Oh look, its literally fucking nothing.

>>59480799
>INTEL(C)
>OPTANE(TM)

PCIe SSDs have been around for fucking ages. Unless they're going to make an affordable one then they can fuck right off.

Knowing Intel probably not.

>>59482087
/thread, fpbp, etc.

>>59482087
Do you like to talk out of your fucking ass when you know nothing about the subject?

>>59482212
Point out what he said that requires any knowledge beyond PCIe SSD prices.

>>59482253
It has a new technology that was promised to be 100x as fast as regular SSD's, you fucking mongoloid retard.

>>59482303
>15% greater performance every generation

Interesting to see how it runs.

File: intel-3dxpoint-01.jpg (78KB, 700x467px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 700x467px

>>59482346
>>59482253
>>59482087

I thought people in /g/ knew about technology, i guess i was wrong.

>>59482429
It runs like shit.

>>59482726
>intel makes all these claims multiple years ago
>as it gets closer to release, all the claims vanish to be replaced by "yeah it's basically just as good as regular NAND"

>>59482766
b-but, it's better ! more speed ! please buy !

>>59480799

Let's just wait until release and see how fast they are.

>>59480799
>15W
>375GB

Oh lol now I see why the heatsink is needed for such a tiny amount of storage

>>59482303
>>59482927

it's not any faster than the best NAND SSDs available today as far as reads and writes go. It has very good latency compared to NAND and as a result, very good iops performance. Read performance is also not so much affected by write performance as in NAND.

it is not meant for consumer use, but may be very attractive to datacenters that are hammering the shit out of a relatively small number of drives.

>>59482303
Not it doesn't
It was designed to beat ddr2, which NVME drives are already doing

>>59482087
But they make the most affordable one there is... SSD6

>>59483402
I mean it might as well be SATA with how slow it is but you're not wrong
It's called a 600p, "6" is the line

File: file.png (57KB, 153x196px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 153x196px

>>59482927
>>59483298
>ITS OKAY IF INTEL DOES IT

File: Optane vs 960 EVO.png (605KB, 350x587px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 350x587px

Had they brought this thing out when they were first talking about it, yeah it would have been an absolute monster and would have lived up to the hype fairly well.
Unfortunately they decided to wait few years before pushing it out.
And now, well now it seems to be hardly any better than the current NVMe drives on the market, but you can bet your ass that the price is going to have more digits than any of the competition.

I bet that NRAM is going to be the future though.
It's going to be even faster, extremely durable and that stuff costs jack shit to manufacture and can be created easily with already existing machinery.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/fujitsu-carbon-nanotube-memory-nram,32603.html

File: 1368348538579.png (228KB, 353x297px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 353x297px

This is the sort of thing that might make a certain Mongolian Tapestry Forum finally beomce financially viable.

>>59483929
So back then it was 1000x faster than NAND?

File: Disgusted Beta.jpg (116KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1280x720px

>>59480799
What a fucking pricey disappointment. I hope Samsung destroys them with their implementation.

File: 1478188958226.jpg (298KB, 1920x1920px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1920x1920px

>at least we tricked people into buying z270 boards

>>59480799
Oh, another Intel's long term R&D project is a pile of streaming shit? Color me surprised.

>>59480799
>Intel’s first Optane SSD: 375GB that you can also use as RAM

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11208/intel-introduces-optane-ssd-dc-p4800x-with-3d-xpoint-memory

It was leaked more than month ago why is there any interest left?
https://www.pcper.com/news/Storage/Closer-Look-Intels-Optane-SSD-DC-P4800X-Enterprise-SSD-Performance

>>59485253
At the low, low price of $1500. What a steal!

>>59482087
>Fast
>Affordable
>Intel

Pick two.

>it's not the best in the world so it's literally nothing
/g/ is so dumb.

>>59485334
They literally promised that it'll rape every SSD in the market. But in actual reality it's a housefire SSD. Nice innovation, Intel.

>>59485334
>Its not the best, its not what they promised and there are cheaper options so its literally nothing
Fixed that for you.

>>59482766
to be fair, the endurance of optane is something to consider at least in the server market.

>>59485504
Decent NAND already lives long enough for upgrade cycle to happen anyway. The only thing Optane is decent for is lower latency. But why though when RAM exists.

>>59483488
and also to be fair, read and write over sata speed is largely unused because at around 400-500mbps you hit a limit due to the need to decompress compressed files, it's why there is a hard limit to how fast shit loads, and why you see next to no difference between good sata ssds and samsung 960 evo in real world performance, not benchmarks.

there are some programs that are unicorns and some games too, these speeds are more for production work where speed is necessary such as video editing

this is where the 600p comes in, it stays well above most programs read speed they can use, has an acceptable write speed, and comes in at almost half the cost of an equally sized evo.

>>59485531
say you do serious work, and you run through drives in short order, so long as intel does not charge 20 times the amount for the optane drive, they have their place where they are heavily utilized.

>>59485588
Dude, it's only 15DWPT, there's MLC NAND enterprise drives with over 10 already.
SLC ones blow this out of the water, furthermore those NAND ones actually go up to some 10TB, not this "just wait" until the 1.5TB one releases, meanwhile enjoy your 375GB

Why does this need Kabylake? It's a block device, it interfaces with PCIe, whatever signaling is done on the nand<->controller level and whatever alchemy is used to produce the silicon should not matter to the system, I can use NAND SSDs on 2005 laptops... Again, why the fuck does this block device need kabylake?

>>59485755
Jewish tactics in simple words.

There is no reason but they have to make you upgrade your CPU somehow.

>>59482726
>that endurance
How is this possible?

>>59485782
Honestly I would actually love to hear a technical reason for it, I'm thawing my head thinking of all the ways that KBL can exclusively do PCIe I/O and others can't but for the life of me I can't find anything that would fit that.

>>59485807
Because it's not, currently.
And this release shows it.

>>59485807
It's a marketing slide from the same company that delivers 15%* performance uplifts.

>>59483929
What is the benefit of low latency. Would that be something you'd notice in day to day use?

>>59485334
>promise 1000x performance
>"not the best"
kek

>>59486247
read write its worse than 960 evo

>>59486776
Samsung really hit it out of the park with the 960 evo.
>Same GB/$ as the 850 pro
>Better performance than the 950 pro

>>59485575
600 is a piece of shit, a mx300 is better in many cases

>>59480799
Can someone recommend me a fast pcie ssd?

I have an asrock extreme 4/3.1 with a 6850k if that matters.

>>59487003
This and the mx300 isn't even that fast. At least they're back in the game with less expensive SSDs, I missed Crucial.

>>59485828
>Honestly I would actually love to hear a technical reason
There isn't a technical reason, only financial ones. Intel wanted a unique feature to market new boards with, so they locked off Optane support to newer platforms.

>>59486989
Thing is, I would take 1/4th the speed for a cheaper price, as nothing outside of production scenarios and unicorn applications uses that speed, I want 1tb of space at sata saturation speeds, honestly considering getting 4 sata ssds and raid 0ing the things for boot and fast launch programs and get a backup 2tb hdd to do a weekly/monthly backup in case.

>>59487003
Any other ssds I should consider getting?
Im honestly open to almost any suggestion, even used shit that people are getting rid of if it goes though a place that can tell me its still functional.

I honestly just want a hdd that does not fall below 400mb read or write no matter what if that even exists but I don't want to pay the massive fuck off premium samsung wants.

>>59487282
I'm doing a raid 0 with two 850 evos right now with a 3tb backup HDD, works pretty well.

>>59486010
Day to day is 99% latency-bound (Random IO)