OCZ Vertex 250 SSD on MP 2008 8-core vs Stock 320 HDD

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by sparkie7, Mar 17, 2009.

  1. sparkie7 macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #1
    Just installed my Vertex 250 using the MaxUpgrades 3.5 to 2.5" sled that arrived today (works perfect):

    Here are the XBench results. 560% score increase over previous stock 320GB HDD. Massive increase overall. So far so good:

    Disk Test 51.02
    Sequential 120.11
    Uncached Write 125.70 77.18 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 121.19 68.57 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 97.94 28.66 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 145.24 72.99 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Random 32.39
    Uncached Write 10.88 1.15 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 76.38 24.45 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 89.16 0.63 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 137.88 25.58 MB/sec [256K blocks]
     

    Attached Files:

  2. aibo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Southern California
    #2
    Very nice scores. Awesome drive, isn't it? For comparison here's my X25-M as the boot disk in my 2008 8-core (also using the MaxUpgrades sled). Your write speeds definitely top mine. Either drive is gonna be blazing for anything you need it for.
    Full Xbench run here
    Disk Test 267.07
    Sequential 175.11
    Uncached Write 136.69 83.93 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 130.39 73.78 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 170.81 49.99 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 499.02 250.80 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Random 562.50
    Uncached Write 637.06 67.44 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 237.43 76.01 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 2359.61 16.72 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 1103.84 204.83 MB/sec [256K blocks]
     
  3. sparkie7 thread starter macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #3
    its impressive. MUCH faster than the "Apple" SSD in my MBP. Youre X25 is very quick on the Random test. Imagine RAIDing a pair or more of these. Woof!!

    Makes the 2.8 Much more responsive. The stock 320GB HDD thats shipped is 7200rpm yet it feels slow. The addition of a fast SSD makes one of the single most dramatic increases in perceptable system performance possible. Well worth the investment. Though it is a big pill to swallow :D:D
     
  4. Nautigar macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #4
    Hello,

    I am considering an OCZ Vertex (120), too. However, I found the following comment in the web:

    "While I’m overall pretty happy with the purchase of the OCZ Core Series II SATA Solid State Drive some disadvantages do come to light every now and then. This happens in situations where many small blocks are written on the Solid State Drive leading to an unresponsive system for a few seconds."

    Do you experience this problem with your SSD as well?

    Thanks in advance,

    Matthias.
     
  5. sparkie7 thread starter macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #5
    the Vertex series has a new controller chip. Earlier models suffered from some problems. The Vertex series should be ok. Also note that the 120 and 250 Vertex have the 64MB cache. The other smaller capacities only have 32MB
     
  6. aibo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Southern California
    #6
    OCZ's Vertex and Intel's drives don't have the stuttering problems other drives do and are probably the only ones worth buying right now. These drives should be on everyone's upgrade list. Everyone talks about the performance boost a RAM upgade can give... this is even more noticeable, and about the same cost. Seeing your Mac boot in 6 seconds is pretty amazing.
     
  7. Nautigar macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #7
    aibo/sparkie7: Thanks, convinced! :)

    Now, is there a consensus on what drive to get, the Intel X25 or the OCZ Vertex?
     
  8. aibo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Southern California
    #8
    Barefeats striped a pair of X25-M's and the Disktester random write test is... staggering :p

    If money's not a constraint, I'd get the OCZ Vertex for the superior write speeds and greater capacities. Neither one is an issue for what I need it for (just boot + apps drive) so I went with the cheaper X25-M.
     
  9. emt1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #9
    All Vertex SSDs have 64MB.
     
  10. sparkie7 thread starter macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #10

    You have been misinformed.

