OCZ Shipping 25nm SSDs, customers not happy over lack of change?

[2.0™]

I'm of the opinion that it doesn't matter how this plays out. It's all in the opening play.

I cannot recommend OCZ any longer.

[Crimsoned]

I'm of the opinion that it doesn't matter how this plays out. It's all in the opening play.

I cannot recommend OCZ any longer.

I've stopped recommending them as soon as they stopped being the value brand.

[chimpanzee]

The only time I had the pleasure of working with OCZ's customer support was when my two 60GB drives were unstable in RAID1. It was absolutely impossible that the SSD could be wrong! They pretty much refused to believe their SSD could possibly be imperfect.

Actually they do. It depends on what they are selling at the moment. To the point of almost bad mouth their own product(Vertex i.e. the one using Indilinx which of course is on the way out) just to show how good their Vertex 2 is. Telling you how they conduct their business.

[Torai]

I had been debating between Vertex 2 and X25M for quite a while. Eventually, I went for Intel because of its reliability. I am willing to give up a bit speed for that. Plus, I heard that OCZ's Vertex 2 SSDs recently changed from 34nm to 25nm which is slower. Also, some users noticed OCZ's performance decreases significantly after 3-4 months even with TRIM. Im not sure about that but I just went with Intel to keep my mind free.

You might wanna take a look at OCZ SSDs' reviews/feedbacks. These are for the old version 34nm. There are so many people saying their drives are either DOA or after couple of months. Totally unacceptable if that's true.

OCZ Vertex 2 120GB

Newegg.com - OCZ Vertex 2 OCZSSD2-2VTXE120G 2.5" 120GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: OCZ Technology 120 GB Vertex 2 Series SATA II 2.5-Inch Solid State Drive (SSD) OCZSSD2-2VTXE120G

It cant be denied that OCZ's SSDs performed very well. On the other hand, its hard to prove they are reliable. I might not touch OCZ for a couple of years. And Im happy that I made a decent choice

[Ryan]

This is ridiculous.

I can't justify what they've done to customers even if they all went on their knees and begged for forgiveness.

[Torai]

I bet this is gonna affect OCZ's Vertex 3 sales very badly. In addition, Vertex 3 might also be the last competitor of the next gen SSDs comes out. Hence, Intel clearly has advantage on the next gen SSD battle.

[Tsunade_Hime]

Well OCZ stopped selling RAM as of February, so they are going to primarily focus on SSD and power supplies. The profit margins on RAM were just too low, so they left the business. I think it was every 1 SSD sale, they had to sell 20 RAM to make money.

[davepermen]

as if no one ever listened to me... i knew since years why i never want anything ocz.

[eva2000]

Yeah very bad move not differentiating the slower NAND by packaging under Vertex 2 name. 25nm 64Gbit is up to 43% slower in writes than old 34nm used Result Mini-review: Direct comparison between 34nm and 25nm drives using 0-fill highly compressible data and 0/1-fill partially compressible data!

[Judicator]

Ugh. While I'm happy with my Vertex 2 (which I got back in December, and has an old enough firmware (1.25) that I'm pretty sure it's 34 nm), I do agree that the way that they handled this has pretty much made for a Google Page Ranking disaster. What I'm more curious about is how much of all this is really related to the 25 nm NAND; after all, what if Intel is quietly doing the exact same thing with their G2s (meaning newly manufactured G2s have quietly replaced the 34 nm NAND with 25 nm), and it's just less noticeable since the performance of the Intels are low enough (comparatively) that the performance difference doesn't show up. This could mean that current Intel G2s have lost the reliability edge that the original G2s did. I don't expect this, especially after their Sandy Bridge chipset mistake, but it's an interesting speculation, none the less. The StorageReview article says that Intel plans to list "user capacity", but that's not necessarily helpful; if they reduce overprovisioning or just add a NAND chip to maintain "user capacity", that's not necessarily going to make up for any reliability or performance differences due to the change from 34 nm to 25 nm. So I guess the question really is what part of the problems are actually related directly to 25 nm NAND (as opposed to all the marketing problems that OCZ is having).