OCZ touts affordable Onyx 2 SSDs

While OCZ may not be introducing new SSDs fast enough to make my head spin, as was once the case, it’s still keeping things moving. The company has unveiled the Onyx 2 series, which it calls "2.5 inch SSD[s] with superior affordability designed for mainstream desktops and mobile systems."

Onyx 2 drives look set to complement members of the original Onyx line, which is already aimed at bargain hunters. For example, the first-gen, 64GB Onyx sells for $110.99 shipped, or $90.99 after a mail-in rebate, at Newegg right now.

With the Onyx 2, OCZ is bringing both higher capacities—120GB and 240GB, which are the only options offered—and higher performance. The firm quotes top sequential read and write speeds of 270MB/s and 265MB/s, respectively, compared to 130MB/s and 110MB/s for that first-gen model I just linked. (A SandForce SF-1200 controller can be credited for the performance increase.) Those perks come with somewhat higher price tags, however: $189.99 for the 120GB Onyx 2 and $439.99 for the 240GB model.

Comments closed
    • MadManOriginal
    • 9 years ago

    This is a move to put the soon to be ‘old’ Sandforce controller in the ‘budget’ SSD to make room for the next Sandforce controller for the Agility/Vertex lines. As such I would welcome it rather than bitch like a lot of people on here are doing. The street prices will undoubtedly be lower which might mean near-$150 120GB-class Sandforce performance which is fantastic (probably all they’ve done is artifically decrease IOPS which isn’t a big deal for a single-user machine) no matter how good the next gen of controllers are.

    An SSD makes an i[

    • potatochobit
    • 9 years ago

    -[

    • paulWTAMU
    • 9 years ago

    You know, if I archived all my photos (about 20 gigs) that’ 128 would work as my main system drive; I could probably do better by uninstalling some older games I no longer play too. And at that price it’s actually viable.

    • AMDguy
    • 9 years ago

    I don’t consider a product “affordable” till it gets into the $50 range for some member of the product line.

    If OCZ would package a SSD with 1/4 the size (30G) and 1/4 the price ($50), I’d be more inclined to get one.

    I don’t think the mass market user (like me) needs a big drive. Clearly OCZ and the other manufacturers intend to serve the premium market and aren’t interested in pursuing the mass market yet.

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 9 years ago

      You’re completely right about small drives, but not only does the mass market know nothing but numbers, the “enthusiast” market may be even worse about it. Just look at this article and any other about SSDs. It’s always “enthusiasts” clamoring for higher capacities so they can fit their pr0n on it or gourd knows what that has nothing to do with faster access…

      The companies peddling SSDs have been playing games for a while now. 30GB drives have dropped into the $60-70 range, so now they’ll just clear them out and replace them with more $100 64GB drives. They can upsell on the “cost per GB” that “enthusiasts” are so hung up on.

    • indeego
    • 9 years ago

    Look at it this way:
    Fast Storage($300+):
    Impacts /[

      • 5150
      • 9 years ago

      I’d take a $200 SSD and a $100 video card and be totally happy.

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 9 years ago

      You can buy a sub-$100 SSD and get pretty much all of the speed benefit you’re going to see for a desktop.

      My complaint is that higher capacity drives, which are most useful for laptops, do not use low power controllers.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 9 years ago

      Look at this way:

      Harddrive: anything provides acceptable performance
      Video card: you have to spend at least ~ $150 to run games at medium settings at the resolution most people’s monitors are at

      The problem here is minimum performance.

    • Neutronbeam
    • 9 years ago

    I noticed that Newegg has been doing all sorts of OCZ SSD deals lately, so I figured new models were coming up.

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 9 years ago

      It’s been a year now since most of the major companies released new drives. They’ll undoubtedly be spewing them out in January. *Crosses fingers for better prices instead of even more expensive 600MB/s controllers that use more power than a 3.5″ HDD*

    • glynor
    • 9 years ago

    The 120GB drive looks pretty good for $190, if that’s what they actually end up costing at Newegg. Any word on when they’ll be available?

    • spigzone
    • 9 years ago

    I’ll save up for the magic Xmas buying season of 2011.

    • Thresher
    • 9 years ago

    I just can’t bring myself to pay this much when HD storage has gotten so cheap. I realize there are some benefits, but I can wait a few seconds longer to boot up at these prices.

    • flip-mode
    • 9 years ago

    As #5 said, I’m on the “long term SSD waiting list”.

    I’m kind of a pathetic enthusiast. My HDD right now is a 160 GB Seagate that is at least 3 years old. I think it’s a single platter model. I’m not really put off by the speed of the thing, but I could use some more capacity.

    I’m going to need to get a whole new gang of drives for my home computers soon in order to get backups set up right and in order to bump up capacity at the same time. I’ll probably be considering a 2TB “green” backup drive and then a 1TB drive for files and I have a 640 GB drive waiting in the wings to become the OS and apps drive.

    By the time I’m done with that, it’ll be 5 years before I’m looking at getting a new OS+apps drive, so…. I hope by then I’ll be able to get a decent capacity SSD for $100.

      • sweatshopking
      • 9 years ago

      don’t confuse “pathetic” with “stupid”. using what works for you doesn’t make you pathetic.

        • flip-mode
        • 9 years ago

        LOL, wait, I think you just called me stupid!

          • Meadows
          • 9 years ago

          I disagree, he called you neither. He insinuated that you used the word “pathetic” in much of the same sense as some others would use the word “stupid”, but didn’t specify if you were either.

            • sweatshopking
            • 9 years ago

            As meadow’s said. I was stating that you using things sensibly was not pathetic. To do otherwise would be stupid. I had your back flip, and don’t forget it. We’re BFF’s for life

            • Buzzard44
            • 9 years ago

            I think the point of that post was to use “backflip” in a clever manner.

            If this is indeed the case, it was a successful post indeed.

            • flip-mode
            • 9 years ago

            BFFs for life! I knew what you meant, but the way you worded it opened the door for me to make a joke of it.

      • spigzone
      • 9 years ago

      I have a drobo (with 4 2tb drives), 40gb ‘os’ muskin (sand force) ssd and a ‘working’ 1.5 tb drive for tv recording, game files, temp storage etc.

      drobo’s are almost magical redundant mass storage devices and I bought my base 4 bay model for $300 on a B&H special. Pretty cheap for what you get.

      With the drobo you can mix and match any hdd’s you happen to have and then just add more or bigger drives when you need more storage.

      Something to consider.

        • StashTheVampede
        • 9 years ago

        This is the path that I started last year and will keep going for some time. NAS with my very large amount of space (Intel NAS + 4X 1TB drives) and local SSD (not in any machine, but will be on new purchases) for the rest.

        I *do* still like having multiple physical drives internally, but no more than two and they would both be SSD.

        • flip-mode
        • 9 years ago

        Indeed, that is something to consider. Thanks.

      • Usacomp2k3
      • 9 years ago

      That’s why I have a Windows Home Server with 4.5 TB in it and 3 laptops with no more than 100GB each (The desktop has a 320 because that’s about the smallest you can buy now).

      • ModernPrimitive
      • 9 years ago

      My desktop has the first gen 640GB Caviar and a new 1TB Caviar Blue for comparison. I had two 640’s and gave one to a friend to replace their dead 250GB and bought myself the 1TB for 70 on sale recently.

      When SSD’s get cheap enough to suit me and I want an updated gaming rig I’ll for a 256GB or so SSD and a couple of 2TB. I would have to get a major itch though as I’ve all but quit gaming. The new F1 2010 game looks inviting though.

      I lump SSD’s into the same category as Triple SLI / Crossfire. Enthusiasts used to be people like me that would pay 500-600 for a graphics card. The thoughts of 3 cards and 500 bucks for a small capacity drive makes me think it’s time to get enthused about something different. 🙂

    • ModernPrimitive
    • 9 years ago

    I’m on the long term waiting list to join the SSD club too. I applaud those that are buying them (be it out of need or enthusiasts) because they will get cheaper faster of course. For my use I’ll wait until the faster ones are around .50c per GB. I’m cheap, but it’s my money and my email loads fine on a pokey 500GB 7200rpm laptop drive.

    • odizzido
    • 9 years ago

    111 sounds okay for the 64gig version. Sounds pretty good for a netbook drive.

    • 5150
    • 9 years ago

    Yawn, wake me when the Quartz 2 is less than $1 / GB.

    • sircharles32
    • 9 years ago

    That’s considered affordable?
    The title should read something like, slightly more affordable, but certainly not affordable.
    I nearly spit my coffee all over my screen, expecting more Earth bound pricing (for once), but instead $440 for a 250 GB storage device.
    At this rate, SSD pricing will reach my level of affordability in another 5 years.

      • sweatshopking
      • 9 years ago

      HA. 5 years? with hdd’s i’m now firmly not going to pay more than 8 cents a GB. i’ll be waiting a decade.

      • bcronce
      • 9 years ago

      I remember spending $200-$300 for a 1GB hd, which if you account for inflation, that’s about $450 in today’s money.

      So yes, $110 for 64GB is affordable.

      I swear, every person who claims they’re poor still manages to spend $100-$300 per month on going out to eat and bars/drinking

        • sweatshopking
        • 9 years ago

        I don’t spend ANYWHERE near that. I don’t drink, and eat out maybe once every 2 months, and only cheap stuff (as in 5-7$ a person max). I have no disposable income, after paying for my kids and my wife’s school. If I spent that, I would be starving. granted, i have a pretty nice farm, which the mortgage runs me 400$ a month, so I do splurge somewhere.

          • bcronce
          • 9 years ago

          Most people I know are single and not putting someone through school.

          In your case, it’s an issue. But most people, in my experience, that are all about getting new tech, have somewhat of a disposable income.

    • Farting Bob
    • 9 years ago

    $190 for the 120GB version, but $440 for one twice the size? Why? It just slapping on more chips. Since when does that pricing make sense for midrange products?

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 9 years ago

      For both existing Onyx and Kingston SSDs:

      30/32GB – $70

      64GB – $100

      128GB – $230

      Oh look, $60 of flash (if even) turned into $130! It’s like magic and technology have merged into one!

      Yeah, this new Onyx drive is cheaper compared to other 128GB drives, but it’s still got the, “Oh, you must have more money if you’re looking at this,” tax.

        • Voldenuit
        • 9 years ago

        128 GB drives tend to have twice the channels of the 64 GB drives, so you’re also gaining performance.

        The Sandforce Vertex 2 120 GB drives were going for $269 just a month or two ago, so $189 doesn’t sound too bad. I might wait till they drop another $20-30, though.

          • OneArmedScissor
          • 9 years ago

          Lol what “performance?” That has to be something tangible if I’m going to pay for it, but my desktop is not a data server or workstation and that isn’t what these “low end” drives are for. The random write speed is still going to be an order of magnitude slower than “fast” on that class of drive even with added channels, but it just doesn’t matter. What you’re gaining in real world use is possibly some numbers on a product spec page.

          When you can buy two smaller drives for less, something is just screwy.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This