    Look at the specs. There is a reason the 120 & 250 perform better than the 30 or 60GB:

    30GB Max Performance**
    Read: Up to 230 MB/s
    Write: Up to 135MB/s
    Sustained Write: Up to 80MB/s

    60GB Max Performance**
    Read: Up to 230 MB/s
    Write: Up to 135MB/s
    Sustained Write: Up to 70MB/s

    120GB Max Performance**
    Read: Up to 250 MB/s
    Write: Up to 180MB/s
    Sustained Write: Up to 100MB/s

    250GB Max Performance**
    Read: Up to 250 MB/s
    Write: Up to 160MB/s
    Sustained Write: Up to 100MB/s

    http://www.hardware.info/en-US/news/ymiclJqawpaaaJY/OCZ_Vertex_SSDs_with_onboard_cache_memory/
     
  11. emt1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #11
    Nope. http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/flash_drives/ocz_vertex_series_sata_ii_2_5-ssd

    "64MB Onboard Cache"

    Also OCZ staff have said on their own forums that all drives have 64MB cache.
     
  12. hubiedubie macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2009
    #13
    Please ignore this post - misread the title.
     
  13. omegasyn macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #15
    I must be blind because I can't seem to find the Intel SSD slot on maxupgrades? All I see from the pull-downs are the veloiraptor and slots already preloaded with the SSD
     
  14. emt1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #16
    Hint: SSDs are 2.5" :)
     
  15. sparkie7 thread starter macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #17
  16. k2director macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    #19
    Sparkie7, thanks for the report on the Vextex. Do you have any other thoughts on the drive now that you've had it a few more days?

    Any sleep issues?

    Any pauses/stutters (I know they're not expected, but just checking).

    Any thing of note?

    I'm thinking of getting a 250 to start with, and then possibly a second one to build a RAID 0.

    Thanks much!
     
  17. emt1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #20
    I have the Vertex 30 with the latest firmware (1199).

    1. No sleep issues.
    2. Noticed one pause while launching Pages, unknown if it was related. I've had the SSD since Thursday.
    3. Nothing to note really. Fast as f***. OS X installed in 15 minutes and my MBP 2.4GHz boots in 20 seconds. It also runs noticeably cooler and, obviously, it is silent. If it put my ear against the keyboard and move my finger on the trackpad, I can hear the processor.
     
  18. sparkie7 thread starter macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #22
    i have just set up the MP with all my apps and docs. havent really put it through its paces yet. but everything seems fine

    nope. (wasnt really aware of them to be honest)

    none

    its faster than my MBP 17 Apple SSD, but that could be because of the MBP has smaller through put than the MP. some apps like indesign & illustrator load up much faster. others are very close, but the vertex is still faster.

    the thought of having two set up as a RAID 0 is very appealing for a fast scratch disk, but i'm not sure if SSDs can handle heavy SD activity. from reports it seems not. (in any case one COULD periodically format these - but i'm not sure if this will completely fix the depletion lifespan noted on some articles. i have to dig further). Hence an SSD is still best used as a sys boot drive with apps. i also have my docs on mine at present

    nice :D you should see a huge increase in performance. i was thinking the same, but they are still very expensive. or i was thinking of getting 2x 120 vertexs and RAID 0 them. I got the 250 initially b/c they were out of the 120's. will see..
     
  19. sparkie7 thread starter macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #23
    there is huge mis-information out there. and its to OCZ's detriment as many people would be put off by the purported 32MB cache advertised.

    i wonder then why the 30's and 60's are published as slower than the 120 & 250's. unless they have fixed this in FW. i did read that a FW had 'levelled' performance but it wasnt formal as such from OCZ. be interested to know. b/c i'd be tempted to get a couple of 60's if they are just as fast as the 250
     
  20. OddThomas macrumors regular

    OddThomas

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Location:
    Grapevine, TX
    #24
    Hey Sparkie7, here are my results with RAID0 for comparison. the SSD is better, but not sure i would really see it. I love the idea of SSD.. price needs to come down a bit for us poor people though. the wd640 is $77 a piece, put 3 in RAID and it's nice.
     

    Attached Files:

  21. sparkie7 thread starter macrumors 68000

    sparkie7

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #25
    Nice :D an 186% increase from your initial single HDD. Should feel a lot snappier now, and your's is faster than Sober's RAID now ;) yeh, SSDs need to drop much, much more. Great price on the WD640's - cant be beat at that price!
     

Share This Page