Intel Optane Memory

Discussion in 'Storage & Backup' started by Agg, Mar 31, 2017.

  1. Agg

    Agg Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2001
    Messages:
    29,301
    Location:
    A Reported Post Near You
    Intel have officially launched their Optane Memory product. To quote HotHardware's coverage: The Intel Optane Memory devices we’ll be discussing here looks like other current generation 80mm M.2 “gumstick” type solid state drives. However, Intel Optane Memory is meant to be used as an accelerator for systems featuring relatively low-speed storage devices, like hard drives. More coverage on Tweaktown, Tech Report, LegitReviews, Anandtech and PC Perspective.

    I haven't read the articles in depth yet, but my first thought is that I can't really see the point of it. Is it meant to be like ReadyBoost but on M.2 PCIe? It'd have to be pretty cheap, otherwise you could just buy one of the many large/fast M.2 PCIe SSDs and put your data on that. Unless you have a huge data set on HDD.. hrrm.
     
  2. Bertross

    Bertross Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,992
    Location:
    Melb, CBD
    im looking forward to this for sure!
     
  3. dakiller

    dakiller (Oscillating & Impeding)

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    7,335
    Location:
    Gippsland
    Seems like a solution looking for a problem.

    My thoughts are this.

    Intel boss - We spent squillions on this new tech, what now?

    Intel engineer - This stuff is great, we can make blazin' fast SSD's with these chips no problems. Just they are $1500 for a 375gb.

    Intel boss - enterprise is going to lap that shit up, but I want something cheaper to squeeze something out of consumers, we want to get them interested in this newfangled stuff too.

    Intel engineer - Uh, we got this cache technology we developed years ago, we can slap it in that? we can sell small ones like that.

    Intel boss - Great, do it!
     
  4. power

    power Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    50,752
    Location:
    brisbane
    this is what I thought when I read about it the other day, waste of time.
     
  5. akromatic

    akromatic Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    408
    more like a problem with no real solutions.....


    they are still stuck on the tiny 32gb cache that is limited to a single drive that you cant even choose which one.

    issue with these caching solution is the hard limit on the cache amount and the supported platform.

    im sure if they offer it out as a 240gb cache that you can pair with any drive or raid array and is OS agnostic it would fly off the shelf.

    at the moment there is still no real solution to storing a few TB of steam games and still have them at SSD speeds without spending a few grand on a 2-4TB SSD or deal with the hassle of shifting games between drives
     
  6. Doc-of-FC

    Doc-of-FC Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,770
    Location:
    Canberra
    ZFS SLOG is a primary use case, depending on if they come in power loss protection (onboard capacitor) capability like the Intel DC-S drives do.



    well the more memory you've got the more blocks windows shovels into cached.

    put those games on a NAS running ZFS and present to your machine using MPIO ISCSI, coupled with L2ARC acceleration and a couple GB ram, you've got yourself most of the way towards a 4TB SSD experience for your most frequently & recently accessed blocks.
     
  7. RagingKoala

    RagingKoala Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2016
    Messages:
    29
    Seems reasonable for non computer literate people. The problem with a SSD + a hard drive is you have to manage your data between two drivers.

    You just plug one of these in, the computer is much much faster and it requires 0 management from them. Plus its very cheap.
     
  8. mtma

    mtma Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,331
    Wasn't this supposed to be the large solid state storage with RAM speeds?

    I guess what they could produce fell far short of the expectations.
     
  9. ni9ht_5ta1k3r

    ni9ht_5ta1k3r Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    30,547
    Location:
    Sydney: it sucks!
    kinda stupid to have if you run off SSDs.
     
  10. akromatic

    akromatic Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    408

    ZFS NAS comes with the expense of building one and running it also its not a "portable" setup after all you would need another computer to set this up.

    LAN party goers need not apply.
     
  11. Doc-of-FC

    Doc-of-FC Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,770
    Location:
    Canberra
    those weren't the points I was addressing.


    for a lot less than a few grand, you can get near SSD speeds for TB's worth of games.


    horses for courses.
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2017
  12. dakiller

    dakiller (Oscillating & Impeding)

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    7,335
    Location:
    Gippsland
    I just looked, there are 1TB SSD's for $400, 2tb for $700, so that give you 2TB for < $1k
     
  13. akromatic

    akromatic Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    408
    cant satisfy everyone cant you. not much solutions for near ssd speed drive access without involving 2 computers

    well im currently getting by with a 2TB firecuda but 8gb cache is just rubbish. optane with 32gb is ok but still crap. no idea about primocache but in theory i can use a 240gb nvme for it but i hate that it cannibalize ram for ram drive when i cant afford any ram given im using ~30gb out of the 32GB that i have and i cant add more because i've fill my 2 dimm slots.


    yeh well, $700 for a 2TB is still pricy and a luxury. for $700 i could get a 1080 and actually have real improvements in games


    all in all i like the idea of optane and its the right ssd for the job, the implementation sucks hard though with a 32gb cap and only OS drive acceleration. in fact its worst then SRT.
     
  14. dakiller

    dakiller (Oscillating & Impeding)

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    7,335
    Location:
    Gippsland
    Cheap!

    I bought 64gb SSD's back when they were the new hotstuff for $450 each. They were the best upgrade I've ever had for a PC still
     
  15. akromatic

    akromatic Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    408
    yeh i paid $450 each when they were hot stuff but now for $700 i have other priorities like a 1080
     
  16. ^catalyst

    ^catalyst Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    11,592
    Location:
    melbourne
    I think the point is you're meant to use it more like ram. So if you've got some workload that is just stupid crazy ram wise and you can't get a system that can take the amount or ram, or you can't afford the ram, this is a pretty good in-between.
     
  17. Alpha2k6

    Alpha2k6 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,296
    Location:
    Sweden
    Thats what I thought also, too bad.
    There is aleast one other company working tech to replace NAND.
    But can't recall the name just now.
    Would have been good too see some new tech on the market.
     
  18. Agg

    Agg Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2001
    Messages:
    29,301
    Location:
    A Reported Post Near You
  19. Doc-of-FC

    Doc-of-FC Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,770
    Location:
    Canberra
    DC P4800X, yes please.
     
  20. thebranded

    thebranded Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,205
    Location:
    Sydney
    thought this was meant to be like non volatile ram? Frequent used files, data remains loaded in this memory after power off and does not need reloading the next day? oh well, time to read reviews see what its all about
     

Share This Page