01:46
Mr. Asim Rajput
SandForce was first to announce & preview its 2011 SSD controller know-how. They first talked about the controller late last year, got a sneak peak at its performance this year at CES & then a couple of months ago brought you a performance preview based on pre-production hardware & firmware from OCZ. Although the Vertex two shipment target was originally scheduled for March, thanks to plenty of testing & new firmware revisions since I previewed the drive, the officially release got pushed back to April.
What I have in my hands is retail 120GB Vertex five with what OCZ is calling its final, production worthy client firmware. The Vertex five Pro has been pushed back a bit as the controller/firmware still must make it through more testing and validation.
I'll get to the 120GB Vertex four and how its performance differs from the 240GB drive they previewed not long ago, but first there's a few somewhat-related issues I must get off my chest.
The Spectek Issue
Last month I wrote that OCZ had grown up after announcing the acquisition of Indilinx, a SSD controller manufacturer that was popular in 2009. The Indilinx deal has now officially closed and OCZ is the proud owner of the controller company for a comparatively trifling $32M in OCZ stock.
By obtaining Indilinx OCZ takes more step up the ladder towards the Intel/Micron/Samsung group. Regrettably at that level, there is a new issue: NAND supply.
The Indilinx acquisition doesn't mean much for OCZ today, however in the long run it ought to give OCZ at least a fighting chance at being a player in the SSD space. Keep in mind that OCZ is now fighting a battle on fronts. Above OCZ in the chain are companies like Intel, Micron and Samsung. These are all companies with their own foundries and either produce the NAND that goes in to their SSDs or the controllers as well. Below OCZ are companies like Corsair, G.Skill, Patriot and OWC. These are more of OCZ's traditional competitors, mostly acting as assembly houses or rebadging OEM drives (Corsair is a recent exception as it's its own firmware/controller combination with the P3 series).
NAND Flash is not unlike any other commodity. Its cost is subject to variation based on a myriad of factors. In the event you control the fabs, then you usually have a nice suggestion of what is coming. There is still a great deal of volatility even for a fab owner, technique technologies are hard to roll out and there is always the risk of issues in manufacturing, but usually speaking you have got a better chance of supply and controlled costs if you are making the NAND. In the event you don't control the fabs, you are at their mercy. While purchasing Indilinx gave OCZ the ability to be independent of any controller maker if it desired to, OCZ is still at the mercy of the NAND manufacturers.
Currently OCZ ships drives with NAND from different companies: Intel, Micron, Spectek and Hynix. The Intel and Micron stuff is available in both 34nm and 25nm flavors, Spectek is strictly 34nm and Hynix is 32nm.
Each NAND supplier has its own list of parts with their own list of specifications. While they are usually comparable in terms of reliability and performance, there is some variance not on the NAND side but how controllers interact with the aforementioned NAND.
Last month OWC published a weblog accusing OCZ of shipping inferior NAND on the Vertex four. OWC requested a drive from OCZ and it was built using 34nm Spectek NAND. Spectek, for those of you who are not familiar, is a subsidiary of Micron (much like Crucial is a subsidiary of Micron). IMFT manufactures the NAND, the Micron side of it takes and packages it - some of it is used or sold by Micron, some of it is "sold" to Crucial and some of it is "sold" to Spectek. Only Spectek adds its own branding to the NAND.
About 90% of what OCZ ships in the Vertex four and four is using Intel or Micron NAND. Those tend to be the most interchangeable as they physically come from the same plant. Intel/Micron have also been on the forefront of driving new method technologies so it makes sense to ship as much of that stuff as you can given the promise of lower costs.
OWC published this picture of the NAND used in their Vertex four sample:
The 34nm Spectek parts pictured above are rated at 3000 program/erase cycles. I have already established that 3000 cycles is over for a desktop workload with a clever controller. Given the low write amplification I have measured on SandForce drives, I don't think 3000 cycles is an issue. It is also worth noting that 3000 cycles is at the lower finish for what is industry standard for 25nm/34nm NAND. Micron branded parts are also rated at 3000 cycles, however I have heard that is a conservative rating.
I don't know the reason for the bad blood between OWC & OCZ nor do I think it is relevant. What I do know is the following:
In the event you order NAND from Spectek you'll know that the -AL on the part number is the highest grade that Spectek sells; it stands for "Full spec w/ tighter requirements". I don't know what Spectek's testing or validation methodology are but the NAND pictured above is the highest grade Spectek sells & it is rated at 3000 p/e cycles. This is the same amount of information I do know about Intel NAND & Micron NAND. It is feasible that the Spectek branded stuff is somehow worse, I don't have any information that shows me it is.
