Originally posted by sdack
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Latest Linux Code Smashes 14M IOPS Per-Core With Intel Core i9 12900K + Optane
Collapse
X
-
Important work, as this might facilitate the merge between persistant (SSD) and voltile (DDR RAM) storage.
Sooner or later i believe technologies like 3DXpoint will reach performance levels where they can replace traditional RAM.
That way we can have almost 0 seconds software loading times.
First step could be to use mmap() files / block devices instead of malloc() physical ram for large objects (instead of swapping by the kernel).
Second step we could look at a platform / CPU which allows mapping part´s / whole "block devices" into physical ram on CPU level / via Hardware components.
When launching a process, we could instruct the kernel to only use "persistant" physical memory pages..
There would be a function to "hybernate" the process, which would just remove all threads from the kernel + remove the virtual memory pages from the MMU.
You can "unhybernate" the process later on (even after a reboot) by just re-mapping the memmory pages and re-adding the threads, without any "load" time.
Comment
-
The bench runs at 512 byte block size right? Is there more than one disk in use or just the single one mentioned? The Intel product page says 1.5M IOPS at 4k block size and 7.2GB/sec read bandwidth, so for 512 bytes that's about 14M IOPS?Code:7.2e+09 / 512 = 14 062 500
---
Off-topic: The ads in these forum threads is nuts. Sometimes they get in the way of the UI buttons such as pagination, I just saw several static ones bunched up together 3x2 grid above this input box. The bottom right video ad somehow played with audio enabled without interaction from me which surprised me, it's X button was large but I could not close it by clicking on it, nor disable audio from clicking the icon. Had to mute browser/OS audio.
Ironically though, my main motivation to block ads will be because of the heavy CPU usage. This is an old system but fully hitting one core for a sustained period is revving up the fan. I'm not sure if it's the animated ads or multiple video ones at the same time. I guess video is using software decoding or something.
Comment
-
Originally posted by polarathene View PostThe bench runs at 512 byte block size right? Is there more than one disk in use or just the single one mentioned? The Intel product page says 1.5M IOPS at 4k block size and 7.2GB/sec read bandwidth, so for 512 bytes that's about 14M IOPS?Code:7.2e+09 / 512 = 14 062 500
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by fransdb View PostIf indeed the same hardware has been used, it's indeed impressive.
So I think he has 4 of these P5800X now? I thought earlier results were with a Optane 905P (costs about 25% the price for equivalent storage capacity and roughly a third of the IOPS/bandwidth) but was wrong. So is the 14M IOPS on a single core across all the disks at 512 block size?
Comment
-
Originally posted by kozman View Post
It's the Amazons and other hosting giants who will, IMHO, undeservedly reap the benefits of this by charging more, rather than less, for a benefit they didn't create.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
It's a late post to this topic, but it's hot off the presses. Intel is closing Optane for good (https://www.servethehome.com/intel-o...022-wind-down/).
How long will we have to wait before another technology comes close to saturating a CPU with millions of transactions?
Or another thought: why wasn't Intel capable of turning this technology profitable? Arguably the technology is great. I love my Optane 905 SSDs. I have been aching to get my hand on a P5800X - but not at the current price points. Newegg is selling off 960GB 905s for about $600 a piece. The cheapest P5800X comes in at about $1200 for 400GB capacity.
Is the technology too advanced for the time? Most applications do well with NAND based SSDs, where an array of NAND SSDs is cheaper and has higher capacity than Optane at similar performance but arguably higher complexity (RAID) and lower density. Specialized applications (e.g. databases, telco level networking) benefit from Optane, but seemingly don't produce sufficient demand for the continued investment into this technology.
RIP Optane!
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment