Total waste of money. The non raid 2.5 already saturate SATA 2. How can these be worth it if they run in raid and have only one SATA 2 port? Any 2x 2.5 in raid will blow these away. OCZ always mentions their sequential transfer rates but never mention what really counts in an OS drive, RANDOM read/writes and latency. The Intels dominate these, even their precious vertex turbos...
They saturate the SATA port at SEQUENTIAL READS only. Not SEQUENTIAL WRITES, which can certainly use some improvement in comparision with rotating media. So for certain applications this makes sense. For you home computer? Probably too expensive.
Based on the numbers posted by Anand, which I trust, which are AFTER the drive has been "worn in", the Vertex does sequential reads around 250MB/s, sequential writes around 135MB/s, random reads at 35MB/s, and random writes at 6MB/s.
So a Collosus WOULD be limited by SATA 2 @ 300MB/s doing sequential reads, but not doing any of the other things. So using two Vertex drives with independent SATA 2 interfaces WOULD be faster at certain things (large file copies from one of these to something infinitely fast say, like streaming to a gigabit interface off a server or something), but otherwise not.
I'm not all that certain how quickly the whole SATA 3 thing is going to roll out given the recent glitches with the P55 mobos and the Marvell chip. Sounds like there should be something before the end of 2009. I don't see why we shouldn't have the Collosus now, and OCZ can deliver a 6GB/s SATA version before the end of the year.
OCZ Collosus (Native Raid 0) Seq Reads - SATA 2 Limited @ 300 MB/S minus overhead
"I'm moving to a small studio and for some reason the cable connection is in an awkward place and I need a way to transmit HD quality video and audio no more than 20 feet away. What is the best wireless HDMI transmitter / receiver for this situation? Thanks!"
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Total waste of money. The non raid 2.5 already saturate SATA 2. How can these be worth it if they run in raid and have only one SATA 2 port? Any 2x 2.5 in raid will blow these away. OCZ always mentions their sequential transfer rates but never mention what really counts in an OS drive, RANDOM read/writes and latency. The Intels dominate these, even their precious vertex turbos...
They saturate the SATA port at SEQUENTIAL READS only. Not SEQUENTIAL WRITES, which can certainly use some improvement in comparision with rotating media. So for certain applications this makes sense. For you home computer? Probably too expensive.
OCZ Collosus (Native Raid 0)
Seq Reads - SATA 2 Limited @ 300 MB/S minus overhead
OCZ Vertex (2 @ Raid 0)
Seq Reads - 450 MB/s
Seq Writes - 380 MB/s
Collosus is cheaper, but is forfeiting a lot of bandwidth. Should have held out for SATA 3
@Anonymonymous,
Based on the numbers posted by Anand, which I trust, which are AFTER the drive has been "worn in", the Vertex does sequential reads around 250MB/s, sequential writes around 135MB/s, random reads at 35MB/s, and random writes at 6MB/s.
So a Collosus WOULD be limited by SATA 2 @ 300MB/s doing sequential reads, but not doing any of the other things. So using two Vertex drives with independent SATA 2 interfaces WOULD be faster at certain things (large file copies from one of these to something infinitely fast say, like streaming to a gigabit interface off a server or something), but otherwise not.
I'm not all that certain how quickly the whole SATA 3 thing is going to roll out given the recent glitches with the P55 mobos and the Marvell chip. Sounds like there should be something before the end of 2009. I don't see why we shouldn't have the Collosus now, and OCZ can deliver a 6GB/s SATA version before the end of the year.
OCZ Collosus (Native Raid 0)
Seq Reads - SATA 2 Limited @ 300 MB/S minus overhead
OCZ Vertex (2 @ Raid 0)
Seq Reads - 450 MB/s
Seq Writes - 380 MB/s
Collosus is cheaper, but is forfeiting a lot of bandwidth. Should have held out for SATA 3