Print 44 comment(s) - last by icanhascpu.. on Sep 12 at 8:06 PM

32GB OCZ Core SATA II SSD $99 after Rebate
SSDs dip below $100

It's been quite some time since DailyTech has posted a Daily Hot Deals post, but this particular deal is simply too mind-blowing to pass over. Newegg currently has the recently released 32GB OCZ Core Series SATA II SSD for $159 -- MWAVE also lists the drive for the same price. There is also a $60 manufacturer's rebate which drops the price down to $99 -- this is a new low for high-speed solid state drives.

The 32GB Core Series SSD has write speeds of 83MB/sec and read speeds of 120MB/sec.

There have been some concerns raised about the performance issues of OCZ's MLC-based Core Series SSDs in recent tests, but the sub-$100 price tag may just be low enough to get some users to at least give the burgeoning technology a try.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: meh
By JustTom on 9/9/2008 8:42:17 AM , Rating: 5

Read that and decide for yourself. I'd not do it, the issues seem really severe.

RE: meh
By Funksultan on 9/9/2008 8:50:17 AM , Rating: 4
Agreed, but remember that all these problems are performance related.

If you've got a small laptop and are looking to keep the heat down and prolong battery life, this might not be a bad purchase.

RE: meh
By therealnickdanger on 9/9/2008 9:18:39 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I think it's important to keep this SSD in perspective of the storage it could replace. Even with its pausing problem, it can still blow the hinges off 5400RPM notebook drives, small "SSDs" in netbooks, and many 7200RPM drives in nearly every category.

Let's not jump all over the "OCZ Core sux" bandwagon just yet. It doesn't suck. It could just be a lot better - Intel has showed us that it can be better - but at 6X the price it better be! LOL

For $100, I would buy this drive to replace just about any notebook/netbook HDD. $60 would be even better... ;-)

RE: meh
By Sunrise089 on 9/9/2008 10:08:36 AM , Rating: 3
It certainly is NOT faster than a 5400RPM notebook drive (much less a decent 7200 RPM drive) when it's stuttering. Anand pointed out system hands with sending IM messages. That is simply unacceptable performance.

RE: meh
By therealnickdanger on 9/9/2008 11:11:57 AM , Rating: 2
I've read and re-read the reviews repeatedly. Despite the "unacceptable" performance, the Core drives still manage to beat the Velociraptor in many benchmarks. I'm sorry, Anand is over-reacting a bit. I've seen these systems in operation - they behave very well in standard desktop operation. It's almost laughable that Anand is simulating 100% random writes as reasoning against these drives. Afterall, look at the AT review of the Core line several weeks ago:

Editors choice. It's not just AT either, there is a consensus among hardware review sites: the Core line offers noticeably improved system-wide performance. Clearly, the new Intel drive is a HUGE step beyond Core, but I don't think it's fair to count them out completely - especially at the right price.

RE: meh
By Zshazz on 9/9/2008 11:25:06 AM , Rating: 4
It's not just "simulations" being run that show this... The reason they were alerted to this problem was due to random pauses of nearly a second on certain easy tasks... such as sending an IM. The culprit was found to be things like updating a small log file.

I'm really sad at the news as well, but if you want to suffer through inconsistent performance, you're certainly allowed to. Just remember, peak performance makes nice-looking benchmarks, but people actually care about general performance and/or worst-case performance... these MLC drives simply aren't up to the task after you look at the fact that they fail at relatively simple real-world tasks. :(

RE: meh
By feraltoad on 9/9/2008 8:51:41 PM , Rating: 2
people actually care about general performance and/or worst-case performance...

Well said! Who would choose a video card that was much faster when it came to maximum fps but with a minimum of 1 fps at times while gaming? In that scenario most people would choose a lower but steady frame rate. Imagine that freeze in COD4 right before u try 2 snipe someone running!

Although they are just unloading the things, I hope this signals a price drop for SSDs. If a company sold a 64gb SSD for under $200 they wouldn't be able to keep them on the shelves. Which is why they would charge more. :( Economics <sigh>...

RE: meh
By bhieb on 9/9/2008 11:28:47 AM , Rating: 2
I think your missing the reason for the concern. In benchmarks the drives look fine, but in actual real world usage you can tell a difference anytime there are more random writes than the buffer can handle. Sorry but most users heavily use their Web browser and IM client. And even if it is happening once or twice and hour it simply is not acceptable for the price premium/other small benefits.

It boils down to what you want most.

