Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 28

Thread: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    25,974
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,394 times in 522 posts

    Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    7th gen Intel Pentium and Celeron chips cannot make use of Optane technology.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    10,639
    Thanks
    1,252
    Thanked
    968 times in 752 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASRock Z77 Pro4-M
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5 3570 (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Crucial DDR3 1866MHz
      • Storage:
      • 240GB Crucial M4, 480GB Crucial M500, 2TB Seagate SSHD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • XFX 650W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2913WM & Philips E-line 234EL2SB
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Yayyyy more ground breaking technology that segments the market.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Merseyside
    Posts
    154
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked
    7 times in 6 posts
    • EvilCycle's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS ROG MAXIMUS IX HERO
      • CPU:
      • Intel I7 7700K (OC to 4.8GHz on Corsair H100i V2)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 @ 3000MHz
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 840 evo 120GB SSD + 3 x 500GB 72000rpm HDD's
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Zotac GTX1070 AMP! EXTREME
      • PSU:
      • DEEPCOOL DQ 750st
      • Case:
      • Corsair Obsidian Series 750D Airflow Edition
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 200Mb (Fibre Optic)

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    It's not great, but in reality how many people with a CPU in a lower tier than an i3 (or even an i5 in most cases) are really going to be considering one of these?

  4. #4
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    7,613
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked
    708 times in 612 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 660GB Linux, 500GB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Nitro R9 380 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 24 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilCycle View Post
    It's not great, but in reality how many people with a CPU in a lower tier than an i3 (or even an i5 in most cases) are really going to be considering one of these?
    Possibly quite a few. If you can afford a top end CPU you probably have a 1TB SSD and little use for any piffling cache technology. If you are on a budget, you are more likely to have spinning rust that will benefit from a cache SSD, and if a spending a bit more gets you a better cache SSD perhaps you will stump up for it?

    Can only guess, I think Optane is a waste of money, I'm clearly not the target market.

  5. #5
    I really don't care Dashers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    698
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked
    85 times in 72 posts
    • Dashers's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-X99-UD4
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-5930K
      • Memory:
      • Corsair DDR4 2800 Quad
      • Storage:
      • Intel 750 PCIe SSD; RAID-0 x2 Samsung 850 EVO; RAID-0 x2 WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GeForce GTX 970 x2 SLI
      • PSU:
      • CoolerMaster Silent Pro M2 720W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • x2 23.5" 1080 72Hz OC
      • Internet:
      • Zen FTTC

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Agreed, cache drives are for people on low-end systems who want a bit of oomph. High end systems already have NVMe drives. I'm interested in seeing 500gig Optane drives.

  6. #6
    Registered+
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    I bent my Wookiee! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySJF9D2PdZc

  7. #7
    Gentoo Ricer
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Galway
    Posts
    10,632
    Thanks
    923
    Thanked
    892 times in 665 posts
    • aidanjt's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Maximus VII Gene
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-4771
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsiar LP 1866MHz C10
      • Storage:
      • 250GB Samsung 850 EVO
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM550
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define Mini
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus MK241
      • Internet:
      • 240mbps UPC Cable

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    What is it with companies and artificial CPU limitations these days?
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    ...every time Creative bring out a new card range their advertising makes it sound like they have discovered a way to insert a thousand Chuck Norris super dwarfs in your ears...

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    210
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    13 times in 9 posts

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilCycle View Post
    It's not great, but in reality how many people with a CPU in a lower tier than an i3 (or even an i5 in most cases) are really going to be considering one of these?
    You're missing the point, that being who else is really going to be considering one of these? Gamers on i5/i7s? Unlikely someone spending $200+ on a graphics card will be so desperate to save $10 to get a 32GB cache SSD instead of paying $10 more for a 250GB full SSD...

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    210
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    13 times in 9 posts

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by aidanjt View Post
    What is it with companies and artificial CPU limitations these days?
    Companies? It's just Intel. Hopefully the competition not doing it will push them to change their practices. Remember all these products were in the pipeline years before they knew what Ryzen was bringing to the table.

  10. #10
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    60
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts
    • fail_quail's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-AB350M-Gaming 3
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 7 1700 @ 3.95ghz
      • Memory:
      • 16GB DDR4 3200mhz
      • Storage:
      • 120GB NVME SSD, 120GB SATA SSD, 2x1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • AMD RX580 8GB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 750W
      • Case:
      • corsair carbide 88r
      • Operating System:
      • Win10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 24" Dell WFP 2408 + cheap 22" LG monitor
      • Internet:
      • 100meg Virgin cable

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    It's a weird technology for sure in it's current incarnation.

    An odd mix of locking out those who'd most benefit from it* in favour of the high end that really don't have much need of it...

    It'd make more sense if you could set it to cache non-boot mechanical HDDs in a high-end system, but from what i've read it's only the OS boot drive. Caching a SSD will give less benefit and who has a HDD as a primary drive in a high-end PC?

    *Your average PCworld jobby would make great use of it. You'd undoubtedly not get it in the shop build due to razor-thin margins, but having it as a cheap easy upgrade down the line would do wonders for such a system...

