Print 21 comment(s) - last by winterspan.. on May 22 at 2:00 AM

OCZ's highly anticipated new high-end SSD is targeted at enthusiasts and the enterprise market

OCZ Technology has become a major player in the enthusiast storage market, thanks to their strong Solid State Drive portfolio. The company has been very successful with its Vertex series of SSDs, but strong demand has kept prices high. Competitors like Super Talent have also begun to use the same NAND flash controllers from Indilinx, leading to shortages.

In response, OCZ has been looking for a second source for high-end NAND flash controllers. Samsung is a major supplier of NAND flash memory to OCZ, and has been seeking to broaden its product line by selling NAND controllers and DRAM cache as well. Samsung previously confirmed to DailyTech that they currently have no plans to sell their own PB22-J SSDs to the channel, preferring to sell them to OEMs instead. 

OCZ's new Summit series of SSDs use the same S3C29RBB01 controller as found in the Samsung PB22-J. All models will come with a 128MB DRAM cache, doubling that of the Vertex series. The 250GB and 120GB models have a maximum read speed of 220MB/s and a maximum write speeds of 200MB/s. However, sustained writes can achieve 200MB/s; double that of the Vertex series using MLC chips. The 60GB model has the same read speed, but only 125MB/s max write. Random read and write speeds were not available.

The company will compete against Intel in the enterprise market with the Summit series and the new Vertex EX series, which uses faster SLC memory. Retail availability of the Summit series is expected later this week. Pricing information has not yet been disclosed.

OCZ, however, is not the first partner to use Samsung's new controller. Corsair launched and shipped its P256 drive last week. It uses the same S3C29RBB01 NAND controller, but has different firmware.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: Internal "RAID"?
By Ristogod on 5/20/2009 10:59:45 AM , Rating: 2
And the difference between multiple channels and RAID 0 are what?

RE: Internal "RAID"?
By Jansen on 5/20/2009 11:09:02 AM , Rating: 3
The older Samsung controller used 4 8-bit channels to access the flash, the new one uses 8 8-bit channels.

RAID 0 in a striping scenario would be use to connect the controllers together. It adds latency and overhead, and is not needed in this case.

RE: Internal "RAID"?
By Ristogod on 5/20/2009 4:08:25 PM , Rating: 2

My point was that fundamentally the concept is the same. Splitting data up in parallel. Whether the controller handles within, or an additional controller (RAID) handles multiple controllers itself, are simply different ways off implementing the concept.

RE: Internal "RAID"?
By Jansen on 5/20/2009 4:19:21 PM , Rating: 2
I respectfully disagree.

Adding a RAID controller introduces an additional point of failure, as does having the extra controller. It is an unnecessary additional layer.

It is much faster, easier, and cost effective to implement more channels on the controller than to have an internal RAID setup.

RE: Internal "RAID"?
By Alexstarfire on 5/20/2009 11:27:52 PM , Rating: 3
He's saying the concept is the same, not the implementation. Damn public education.

RE: Internal "RAID"?
By emboss on 5/21/2009 11:04:40 AM , Rating: 2
The older Samsung controller used 4 8-bit channels to access the flash, the new one uses 8 8-bit channels.

Any non-NDA'd refs for this? I've never managed to get any info out of Samsung regarding their controllers :(

"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

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