Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Optane SSD 900P Offers Stunning Linux Performance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    The only funny thing is that Intel is marketing the consumer-level drives to gamers who won't see a real benefit in most games where reading from an SSD isn't really a bottleneck.
    The drives are absolutely great for workloads that can actually push I/O though.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by chuckula View Post
      The only funny thing is that Intel is marketing the consumer-level drives to gamers who won't see a real benefit in most games where reading from an SSD isn't really a bottleneck.
      The drives are absolutely great for workloads that can actually push I/O though.
      No benefit, but SSDs cause significant psychological addiction. If someone gets used to even a half-assed SSD they won't go back to traditional hard drives. Especially on laptops.

      These things are powerful enough that even on a desktop system they are going to cause some serious SSD addiction, and will cause peer pressure on others.

      Comment


      • #13
        I may not be a fan of Intel, but there's no denying that this is by far the best performance you can get without doing a RAM drive. And considering it's non-volatile, that makes it even better.

        I honestly don't think this drive is that expensive for what it is. Personally, I wouldn't buy it, but I do see myself recommending this to those who have a need for extremely high bandwidth (and that being said, this wouldn't apply to home users). I also don't like that it uses U.2.


        If having huge amounts of raw sequential read/write performance is your priority for a decent price, RAID0 SATA III drives is still a viable option. That ought to handle most workloads. But for anything beyond sequential read/writes, RAID0 is not worth the investment for SSDs.
        Last edited by schmidtbag; 11-15-2017, 03:53 PM.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by franglais125 View Post
          So, in summary: more endurance (10x), but more power consumption (10x on average, depending on load). Perhaps not yet ideal for a laptop? Am I reading this right?
          This thing is THICC, it's over standard 2.5'' drive height. It won't phisically fit in a laptop anyway.

          Also, 14w of heat in there is a fire hazard for laptops.
          Last edited by starshipeleven; 11-15-2017, 04:28 PM.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
            This thing is THICC, it's over standard 2.5'' drive height. It won't phisically fit in a laptop anyway.

            Also, 14w of heat in there is a fire hazard for laptops.
            Makes you wonder why they didn't just make it a 3.5" drive. Pretty much all desktop PCs support at least one of those. Though I haven't entered a mainframe since 2011, I'm sure many places are downscaling their servers, and have all this empty room for larger drive bays if necessary.

            14W isn't that bad for laptops, when you consider that's full load or burst usage. For a drive this fast, you're going to have a hard time pushing it to its limits for an extended period of time. The 5W idle is much more tolerable, and not a whole lot dissimilar to a typical 2.5" SSD.

            Regardless of potential heat output or physical size, I wouldn't waste a drive like this on a laptop anyway. Are there even laptops that support U.2 drives?

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
              This thing is THICC, it's over standard 2.5'' drive height. It won't phisically fit in a laptop anyway.
              Thanks, didn't know that.

              Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
              Also, 14w of heat in there is a fire hazard for laptops.
              Indeed.

              Comment


              • #17
                Would really love to see some file system comparisons.

                ​​​​I'm guessing that filesystem journaling is actually making performance worse on these devices, since they write-in-place, don't care about locality, and have low enough latencies intel are endorsing polling over interrupts.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by wolfwood View Post
                  Would really love to see some file system comparisons.

                  ​​​​I'm guessing that filesystem journaling is actually making performance worse on these devices, since they write-in-place, don't care about locality, and have low enough latencies intel are endorsing polling over interrupts.
                  FS comparison should be done this weekend or early next week.

                  And welcome to the forums.
                  Michael Larabel
                  http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                    This thing is THICC, it's over standard 2.5'' drive height. It won't phisically fit in a laptop anyway.
                    Nothing that a hammer and a screwdriver won't fix.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Wow, very impressive. The price isn't that bad, $1.50/GB. SSD's used to be more expensive not that long ago. That SQLite bench is out of this world.

                      What type of connector is it? You just plug it into the U.2 socket? Would the cable fit under a GPU card (is it stiff)?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X