With deadlines looming, we had to make some choices about the tests we ran. This time around, we dropped our in-house trace-based metric. Instead, we're using PCMark 7, which was written to perform a similar function.
Overall, the Vertex 4 doesn't beat the Vertex 3, but that's because the majority of PCMark 7's Storage Suite is compressible. This explains why the SandForce-based SSD 520s and Vertex 3s remain some of the fastest drives on the market.
OCZ's Vertex 4s deliver competitive performance just behind Samsung's 830.
Fact: Because SSDs are so fast, they sit idle most of the time. During our recent virus scan benchmark, which lasted almost 30 minutes, the SSD was only busy for 281 seconds. As a result, idle power consumption is the most important figure to consider in a desktop environment.
Samsung's 830 does exceptionally well here. Even though it employs a beefy triple-core ARM-based controller, it consumes slightly less power than Crucial's m4 and its dual-core ARM-based Marvell controller.
The Vertex 4s are the real power hogs; both models require more than 1.2 W. It's difficult to pinpoint the reason for this power result. In theory, the dual-core Everest 2 controller should require less power, but of course the drive's PCB design could contribute to higher consumption.
- OCZ's Vertex 4 Replaces An Already-Fast Flagship
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- 4 KB Random Performance: RAW, Windows, And Mac
- 128 KB Sequential Performance: RAW, Windows, And Mac
- PCMark 7 And Idle Power Consumption
- Power Consumption: 4 KB Random (Windows 7/Mac OS X)
- Power Consumption: 128 KB Sequential (Windows 7/Mac OS X)
- Examining Steady State Performance (Worst-Case)
- Real World Performance: File Copy And Boot Times
- A Gamble Pays Off: Vertex 4 Looks Strong