What is the best known upper bound for $\frac{1}{\zeta'(\rho)}$ assuming the SZC but not the RH? Let $\zeta$ denote the Riemann zeta function and let $\rho$ denote one of its complex zeros. What is the best known upper bound for $\frac{1}{\zeta'(\rho)}$ assuming that all zeros are simple (SZC), but not assuming Riemann Hypothesis ?
Assuming both the RH and the SZC, one can mimick the proof of Theorem 15.6 of Montgomery-Vaughan's Multiplicative Number Theory and show that
$$
\frac{1}{\zeta'(\rho)} \ll X,\label{1}\tag{1}
$$
where $X$ is any real number $\geq |\rho| $ (actually the Montgomery-Vaughan argument seems to yield an upper bound of the form $o(X)$). 
However, it looks like the bound \eqref{1} could hold assuming the SZC alone, as it appears that Montgomery-Vaughan only invoked the RH on bounding the $S(T)=\arg \zeta(\sigma + iT)$. On the RH, it is a classical fact that
$$
S(T) \ll \frac{\log T}{\log \log T}
$$
whilst $S(T) \ll \log T$ unconditionally. The unconditional bound seems sufficient for the purposes of showing that \eqref{1} comes from the Montgomery-Vaughan argument.
 A: We have an exact formula
\begin{align*}
 \frac{1}{\zeta'(\rho)} &= \lim_{s \to \rho} \frac{s-\rho}{\zeta(s)} \\
&= \lim_{s \to \rho} \frac{(s-\rho) (s-1) \Gamma(1+s/2) \pi^{-s/2}}{\xi(s)} \\
&= (\rho-1) \Gamma(1+\rho/2) \pi^{-\rho/2} \lim_{s \to \rho} \frac{s-\rho}{\frac{1}{2} e^{Bs} \prod_{\rho'} (1-\frac{s}{\rho'}) e^{s/\rho'}} \\
&= -\frac{ 2 e^{1-B\rho} \rho(\rho-1) \Gamma(1+\rho/2) \pi^{-\rho/2}}{\prod_{\rho' \neq \rho} (1-\frac{\rho}{\rho'}) e^{\rho/\rho'}}
\end{align*}
where $B = -0.0230957\dots$ is the constant in Theorem 10.12 of Montgomery-Vaughan.  All of the factors in the above formula are well understood except for the terms $1-\frac{\rho}{\rho'}$ for nearby zeroes $\rho' = \rho+O(1)$, which are proportional in magnitude to the distances from $\rho$ to the nearby zeroes $\rho'$.  So the problem of upper bounding $1/\zeta'(\rho)$ is more or less equivalent to that of lower bounding the distance $|\rho-\rho'|$ to the nearest zero $\rho'$ (or more precisely the product of the distances to those zeroes $\rho'$ within $O(1)$ of $\rho$).  An assumption of simple zeroes merely says that this distance is positive, but a more quantitative version of this hypothesis would be needed to get any quantitative upper bound.
