
| Store | Price | Availability |
| Amazon.com Marketplace | $44.80 | In stock |
![]() |
| The OCZ Slate Series SSD ExpressCard is touted as the ideal companion for the notebook user needing a backup storage method but who does not want to carry around an external drive of any kind. Available in capacities of 8GB, 16GB and 32GB, owners of ExpressCard 34 equipped notebooks will surely be interested in an alternate way to cram more storage into an already overstuffed machine. Yet another flash storage option? Does anyone care? Should you run out and spend your cash on what seems like a poor man's SSD? Read on with an open mind. |
Review Verdict
The Good & Bad
|
Essential Specs & Stats
|
|
First Impressions
Where to Buy?![]() Fill your vacant ExpressCard 34 slot with the Slate SSD. You'll be glad you did. ![]() The OCZ Slate SSD ExpressCard fits snugly inside this MacBook Pro slot. ![]() OCZ Slate USB-based SSD ExpressCard pictured with USB Flash drive (left), Memory Stick (right) and USB enclosure housing 2.5" notebook SATA HDD (top). It's important not to confuse ExpressCard with the older, now outdated CardBus standard from a few years ago. CardBus devices are physically much wider and a little longer, and used for many years as the primary expansion bus for notebooks needing additional connectivity. Fast forward to modern times, and ExpressCard has moved in as the new expansion standard of choice. ExpressCard allows access to the system bus over PCI Express and USB 2.0. In the case of the OCZ Slate 32GB SSD ExpressCard, access to the system bus is over USB 2.0 internally, and the Slate 32GB shows up as just another USB device on the bus. ![]() The OCZ Slate SSD's mini USB cable provides an effortless way to share files with PCs without an ExpressCard slot. ![]() OCZ Slate 32GB SSD ExpressCard (left), PC Card with CompactFlash memory installed, circa 2002 (right) As a glorified USB flash drive when the mini USB cable is connected, the OCZ Slate performs very well. I tested it in a variety of system and OS configurations just as I would any flash drive, and it went neck and neck with a former speed champ, the Patriot Xporter XT 8GB. The following data were obtained using SISoft Sandra benchmarking software on Windows XP Professional (32-bit). ![]() Similarly, on the Mac under Mac OS X 10.5.5, I obtained the following results, which show slightly lower read performance but slightly higher write performance compared with the benchmarks obtained under Windows. In this comparison, I have graphed the OCZ Slate's results against the stock Fujitsu 120GB SATA HDD in a late 2007 MacBook Pro (Santa Rosa 2.2GHz). As you can see, the Slate isn't much behind the HDD for reads, but write performance is considerably worse. Nevertheless, I consider this a pretty good performance from a flash-based storage device that is not built for ultimate performance.
However, do benchmarks tell the whole story? I thought it best if I made the Slate sweat a bit, so off I went to see if this good sustained transfer performance meant that I would have a poor man's SSD to boot from.
Fast in a Straight Line, but Can it Handle Curves?In order to turn the OCZ Slate SSD into a boot drive under Mac OS X, all I had to do was reformat the drive as a "GUID Partition" and install the OS. Two hours later, plus another hour for the update to OS 10.5.6 from 10.5.0, I was ready. I rebooted the MacBook Pro....and waited....and waited. The blue LED on the Slate was madly blinking away, indicating activity. The stock HDD remained quiet. Eventually, the background image appeared, and minutes later, the desktop and icons were available. I rebooted again just in case the first boot involved a bunch of one-time configuration, but again, performance was abysmal. Navigating in the Finder, opening windows, or waiting for pull-down menus to appear was excruciatingly slow. It really felt like my old PowerBook G3 the first time I loaded OS X onto it. Unusable. More detailed benchmarks reveal the root of the problem. Here I ran some XBench benchmarks for disk performance to see what was going on. Basically, while basic benchmarks show decent performance with big block sizes, the real world involves a lot of sequential and random access to the drive. The following graphs show how much better the spinning platter HDD is at both these scenarios. ![]() ![]() I've spent a lot of time showing you how your shouldn't rush off and buy a Slate to replace your aging HDD. Well, this may be a perfect time to bring up what is an ideal use case for an extra 32GB of storage in your laptop.
Overall, the OCZ Slate SSD ExpressCard is a real useful travel companion for notebook users with an available ExpressCard slot. Chances are, if you don't use a wireless modem card now, but you have a notebook with ExpressCard, you'll be really well served by sliding in a 32GB Slate for street prices of under $80 USD. You can't go wrong, and if your Slate backups save you just once, you'll be an even happier camper. It's a no brainer, go get one now.
Reviewed by Kerry Chin, Technical Editor |
||

















Similarly, on the Mac under Mac OS X 10.5.5, I obtained the following results, which show slightly lower read performance but slightly higher write performance compared with the benchmarks obtained under Windows. In this comparison, I have graphed the OCZ Slate's results against the stock Fujitsu 120GB SATA HDD in a late 2007 MacBook Pro (Santa Rosa 2.2GHz). As you can see, the Slate isn't much behind the HDD for reads, but write performance is considerably worse. Nevertheless, I consider this a pretty good performance from a flash-based storage device that is not built for ultimate performance.
However, do benchmarks tell the whole story? I thought it best if I made the Slate sweat a bit, so off I went to see if this good sustained transfer performance meant that I would have a poor man's SSD to boot from.
Fast in a Straight Line, but Can it Handle Curves?
