Intel Invented the Traditional SSD Killer of the Future

Intel Invented the Traditional SSD Killer of the Future.

Is this...just a glorified advertisement? No specifications or technical explanation how it works or meaningful benchmarks. A complete fluff piece.

​

​Here's an article with better (but still relatively layman) information on the tech: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-optane-ssd-800p,5497.html

​

​Conclusion basically seems to be that it's neat in a few ways, but not really worth buying (...though they seem to more readily recommend the 900P).

Edited March 9, 2018 by Bartimaeus

It seems we're at a point already where drive speed isn't making much difference for games anymore.

I recently checked benchmarks on SSD vs M2 SSD and a RAM disc.

 

Even in games with long loading times (total war, gta5 ) the higher priced m2 dics or even the ram disc did offer a very minor improvement, especially compared to hdd vs ssd loading times.

 

Might be nice if you copy your data often from  A to B, but in my personal usage I seldom need that. 

Just curious now... SATA M2 or PCI M2?

 

There is a significant difference (little to no difference between SSD and SATA M2 SSD)

 

I do know my old 5400 RPM laptop drive feels slow like molasses by comparison to any of the above

Is there any difference at all between standard 2.5" SATA SSD speeds and M2.SATA speeds? I thought that was just cable management preference, ie not needing any with the M2 form factor.

 

NVMe is faster than SATA, but unlike the difference between a platter HD and a SSD for most practical applications the difference is insufficient to justify its increased price. You get more bang for buck putting the monetary difference between, say, an 860 and a 970 Evo into a better processor or faster RAM (for Ryzen, not so much Intel) or towards a better video card (gaming); and if you're just doing general productivity stuff you'd seldom notice the difference so might as well just save the money. In terms of value for money upgrades it's pretty low priority, unless you're trying to squeeze out every bit of performance.

 

(That was my reasoning for going for a M2.SATA Crucial MX over a 960 Evo or 600p at least, I could put the 120$ price difference to better use)

I can't find the benchmark I was referencing, but I'm pretty sure he was using an PCIe m2 disc.

 

But as the use of a ramdisc showed (they're easily 10x faster than an modern SSD), every day application can't really uitilize them fully because the bottleneck lies somewhere else.

Good for servers I suppose. 

I can't find the benchmark I was referencing, but I'm pretty sure he was using an PCIe m2 disc.

 

Some recent gaming benchmarks for SSDs. NVMe/ PCIe is faster in general than SATA, but not by much and they are not really worth the premium for general usage.