OCZ insists that there is no difference between the Spectek stuff & standard Micron 34nm NAND. Given that the NAND comes out of the same fab & carries the same p/e rating, the story is believable. Unless OWC has done some specific testing on this NAND to show that it is unfit for use in an SSD, I will call this myth busted.
What I have in my hands is retail 120GB Vertex five with what OCZ is calling its final, production worthy client firmware. The Vertex five Pro has been pushed back a bit as the controller/firmware still must make it through more testing and validation.
I'll get to the 120GB Vertex four and how its performance differs from the 240GB drive they previewed not long ago, but first there's a few somewhat-related issues I must get off my chest.
The Spectek Issue
Last month I wrote that OCZ had grown up after announcing the acquisition of Indilinx, a SSD controller manufacturer that was popular in 2009. The Indilinx deal has now officially closed and OCZ is the proud owner of the controller company for a comparatively trifling $32M in OCZ stock.
By obtaining Indilinx OCZ takes more step up the ladder towards the Intel/Micron/Samsung group. Regrettably at that level, there is a new issue: NAND supply.
The Indilinx acquisition doesn't mean much for OCZ today, however in the long run it ought to give OCZ at least a fighting chance at being a player in the SSD space. Keep in mind that OCZ is now fighting a battle on fronts. Above OCZ in the chain are companies like Intel, Micron and Samsung. These are all companies with their own foundries and either produce the NAND that goes in to their SSDs or the controllers as well. Below OCZ are companies like Corsair, G.Skill, Patriot and OWC. These are more of OCZ's traditional competitors, mostly acting as assembly houses or rebadging OEM drives (Corsair is a recent exception as it's its own firmware/controller combination with the P3 series).
NAND Flash is not unlike any other commodity. Its cost is subject to variation based on a myriad of factors. In the event you control the fabs, then you usually have a nice suggestion of what is coming. There is still a great deal of volatility even for a fab owner, technique technologies are hard to roll out and there is always the risk of issues in manufacturing, but usually speaking you have got a better chance of supply and controlled costs if you are making the NAND. In the event you don't control the fabs, you are at their mercy. While purchasing Indilinx gave OCZ the ability to be independent of any controller maker if it desired to, OCZ is still at the mercy of the NAND manufacturers.
Currently OCZ ships drives with NAND from different companies: Intel, Micron, Spectek and Hynix. The Intel and Micron stuff is available in both 34nm and 25nm flavors, Spectek is strictly 34nm and Hynix is 32nm.
Each NAND supplier has its own list of parts with their own list of specifications. While they are usually comparable in terms of reliability and performance, there is some variance not on the NAND side but how controllers interact with the aforementioned NAND.
Last month OWC published a weblog accusing OCZ of shipping inferior NAND on the Vertex four. OWC requested a drive from OCZ and it was built using 34nm Spectek NAND. Spectek, for those of you who are not familiar, is a subsidiary of Micron (much like Crucial is a subsidiary of Micron). IMFT manufactures the NAND, the Micron side of it takes and packages it - some of it is used or sold by Micron, some of it is "sold" to Crucial and some of it is "sold" to Spectek. Only Spectek adds its own branding to the NAND.
About 90% of what OCZ ships in the Vertex four and four is using Intel or Micron NAND. Those tend to be the most interchangeable as they physically come from the same plant. Intel/Micron have also been on the forefront of driving new method technologies so it makes sense to ship as much of that stuff as you can given the promise of lower costs.
OWC published this picture of the NAND used in their Vertex four sample:
The 34nm Spectek parts pictured above are rated at 3000 program/erase cycles. I have already established that 3000 cycles is over for a desktop workload with a clever controller. Given the low write amplification I have measured on SandForce drives, I don't think 3000 cycles is an issue. It is also worth noting that 3000 cycles is at the lower finish for what is industry standard for 25nm/34nm NAND. Micron branded parts are also rated at 3000 cycles, however I have heard that is a conservative rating.
I don't know the reason for the bad blood between OWC & OCZ nor do I think it is relevant. What I do know is the following:
In the event you order NAND from Spectek you'll know that the -AL on the part number is the highest grade that Spectek sells; it stands for "Full spec w/ tighter requirements". I don't know what Spectek's testing or validation methodology are but the NAND pictured above is the highest grade Spectek sells & it is rated at 3000 p/e cycles. This is the same amount of information I do know about Intel NAND & Micron NAND. It is feasible that the Spectek branded stuff is somehow worse, I don't have any information that shows me it is.
OCZ insists that there is no difference between the Spectek stuff & standard Micron 34nm NAND. Given that the NAND comes out of the same fab & carries the same p/e rating, the story is believable. Unless OWC has done some specific testing on this NAND to show that it is unfit for use in an SSD, I will call this myth busted.
0 comments:
Post a Comment