|
Factory Factory posted:It's not reliability issues in the sense of bugs, it's that the NAND burns out way faster than normal, and that's entirely intended (use the junk NAND for a cheap drive). With larger drives, there's just so much NAND that it still last a while regardless - at least, for normal desktop workloads. It's not that the NAND in the non-Pro 840 is "junk" per se, it's that the 840 Pro uses 2-bit per cell MLC while the non-Pro 840 uses 3-bit per cell TLC NAND. The trade-off is that the non-Pro needs less silicon for a given capacity in exchange for lower endurance and a lower price.
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 07:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 13:07 |
|
|
HalloKitty posted:No-one was crazy about Toshiba SSDs either, but they didn't have the awful reputation of OCZ. As far as I can tell, they wanted the Indilinx assets from OCZ.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:This is true, but my impression is that the enthusiast PSU market is actually in trouble thanks to reduced demand for fuckoff ridiculous CF / SLI gaming systems. Same is true of most other specialty "enthusiast" components. The money's in console games and mainstream PCs, and fancier graphics in games cost more to create, so fewer and fewer game developers deliberately target their games at running well only on cutting edge gaming PCs. For quite a while CF/SLI demand was driven mostly by people wanting to play on large and/or multiple monitors, but that's melting away as single GPUs get better and better. Maybe we'll see a return to that pattern as 4K+ monitors get cheap enough to appeal to gamers. They left the RAM market because the consumer market for performance memory is basically gone. The only reason to get high-performance RAM is if you're a competitive overclocker; the actual performance benefits are virtually nonexistent at this point. This left OCZ to head for greener, higher-margin pastures. Unfortunately, SSDs quickly became a low-margin, commodity market as manufacturers quickly hit the performance limits of the SATA interface and any idiot on the Pacific Rim with a pick-and-place line and a reference design from Sandforce could crank out a perfectly acceptable consumer drive. If you didn't have some secret sauce of your own, you had no way to make any money compared to the vertically integrated manufacturers that had their own fabs, firmware teams, or controller tech. The Indilinx purchase was their last desperate gasp at relevance in the market before the whole thing came crashing down.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Don't feel too bad, OCZ was good before they were poo poo and that's why it was such a big deal. Mushkin drives were good for a long time and all the samples I saw had branded Intel NAND, and then one day reviewers started seeing mSATA drives with unbranded NAND chips and I stopped recommending them, but chances are they did the switch in their 2.5" drives first where it was hidden inside the case. That's one of the reasons I try to only recommend drives from the NAND manufacturers, with limited exceptions for low-end drives. I don't think OCZ was ever really "good" except for a brief window in the DDR2 days. It's more that for a long time their primary market was people who were willing to sacrifice stability to get a couple extra points in their benchmarks and their more credible competition was significantly higher priced. A janky stick of RAM that causes your computer to reboot every other day is more tolerable than an SSD that fails and takes out all of your data.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2014 21:36
|
|