  11. #11
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    86
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Funny.
    I am excited with the optane technology but seruisly it is not what i would buy as for now.
    1. I canot see the realtime difference between SSD and NVMe (which is 2 to 4 times faster)
    2. I see no reason for gamers to have SSD for games - i had that but i realised that having my steam library on HDD and os on SSD almost the same - no kidding. HOTS game is loading 15 sec instead of 12 sec.in both cases i usually wait for other players. It is similar for other games, and there is no difference in the runtime of the game.
    3. optane as a catch that cost of SSD suitable for OS...
    4. If you need awsome speed then do ram cache, no processor restrictions there.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Redditch, United Kingdom
    Posts
    254
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts
    • aniilv's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte B85
      • CPU:
      • i5-4570
      • Memory:
      • 8GB
      • Storage:
      • 160GB Raptor 10k rpm
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI 760GTX 2GB
      • PSU:
      • 550W Gigabyte
      • Case:
      • Antec
      • Operating System:
      • Win 7

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by DevDrake View Post
    2. I see no reason for gamers to have SSD for games - i had that but i realised that having my steam library on HDD and os on SSD almost the same - no kidding. HOTS game is loading 15 sec instead of 12 sec.in both cases i usually wait for other players. It is similar for other games, and there is no difference in the runtime of the game.
    depends what games

    BF1 takes a good minute to load a map on hdd, while ssd its maybe 20 seconds... That's enough for few of us to convert. And then there are games like guild wars 2, which on hard drive can load something like 2 min on some locations on first load, while on ssd it literally is 20 or less seconds. And you do feel that difference.

    Nothing to do with optane technology, just nitpicking ;]

  13. #13
    Gentoo Ricer
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Galway
    Posts
    10,632
    Thanks
    923
    Thanked
    892 times in 665 posts
    • aidanjt's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Maximus VII Gene
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-4771
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsiar LP 1866MHz C10
      • Storage:
      • 250GB Samsung 850 EVO
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM550
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define Mini
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus MK241
      • Internet:
      • 240mbps UPC Cable

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq View Post
    Companies? It's just Intel.
    This isn't the only example of companies doing stupid crap like this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    ...every time Creative bring out a new card range their advertising makes it sound like they have discovered a way to insert a thousand Chuck Norris super dwarfs in your ears...

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,677
    Thanks
    130
    Thanked
    152 times in 110 posts

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by DevDrake View Post
    1. I canot see the realtime difference between SSD and NVMe (which is 2 to 4 times faster)
    The main difference seems to be the higher iOPS at low queue depths, that in itself is worth having but Intel seems to be doing an really bad job packaging it into a product and marketing it.

  15. #15
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    7,613
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked
    708 times in 612 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 660GB Linux, 500GB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Nitro R9 380 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 24 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by Corky34 View Post
    The main difference seems to be the higher iOPS at low queue depths, that in itself is worth having but Intel seems to be doing an really bad job packaging it into a product and marketing it.
    Higher IOPS will give you lower queue depths as the storage can keep up better, so really what it is giving you is higher IOPS.

    His point is, while the change from rotating media to SSD is a noticeable step change in enough use cases that people can feel an improvement in the machine, the difference between the cheapest SATA SSD and the fastest NVMe drive is measurable but you can't feel any difference. Getting an even more expensive SSD using this Optane technology seems, for home users, completely pointless.

    In server usage, you would be writing to perhaps 100 SSDs in parallel to get enough capacity, so you already have insane aggregate throughput.

    Optane is a nice technology, but it needs to displace flash by being price competitive and Intel doesn't do cheap products. I suspect it will pop up in odd products like this for some time as Intel tries to find a way to fleece it with us, before finally mandating that all Gen 9 or whenever CPUs that they make must have the BIOS stored on Optane for some made up performance reason but actually just to shift some stock.

    In this case, if you have to upgrade your Pentium to an i5 in order to buy an Optane cache, then they win again with another CPU sale so they probably won't see the problem.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,677
    Thanks
    130
    Thanked
    152 times in 110 posts

    Re: Intel Optane cache drives don't play with budget Kaby Lake CPUs

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Higher IOPS will give you lower queue depths as the storage can keep up better, so really what it is giving you is higher IOPS.
    Only that's not what we see with Optane as it has around the same iOPS as SSD's and NVMe drives, however most SSD's and NVMe drives don't reach their maximum iOPS until they hit maximum QD whereas Optane reaches it's maximum iOPS at much lower QD, they say pictures tell a thousand words so..



    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    His point is, while the change from rotating media to SSD is a noticeable step change in enough use cases that people can feel an improvement in the machine, the difference between the cheapest SATA SSD and the fastest NVMe drive is measurable but you can't feel any difference. Getting an even more expensive SSD using this Optane technology seems, for home users, completely pointless.
    I would disagree, the change most people feel when changing from HDD to SSD is mainly down to the increase in iOPS from the 100-200 of HDD to the 10-20k of an SSD, and no I'm not mistaking my numbers as an SSD or NVMe drives rarely hit their maximum iOPS of 100-200k.

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    In server usage, you would be writing to perhaps 100 SSDs in parallel to get enough capacity, so you already have insane aggregate throughput.
    It's not about throughput, it's about accessing lots of small amounts of data really quickly.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •