Corsair K57 RGB Wireless keyboard review
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X review
PowerColor 5700 RED DEVIL review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT Evoke review
ASUS Radeon RX 5700 XT ROG STRIX review
ViewSonic Elite XG240R Monitor Review
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
X570 Aorus master review
Cooler Master Silencio S600 review
AMD Ryzen 5 3400G review
Intel announces 58GB and 118GB Optane 800P SSD
Today, Intel announced the Intel Optane SSD 800P, the latest in the Optane technology family of products. The 800P is available in 58GB and 118GB capacities in the M.2 2280 form factor using an NVMe PCIe 3.0 x2 interface.
The Optane 800p series M.2 NVMe is once again a, intended to be a cache SSD and replaces the 16 GB and 32 GB models, you could however use that 118GB version as standalone SSD as it is big enough (well barely). Intel, of course, encourages you to purchase two or more of these drives, to be set up in NVMe RAID. The storage units are using M.2 2280 form factor using an NVMe PCIe 3.0 x2 interface
Performance wise both offer up to 1450 MB/s sequential reads and up to 640 MB/s sequential writes. With up to 250,000 IOPS random reads, and up to 145,000 IOPS random writes. Endurance is a strong point as both models are rated at 365 TBW. The Optane 800p 58 GB will cost you USD $129.99, the 118 GB model sells ate $199.99.
Mind you that these units as cache drive are not compatible with Ryzen based systems.
| Optane SSD 800p | Optane Memory | |||
| Capacity | 118GB | 58GB | 32GB | 16GB |
| Form factor | M2 2280 B + M key | M2 2280 B + M key | ||
| Interface | Pci-e 3.0 x2 | Pci-e 3.0 x2 | ||
| Protocol | Nvme 1.1 | Nvme 1.1 | ||
| Memory | 128Gb 20nm Intel 3D XPoint | 128Gb 20nm Intel 3D XPoint | ||
| Sequential reading | 1450 MB / s | 1350 MB / s | 900 MB / s | |
| Sequential writing | 640 MB / s | 290 MB / s | 145 MB / s | |
| Random reading | 250k iops | 240k iops | 190k iops | |
| Write randomly | 140k iops | 65k iops | 35k iops | |
| Consumption | 3.75 W | 3.5 W | 3.5 W | |
| Consumption idle | 8 mW | 8 mW | 1 W | 1 W |
| Endurance | 365 TB | 365 TB | 182.5 TB | 182.5 TB |
| Guarantee | 5 years | 5 years | ||
| Introduction | March 2018 | April 2017 | ||
| Recommended retail price in $ | $ 199 | $ 129 | $ 77 | $ 44 |
Intel and Micron end mutual cooperation in the field of 3D NAND - 01/09/2018 10:03 AM
Intel and Micron have announced that they will end their collaboration in the development of 3D nand flash memory. The companies still say they want to finish and work together on the third generation...
Intel Announces 8th Gen Core i7 Processor with Radeon Vega M Graphics - 01/08/2018 09:56 AM
Intel is launching a first-of-its kind processor: the 8th Gen Intel Core processor with Radeon RX Vega M Graphics. Packed with features and performance crafted for gamers, content creators and fans of...
Intel Announces High-Density ARM-based Stratix 10 FPGA on 14 nm - 11/03/2017 06:35 PM
Intel today announced it has begun shipping its Intel Stratix 10 SX FPGA - the only high-end FPGA family with an integrated quad-core ARM Cortex-A53 processor....
Intel Announces Availability of Core X 14-, 16- and 18-core processors - 09/25/2017 12:36 PM
Intel is announcing the availability of its 14-, 16- and 18-core processors – Intel® Core i9-7940X, Intel Core i9-7960X and Intel Core i9-7980XE processors – which begin shipping ...
Intel Announces Xeon Series W Processors With 18 core Xeon W-2195 - 08/30/2017 08:07 AM
Aimed at workstations Intel will release Xeon-W processors, with a line-up you might find familiar. Xeon W will become available up-to 18 cores and will be based on lga2066 sockets. The Xeons do suppo...
eddieobscurant
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: 2010-10-26
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: 2010-10-26
#5526852 Posted on: 03/09/2018 05:30 PM
Useless product with such low capacities and absurd pricing
Useless product with such low capacities and absurd pricing
Warrax
Senior Member
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-01-08
Senior Member
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-01-08
#5526861 Posted on: 03/09/2018 05:48 PM
No offence to Intel but...no ones cares unless price is right which is not.
No offence to Intel but...no ones cares unless price is right which is not.
Agonist
Senior Member
Posts: 2726
Joined: 2008-10-13
Senior Member
Posts: 2726
Joined: 2008-10-13
#5526972 Posted on: 03/10/2018 12:02 AM
Fully agreed. My 960 Evo 250GB was only $115 brand new. Why would anyone purchase these at these kind of prices for the storage size.
Its not like these would make my evo like a sata II SSD from 2010.
Useless product with such low capacities and absurd pricing
Fully agreed. My 960 Evo 250GB was only $115 brand new. Why would anyone purchase these at these kind of prices for the storage size.
Its not like these would make my evo like a sata II SSD from 2010.
0blivious
Senior Member
Posts: 2509
Joined: 2006-04-25
Senior Member
Posts: 2509
Joined: 2006-04-25
#5526980 Posted on: 03/10/2018 12:34 AM
Diminishing returns is all that comes to mind.
Diminishing returns is all that comes to mind.
nosirrahx
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
#5526985 Posted on: 03/10/2018 12:51 AM
A big blunder by Intel was not doing anything at all to explain why 4KQ1T1 speed matters so much. Mixed reads and writes with high queue and thread count and sequential reads matter very little in a desktop environment.
Disk bench software lists super impressive numbers for certain drives indicating that they are fantastic at multiple user database workloads and moving very large files from point A to point B over a fast connection, both of which you don't do on a desktop PC.
The other blunder was releasing Optane years after it mattered. If you have a motherboard that supports Optane then you did not install windows on a HDD. Conversely if you have a HDD that would be perfect for Optane you likely do not have support for it.
On top of all that the only enthusiast case where Optane makes sense is hidden as an undocumented feature. I used a 280GB 900P as Optane cache for a 4TB SATA SSD and the performance is staggering, far better than any of these M.2 cache drives.
According to Intel this configuration does not even work even though it is the only current way to get 4TB of storage combined with top of the line 4KQ1T1 performance.
A big blunder by Intel was not doing anything at all to explain why 4KQ1T1 speed matters so much. Mixed reads and writes with high queue and thread count and sequential reads matter very little in a desktop environment.
Disk bench software lists super impressive numbers for certain drives indicating that they are fantastic at multiple user database workloads and moving very large files from point A to point B over a fast connection, both of which you don't do on a desktop PC.
The other blunder was releasing Optane years after it mattered. If you have a motherboard that supports Optane then you did not install windows on a HDD. Conversely if you have a HDD that would be perfect for Optane you likely do not have support for it.
On top of all that the only enthusiast case where Optane makes sense is hidden as an undocumented feature. I used a 280GB 900P as Optane cache for a 4TB SATA SSD and the performance is staggering, far better than any of these M.2 cache drives.
According to Intel this configuration does not even work even though it is the only current way to get 4TB of storage combined with top of the line 4KQ1T1 performance.
jortego128
Senior Member
Posts: 101
Joined: 2017-04-30
Senior Member
Posts: 101
Joined: 2017-04-30
#5527200 Posted on: 03/11/2018 01:14 AM
They can keep it then, theres no sense in that...
Mind you Optane is not compatible with Ryzen systems.
They can keep it then, theres no sense in that...
MegaFalloutFan
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
#5527220 Posted on: 03/11/2018 02:37 AM
These are VERY fast, faster then any NVMe drives and are big enough to install Windows 10, the 4K speed is tad faster then 900p based on this review
Check out this 4K performance, 960 pro 1tb does maximum 50-60mb/s
These are VERY fast, faster then any NVMe drives and are big enough to install Windows 10, the 4K speed is tad faster then 900p based on this review
Check out this 4K performance, 960 pro 1tb does maximum 50-60mb/s
nosirrahx
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
#5527224 Posted on: 03/11/2018 02:57 AM
These are VERY fast, faster then any NVMe drives and are big enough to install Windows 10, the 4K speed is tad faster then 900p based on this review
Check out this 4K performance, 960 pro 1tb does maximum 50-60mb/s
That is a really old version of CrystalDiskMark, no idea why they don't upgrade.
The newer ones let you control queue depth and threads, 4KQ1T1 is really the only test that matters.
These are VERY fast, faster then any NVMe drives and are big enough to install Windows 10, the 4K speed is tad faster then 900p based on this review
Check out this 4K performance, 960 pro 1tb does maximum 50-60mb/s
That is a really old version of CrystalDiskMark, no idea why they don't upgrade.
The newer ones let you control queue depth and threads, 4KQ1T1 is really the only test that matters.
MegaFalloutFan
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
#5527225 Posted on: 03/11/2018 03:05 AM
That is a really old version of CrystalDiskMark, no idea why they don't upgrade.
The newer ones let you control queue depth and threads, 4KQ1T1 is really the only test that matters.
Like this?
That is a really old version of CrystalDiskMark, no idea why they don't upgrade.
The newer ones let you control queue depth and threads, 4KQ1T1 is really the only test that matters.
Like this?
Agonist
Senior Member
Posts: 2726
Joined: 2008-10-13
Senior Member
Posts: 2726
Joined: 2008-10-13
#5527227 Posted on: 03/11/2018 03:21 AM
Speeds dont matter with crappy sizes and crappy prices.
And no ryzen support, intel can swallow a massive F*** You.
Speeds dont matter with crappy sizes and crappy prices.
And no ryzen support, intel can swallow a massive F*** You.
MegaFalloutFan
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
#5527229 Posted on: 03/11/2018 03:31 AM
Speeds dont matter with crappy sizes and crappy prices.
And no ryzen support, intel can swallow a massive F*** You.
Thats BS, It works fine on ryzen.
It doesnt work in Optane Cache mode on Ryzen and Gen6 and lower Intel, but it works fine as SSD 60 and 120Gb are enough for windows 10 install. for most people that keep game on separate SSD/HDD
Speeds dont matter with crappy sizes and crappy prices.
And no ryzen support, intel can swallow a massive F*** You.
Thats BS, It works fine on ryzen.
It doesnt work in Optane Cache mode on Ryzen and Gen6 and lower Intel, but it works fine as SSD 60 and 120Gb are enough for windows 10 install. for most people that keep game on separate SSD/HDD
nosirrahx
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
#5527232 Posted on: 03/11/2018 03:37 AM
Like this?
Exactly, that bottom score is what you "feel". The rest are super specific to scenarios like moving massive files from A to B over a fast link or a database being accessed by a lot of users. 4KQ1T1 represents the random reading and writing of small files that make up the majority of desktop disk access.
Like this?
Exactly, that bottom score is what you "feel". The rest are super specific to scenarios like moving massive files from A to B over a fast link or a database being accessed by a lot of users. 4KQ1T1 represents the random reading and writing of small files that make up the majority of desktop disk access.
nosirrahx
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
#5527233 Posted on: 03/11/2018 03:46 AM
Speeds dont matter with crappy sizes and crappy prices.
And no ryzen support, intel can swallow a massive F*** You.
I am an Optane user and fan but I do agree that the capacity and price point suck. I love my 900P but it sucks that it only comes in a U.2 or add in card interface and has a capacity and price from 2015.
I'm not even using my 900P the way Intel wants me to use it because as intended it is just not worth it.
Speeds dont matter with crappy sizes and crappy prices.
And no ryzen support, intel can swallow a massive F*** You.
I am an Optane user and fan but I do agree that the capacity and price point suck. I love my 900P but it sucks that it only comes in a U.2 or add in card interface and has a capacity and price from 2015.
I'm not even using my 900P the way Intel wants me to use it because as intended it is just not worth it.
MegaFalloutFan
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
Senior Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2015-06-27
#5527243 Posted on: 03/11/2018 04:40 AM
I am an Optane user and fan but I do agree that the capacity and price point suck. I love my 900P but it sucks that it only comes in a U.2 or add in card interface and has a capacity and price from 2015.
I'm not even using my 900P the way Intel wants me to use it because as intended it is just not worth it.
I got 480gb version and sold the game code to get 140$ back.
Just got a new case and in this build ill have 200Gb for windows and 280GB for PrimoCache to cache all my HDD's and NVMes (except system drive which already optane)
Maybe ill get that 120Gb optane and use it as system and dedicate all 480Gb as to L2 cache for PrimoCache
I am an Optane user and fan but I do agree that the capacity and price point suck. I love my 900P but it sucks that it only comes in a U.2 or add in card interface and has a capacity and price from 2015.
I'm not even using my 900P the way Intel wants me to use it because as intended it is just not worth it.
I got 480gb version and sold the game code to get 140$ back.
Just got a new case and in this build ill have 200Gb for windows and 280GB for PrimoCache to cache all my HDD's and NVMes (except system drive which already optane)
Maybe ill get that 120Gb optane and use it as system and dedicate all 480Gb as to L2 cache for PrimoCache
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 2013-04-05
I wonder if they will announce that the 900P is already Optane compatible. As of now they still have not updated their list of supported drives:
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27401/Intel-Optane-Memory-User-Interface-and-Driver-for-System-Acceleration?product=99745