Go Back   Overclock3D Forums > [OC3D] General Forums > OC3D News
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 14-10-09, 05:19 PM
PeterStoba PeterStoba is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,190
New OCZ Vertex v1.4 Firmware

A new firmware version for the Vertex range of solid state drives from OCZ.

Continue Reading

__________________
Silverstone SG05B | i3 530 | Scythe Shuriken | DFI LanParty MI P55-T36 | 4GB Kingston HyperX 1333Mhz | XFX 5450 512MB | Samsung SN-T083C | Intel X25-V 40GB | Samsung F1 1TB

LGW2452TX-PF | Logitech G9 | Logitech G15 | Logitech Z5500

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 14-10-09, 05:23 PM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,419
Fragmentation on SSDs still confuzes me tbh. I always thought u had a file, it's sector locations were like memory addresses, there's no head movement like with regular drives - so where's the beef ?

Think I need to read up on how the SSD electronics work.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 14-10-09, 05:29 PM
deathwish deathwish is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,145
the firmware allows windows 7 to clear the sections of the disk that data has been marked for deletion so that when it comes to write to the sector it doesn’t first have to erase the data and then write. it speeds up writing to the drives as i understand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM_(SSD_command)

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world those who understand binary and those who dont

Quote:
Originally Posted by name='Jim'
Is it wrong that I'm enjoying this
-----------------------------------------------------------

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 14-10-09, 05:31 PM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,419
Interesting - why does it need to clear it ? Why not just erase the memory address pointer.

Without the pointer I don't think the contents of the location mean anything.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 14-10-09, 07:44 PM
Pyr0 Pyr0 is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 845
lol @ Peter, fragmentation is NOT the reason the drives slow down
__________________
Intel i7 950

Gigabyte EX58A-UD3R

3x4GB GSkill Ripjaws PC3-12800

AMD HD 6970 2GB & Dell 3007WFP-HC

Asus Xonar DX

Crucial C300, Vertex1, Velociraptor & Sammy F3's

Corsair AX850

Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1



Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 14-10-09, 07:48 PM
PeterStoba PeterStoba is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by name='Pyr0'
lol @ Peter, fragmentation is NOT the reason the drives slow down
What does slow them down then?
__________________
Silverstone SG05B | i3 530 | Scythe Shuriken | DFI LanParty MI P55-T36 | 4GB Kingston HyperX 1333Mhz | XFX 5450 512MB | Samsung SN-T083C | Intel X25-V 40GB | Samsung F1 1TB

LGW2452TX-PF | Logitech G9 | Logitech G15 | Logitech Z5500

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 14-10-09, 08:46 PM
Pyr0 Pyr0 is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 845
it's just as deathwish pointed out

as data is deleted, the cells aren't actually erased. the next time the drive wants to write data to those same cells/blocks they have to be erased first before being written to again, causing extra write latency.

TRIM improves this by running after the delete command, queries the volume bitmap, sees data marked for discard and discards it.
__________________
Intel i7 950

Gigabyte EX58A-UD3R

3x4GB GSkill Ripjaws PC3-12800

AMD HD 6970 2GB & Dell 3007WFP-HC

Asus Xonar DX

Crucial C300, Vertex1, Velociraptor & Sammy F3's

Corsair AX850

Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1



Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 14-10-09, 08:50 PM
PeterStoba PeterStoba is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,190
My bad, updated the article

Thanks for that.
__________________
Silverstone SG05B | i3 530 | Scythe Shuriken | DFI LanParty MI P55-T36 | 4GB Kingston HyperX 1333Mhz | XFX 5450 512MB | Samsung SN-T083C | Intel X25-V 40GB | Samsung F1 1TB

LGW2452TX-PF | Logitech G9 | Logitech G15 | Logitech Z5500

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 14-10-09, 11:10 PM
Ducky Spud Ducky Spud is offline
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 377
Just bought a Vertex earlier today, only a 30GB one but will be alright for now until I can buy another for RAID0. Have it just for OS for now, but this firmware is perfectly timed for Windows 7 next week
__________________
[sigpic][/sigpic]
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 15-10-09, 12:57 PM
Rastalovich's Avatar
Rastalovich Rastalovich is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Testing hardware somewhere
Posts: 11,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by name='Ducky Spud'
Just bought a Vertex earlier today, only a 30GB one but will be alright for now until I can buy another for RAID0. Have it just for OS for now, but this firmware is perfectly timed for Windows 7 next week
Let's hope it fits !! (joke refering to another thread)

Quote:
Originally Posted by name='Pyr0'
it's just as deathwish pointed out

as data is deleted, the cells aren't actually erased. the next time the drive wants to write data to those same cells/blocks they have to be erased first before being written to again, causing extra write latency.

TRIM improves this by running after the delete command, queries the volume bitmap, sees data marked for discard and discards it.
That sounds pretty inefficient.

Is that something to do with the intergrity check of the controller or something ?

The matter that the data in a location was $009e0f50, then needs to be made $4c4f4c21, in theory, shouldn't require zero filling b4 hand.

Can u turn the discard thing off to speed things up ?

Quote:
The root cause of the issue is that SSD drives do not know which blocks are truly in use and which are free. While the file system on the SSD will maintain an in-use list, SSDs don't understand file systems, and cannot access this list. This causes trouble in two places:

SSDs can write 4KB blocks at a time, but only delete 512KB blocks. Since the drive does not know which 4k blocks are still in use if they have been written to previously, each write requires a 512KB read-erase-modify-write cycle
That is crazy.
__________________


Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






All times are GMT. The time now is 03:40 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.