Read more.Quote:
The fastest consumer SSD in the world?
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
The fastest consumer SSD in the world?
Its 5 times more expensive per GB than a Samsung 860!
You could get a Core i5 8400,motherboard,16GB of decent RAM and a 500GB SSD for the price of the 480GB model.
I am not sure how many normal consumers would be buying this outside a few high end enthusiasts. Only people using their systems for generating income could justify this as a business expense,and I assume for commercial use there are different lines made by Intel?
The same demographic that buy Geforce Titans despite the minimal gaming improvements over the next (much cheaper,) tier down.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
There's always someone who MUST have the fastest, no matter what the cost ot whether they actually need it.
I think it's a statement of technology more than a mass-selling product.
Sure, it's very expensive, but one would hope that over time and economies of scale would reduce the cost-per-GB significantly.
It's always good to see new, better tech coming to market, in my opinion.
But that is a niche even amongst high end enthusiasts - on tech forums you see far more GTX1080 and GTX1080TI owners. Even then 480GB is not massive looking at the increasing sizes of modern games. I would rather have a "slow" 2TB SSD for the same price TBH.Quote:
Originally Posted by spacein_vader
Technologically its impressive,but since Intel and Micron developed the technology together,I hardly see them pushing each other too much,unless more companies decided to produce it in larger quantities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarinder
With NAND,the multitude of companies helped drop prices,but even then,prices are still barely reaching what they were in late 2015 and 2016. I could have got a 750GB Crucial SSD for £110 in 2016. For the average person,capacity is more an issue,especially with games getting bigger and bigger. Its probably why so many systems still ship with spinny disks and only have relatively smallish boot drives.
I wouldn't put games on it, but as an OS and cache drive it'd be lovely.
Interesting article on the reg with Micron saying that 3D Xpoint sales to Intel have collapsed. Intel may not be shifting these in the numbers it hoped.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...nt_sales_down/
Whoah, 1960's calling, they want their 10KHz clocked magnetic core memory back :DQuote:
Compare this with 0.1ms for good, old main computer memory.
Not sure what figure you were going for there.
exactly right..it's hardly for streaming 1080p films from.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalniel
I've got a 900 sat in front of me and the glorious engineering of the case alone makes me smile. Intel know their storage solutions.
I still have an old 80GB intel drive (which I DO use for games) and it's very old now and hasn't missed a beat.
Over £500 for a 480gb drive? Are they crazy?
Only an idiot would buy it.
I think you're looking at the price out of context and therefore in isolation. Sure, it's damn expensive compared to a NAND-based SSD, but as a boot drive for a system equipped with a Core i7-7980XE or Threadripper and GTX 1080 Ti, the price isn't mad. 32GB of high-end DDR4 is getting close to this mutch.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmaheid
That depends what the intended use is.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohmaheid
If I am putting together a high end relational database server for work, and I have already budgeted £5k for a mid range server with lots of ram and a decent server class CPU, then adding another grand for 900Gb of very speedy storage looks like a good idea.
The write speed of a relational database is dominated by the speed of long term storage, especially on transactions that join lots of tables or have many constraints. Anything that will make that sort of thing faster is a good thing.
Having said that, I would be buying the PCI card version, not this strange hacked up M.2 interface.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanoe
Crikey,its taken 5 years to get to this pricing level?Quote:
Falling XPoint sales
Micron's storage business unit (SBU), with SSD revenue now more than half of its revenues, pulled in $1.1bn, up a relatively low 13 per cent. Micron said this reflected a shift of NAND supply to high-value mobile managed NAND.
In the earnings call, SVP and CFO Dave Zisner said: "This shift in NAND supply and lower 3D XPoint sales to our partner resulted in a 9 per cent sequential decline in our Storage Business Unit revenue."
He added: "We sold very little of 3D XPoint to our partner [Intel]."
The CFO added it was possible that there would be zero sales of the product to Intel in the current (fourth) quarter, answering a question to a Credit Suisse MD: "Assuming that we do not sell any 3D XPoint to our partner... [which] I wouldn’t rule.. out."
For Micron, XPoint has been a disappointment because Intel hasn't sold enough Optane product. So much so that Mehrotra said: "We have been discussing the commercial terms of our future-generation 3D XPoint collaboration [with Intel]."
The CEO added: "We will provide updates as appropriate as these discussions progress further."
Micron still intends to introduce its first XPoint products in late calendar 2019, with meaningful revenue in 2020. That's five years after Intel introduced XPoint technology.
Compared to five NAND SSDs of the same capacity though, which you could put in a raid 0 or 5 stripe giving you way more capacity and a crazy aggregate IOPs figure?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarinder
I'd find it hard to justify the cost to myself, the wife would have me sectioned...
Almost certainly 0.1 microseconds. I have no idea what the Unicode point for a greek letter mu is though! I'd normally fudge it with a u.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
EDIT: and I note that the article's actually been updated already... *doh*
I thought that was about a magnitude too slow for typical time to first word. Maybe once the request has been routed over a ringbus and bounced off the caches though...Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
Too expensive for me....but if I needed it perhaps a good buy. But I think I'd be more interested in a RAID solution if it works out better on the cost per gb solution and isn't going to be that slow
Odd that they need an extra power connector, m.2 SSDs manage fine on what the socket provides. Of course, that probably explains the chunky die-cast heatsink - that's a lot of cooling for an SSD. For a 55C temp difference (25C ambient, 80C heatsink) a bare 2.5" drive shaped cuboid should dissipate ~9W, so with the ribs and pins it should handle the 12.4W nominal max sustained draw without needing an air con unit. Of course, that power into ~100g of aluminium would take well over an hour* to get it all up to temp so it should be rare for a workload to get the heatsink fully warmed up
*assuming externally adiabatic and lumped heat capacity it'll take 82.5 mins to increase by 55C, so in practice this would be much much longer
memory latency benchmarks seem to give mid-50s ns for Intel and mid 70s ns for Ryzen, so I think talking about 0.1 microseconds is fair in terms of relative magnitude (when you're saying under 10ms for Optane latency). It still leaves Optane 2 orders of magnitude slower than RAM and only 1 order of magnitude faster than NAND flash, which IMNSHO leaves it firmly in the storage bracket of latency - needs another order of magnitude improvement before it's closer to RAM than storage...Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
... I thought Optane would get a competitor through QuantX, but haven't heard thing since the QuantX announcement. I wonder what happened with that?
Its being released next year,and both companies developed the tech together,so it makes me wonder whether Intel will release something newer next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizyab
Well there is that option, or you could just get a 500GB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 drive for an OS drive, saving yourself £350 for some additional storage. Such as 3 additional Samsung 500GB 860 Evo drives for that Raid 5 with pretty decent storage capacity and IOPS. You're still saving money this way as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
I can see why Micron isn't shipping much XPoint to Intel, the pricing is stupid for essentially minimal gains.
Depends what performance characteristic you were after. If IOPS then sure, if latency though then this is cheaper than RAM.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
over priced junk.
Why do people review these and the 900p drives as SSDs. These optane drives really shines and come to life if you use them as cache for slow clunky HDDS.. just think of a 10tb hdd being as quick or faster the a standard ssd drive.
Already Having a "32gb optane memory" and having no trouble with it since buying it xmas time... Just pop it in, set it up, forget about it and it does its thing. Cutting down game loading times in half on my old 640 WD black hdd..
So I am really thinking of buying the "280gb optane 900p" with the M.2 cable, and pairing it up with a nice WD black/gold 4tb drive as my games/storage drive.