OCZ announced yesterday via their Twitter profile that a 64GB version of their Vertex 4 will soon be available. Vertex 4 is based on a second generation OCZ/Indilinx controller, named the Indilinx Everest 2. However, it was later revealed that the hardware is actually from Marvell. We reviewed the 256GB and 512GB Vertex 4 SSDs about a month ago and came away very pleased with how the drives performed. The Vertex 4 product page has also been updated with specifications for the 64GB model, which we've summarized in the table below:

OCZ Vertex 4 Specifications
Capacity 64GB 128GB 256GB 512GB
Number of NAND Packages 8 16 16 16
Number of Die per Package 1 1 2 4
Sequential Read 460MB/s 535MB/s 535MB/s 535MB/s
Sequential Write 220MB/s 200MB/s 380MB/s 475MB/s
4K Random Read 70K IOPS 90K IOPS 90K IOPS 95K IOPS
4K Random Write 50K IOPS 85K IOPS 85K IOPS 85K IOPS
Street Price N/A $150 $300 $650

As expected, there is a decline in performance when moving from a sixteen package design to an eight package design. Random write unsurprisingly takes the biggest hit but 50K IOPS is still great for a 64GB drive. For comparison, a 60GB Vertex 3 is rated at 60K IOPS and a 64GB Plextor M3 at 40K IOPS. Overall the 64GB Vertex 4 is at the upper spectrum of ~64GB SSDs and it presents very promising performance figures.

OCZ did not announce any specific availability other than "soon", but I contacted OCZ and will update this article once I receive a reply. Pricing is also unknown as of now. We will try to get our hands on a review sample as soon as possible, and Anand also has a 128GB sample in the house, so keep your eye on our SSD Bench section if you're in the market for a new drive.

Source: OCZ Twitter

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • mfed3 - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    i love how each revision of ssds is getting worse and worse to cut costs. this never happens in any other computer component. greedy ass companies.
  • SamLJG - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    What is getting worse exactly?
  • Taft12 - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    What? That happens for EVERY computer component! Have you seen how awful today's low-price laptops are? And rotational hard drives, printers, power supplies, ....

    It's not just computer components of course, this applies to everything sold at Walmart and most other stores for that matter. Crap quality for cheap price.
  • bupkus - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    One can only prey that China doesn't take up the production of toilet paper and condoms.
  • Pessimism - Wednesday, May 16, 2012 - link


    Electronically Testeo.... for your safety.
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    I don't really get what you mean. If you are referring to the fact that the 64GB drive uses 8 NAND packages instead of 16, that's the case with all 64GB SSDs with 2Xnm NAND. 2Xnm MLC NAND die is 8GB, so that limits the maximum amount of NAND packages to 8 in a 64GB drive.
  • KungFu_Toe - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    OCZ has a release candidate for firmware revision 1.4. Apparently, it gives a serious boost to write speeds. I'd really like to see these drives retested and benchmarks for 64 GB version with this firmware.
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    We'll most likely wait for the release version before publishing any data. I talked with Anand earlier today and he said he has done tests with the 1.4 RC but there are still a few things that should be fixed in the final version, if I interpreted his messages right.
  • StormyParis - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    A French site has been tracking faulty returns to a big French e-tailers for a few years. SSDs in general are not very reliable, and OCZ SSDs in particuliar are crap:

    Return rates:
    - Crucial 0,82% (last year: 0,8%)
    - Intel 1,73% ( 0,1%)
    - Corsair 2,93% ( 2,9%)
    - OCZ 7,03% ( 4,2%)

    I woldn't buy that brand.
  • Taft12 - Friday, May 11, 2012 - link

    The fact that OCZ is that much worse than Corsair which is selling the IDENTICAL PRODUCT (Sandforce controller plus some NAND on a PCB) is really damning. Just awful. Yuck!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now