bios
- HIS Multi-View x2 HDOCK1 USB 3.0 Dual Display Docking Station Review
- Cannot open CTRL + I Intel rapid storage menu
- Fractal Design Announces Venturi Series Fans
- BitFenix Announces AEGIS Micro-ATX Chassis
- VisionTek Introduces DriveXpander 2.5-inch Drive Expansion Slot Adapter
- Charter Communications Says Net Neutrality Will Slow Broadband Growth and Mean Higher Fees
- MSI Announces the AP16 Flex All-in-one Desktop