High Speed Storage

[RedShank]

1. How does Intel Optane memory acceleration work?

2. (M.2 SATA III + 32GB Intel Optane) VS (512GB Samsung 970 pro) which one is faster?

3. (SSHD + 32GB Intel Optane) VS (Samsung 860 pro) which one is faster? If its possible!

4. Is it possible to have 512GB Samsung 970 pro + 32 GB Intel Optane? 

 

 

Simply put I have 2XM.2 SSD slot, so which configuration would be fastest? 

 

 

[Oshino Shinobu]

A single NVMe SSD would be the fastest (technically, two in RAID 0 would be faster, but you shouldn't do that) 

 

Optane really doesn't make a lot of sense. There aren't many situations where I'd say it is worth it 

[RedShank]

31 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

A single NVMe SSD would be the fastest (technically, two in RAID 0 would be faster, but you shouldn't do that) 

 

Optane really doesn't make a lot of sense. There aren't many situations where I'd say it is worth it 

Thanks 

Isn't Optane boost your speed, like bootup time? AND Why RAID 0 would be faster, but shouldn't do that?

 

[Oshino Shinobu]

8 minutes ago, RedShank said:

Thanks 

Isn't Optane boost your speed, like bootup time? AND Why RAID 0 would be faster, but shouldn't do that?

 

Optane memory basically acts as a cache, so frequently used data loads faster (provided that Optane is faster than the primary storage) and small writes are fast. This would have basically no affect on boot times and for the most part, won't affect the majority of most people's work flow. It can be useful for speeding up HDD storage in some cases, especially for writing to the HDD, but a dedicated SSD is always going to be better as you can choose exactly what goes onto it and what gets the speed benefits. It's also cheaper for larger capacities of high speed storage, so a dedicated SSD is basically always better. 

 

RAID 0 stripes data across multiple drives. This (theoretically) multiplies data throughput by the amount of drives in the array. However, if any of the drives in the array fail or get corrupted, or the array itself fails, you lose all data on the array. So it also multiplies the chances of losing data. 

 

For NVMe drives, they're already at the point where most applications don't  take advantage of the speed benefits they provide, so adding more speed to them really doesn't make sense. All you'd really be doing is increasing your chances of losing data for no real world performance benefits. 

[RedShank]

4 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

Optane memory basically acts as a cache, so frequently used data loads faster (provided that Optane is faster than the primary storage) and small writes are fast. This would have basically no affect on boot times and for the most part, won't affect the majority of most people's work flow. It can be useful for speeding up HDD storage in some cases, especially for writing to the HDD, but a dedicated SSD is always going to be better as you can choose exactly what goes onto it and what gets the speed benefits. It's also cheaper for larger capacities of high speed storage, so a dedicated SSD is basically always better. 

 

RAID 0 stripes data across multiple drives. This (theoretically) multiplies data throughput by the amount of drives in the array. However, if any of the drives in the array fail or get corrupted, or the array itself fails, you lose all data on the array. So it also multiplies the chances of losing data. 

 

For NVMe drives, they're already at the point where most applications don't  take advantage of the speed benefits they provide, so adding more speed to them really doesn't make sense. All you'd really be doing is increasing your chances of losing data for no real world performance benefits. 

7

Thank you very much, so basically,

single 512GB 970 pro with no RAID configuration is a safe choice. 

 

One more thing I am a hardcore gamer so an SSHD would be great or SATA III SDD?

[Oshino Shinobu]

1 minute ago, RedShank said:

Thank you very much, so basically,

single 512GB 970 pro with no RAID configuration is a safe choice. 

 

One more thing I am a hardcore gamer so an SSHD would be great or SATA III SDD?

It is, yes. I would personally advise to go for the EVO rather than the Pro and save a bit of money, but if they're close in price, may as well have to Pro. 

 

SSHDs are only worth the cost in one situation (in my opinion):

1. You only have room for 1 drive in the system

2. You can't afford a large enough SSD

3. Using external drives for storage is not an option

 

If you don't have those 3 conditions, SSHDs aren't worth it. You're better off going with an SSD + HDD setup. SSD for OS, frequently used programs and games. Then the HDD for mass storage of media, other games and so on.