Battery Life/Ruggedness
- stick with a desktop drive the premium is not there.

Quick application starts
- SSD obviously has an edge here even the older MLC's beat a normal drive.

Overall better experience
- You won't get that from the older MLC. What difference does it make if your browser starts fast if it is pausing for up to a second randomly throughout the day. Sorry that is a complete failure compared to a normal drive.

This is a subjective category and for whatever reason a random pause is noticed by the user more than a steady slowness. You get quite used to your apps taking x number of seconds to load, but and unexplain random slowness will always impact your overall experience more.

RE: meh
By xsilver on 9/9/2008 12:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
well some poor sods have to buy them at least in order to reduce the prices further on the next generation drives! ;)

and they still are useful if you want durability/battery performance.
tough break though - the price point is very tempting although the size is still just a tad small for os install. 64gb is just about right. When that hits the $100 price point without this issue - I think the floodgates will open on sales.

RE: meh
By therealnickdanger on 9/9/2008 12:43:09 PM , Rating: 2
This is a subjective category and for whatever reason a random pause is noticed by the user more than a steady slowness.

"Subjective" being the key word. Objectively, the reviews show these as lightning-fast drives. Subjectively, I didn't notice anything like what Anand mentioned on a system (Vista-32, 2GB RAM) running the 64GB Core and I did plenty of surfing. I did not use IM though (I rarely do anyway). What I did notice was a snappy responsiveness that I had never experienced prior.

Friday is payday and I'll likely purchase this drive. I'll keep investigating up to the very second I click the "purchase" button. I'm trying to encourage people not to just dismiss this drive - as powerful as Anand's comments can be. There is MUCH to benefit the common user with one of these. If your workload produces constant small, random writes, then this isn't the drive for you. It's inappropriate to call it "crap" however.

RE: meh
By TheLiberalTruth on 9/9/2008 1:56:16 PM , Rating: 1
Friday is payday and I'll likely purchase this drive.

By all means, buy it! We need suckers *ahem* I mean someone to buy up all these drives so the retailers can make room for new models that work right.

RE: meh
By Brandon Hill on 9/9/2008 1:33:10 PM , Rating: 5
You're quoting the wrong SSD drive. The drive in the review you point out is OCZ's SLC drive. SLC drives don't have the performance/stuttering issues. It is NOT the Core Series SSD which use MLC NAND flash.

The drive in question (and which is the subject of this article and Anand's review yesterday) is an MLC drive -- the Core Series.

RE: meh
By therealnickdanger on 9/9/2008 2:53:08 PM , Rating: 2

Still doesn't change the overall performance benefits of the Core series, however.

RE: meh
By DigitalFreak on 9/9/2008 2:56:06 PM , Rating: 1
Hmm... Shall I trust the opinion of someone with the handle "therealdickdanger", or Anand?

Not really that difficult of a decision.

RE: meh
By atrabilious on 9/9/2008 2:37:57 PM , Rating: 2
Why take the risk when in 6 months, you can get a much better drive for less money, that doesn't have these problems? Is it really so important to pull the trigger now?

RE: meh
By rudolphna on 9/9/2008 3:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
I dunno, a 1 second lag for sending an IM seems pretty crappy to me.

RE: meh
By homerdog on 9/9/2008 10:26:33 AM , Rating: 2
The battery life of the system was actually lower with the OCZ Core, presumably thanks to the strange write performance issues.

RE: meh
By Googer on 9/10/2008 12:35:15 AM , Rating: 2
Read and decide for yourself. I did not do it..

Obviously you did not read the link you posted. The deal is for OCz SSD and the Anandtech article you linked is for the latest Intel X25-M SSD (Intel X25-M SSD: Intel Delivers One of the World's Fastest Drives).

Two different products and two different performance levels. Just because it says SSD, do not assume they are all alike in the benchmark.

This may be the correct link:

RE: meh
By JustTom on 9/10/2008 3:52:12 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, I read the entire article. There is a lot of information on problems with the OCZ SSD. Stuttering, slow response time and other issues. I'd give you quotes but for some reason the link isn't working. Given the data in that article, even if it was focused on Intel's product, I'd not touch OCZ core product.

The link you provided is for a different OCZ product. It is much more expensive than the Core products and doesn't have the stuttering/response time problems of the cheaper Core products. Of course, a 32 gig unit will set you back $359 rather than $99 for the Core unit. (prices from Newegg)

"What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." -- Michael Dell, after being asked what to do with Apple Computer in 1997

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki