Is this RAM Optane thing faster than NVMEs?

[G1K777]

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/optane-dc-persistent-memory.html

[NunoLava1998]

Yes, but I'd focus on upgrading your system first.

[DocSwag]

It's based on the same stuff used in the optane NVMe PCIe drives, which are arguably the fastest SSDs, so yeah I would say so

[goto10]

the problem with optane is price, and size

 

at first optane was offered not as a storage device but as a added card to help prove performance of hard disks

 

but price is ridiculous, you pay for 16 gbs the same you pay for a 240 gbs nvme

 

prices have changed recently, but optane is not moving forward in the market, not at least as intel would like to

 

256gbs to be used on a pc as a boot drive costs around 130 dollars, alot less than it used to, but the benefits of use it as boot drive are not that impressive

 

move windows from a hard disk to a ssd is a big improvement

 

move windows from a ssd to a nvme is a very small improvement

 

move windows from a nvme to a optane, perhaps is not a improvement

 

not at least in terms of you seeing the pc running apps faster, booting faster, performing faster

[porina]

9 minutes ago, goto10 said:

the problem with optane is price, and size

So the fastest to date storage shouldn't be at a price premium?

 

Anyway, back to OP's question, it is fast, but you have to look at how. Optane is more ram-like than flash's block like structure. This particularly helps with low queue depth random reads. If that isn't an area of benefit, then you might not see a benefit in actual use. If you just want sequential speed, flash SSDs will do that cheaper.

[goto10]

3 minutes ago, porina said:

So the fastest to date storage shouldn't be at a price premium?

 

Anyway, back to OP's question, it is fast, but you have to look at how. Optane is more ram-like than flash's block like structure. This particularly helps with low queue depth random reads. If that isn't an area of benefit, then you might not see a benefit in actual use. If you just want sequential speed, flash SSDs will do that cheaper.

the fastest, well, fastest how, and for who

 

at what price should be higher

 

nvme is not far

 

for personal use ssd is not far from it

 

everything is relative to the client, use scenario and budget

 

there was a time you could charge 130 for a hard disk, not anymore

 

same for a nvme

 

optane used to charge like 80 dollars for 32gbs

 

perhaps is faster, but is not better, and there is no way to justify the price, not when it is barely faster than pci express 4 nvme rhat is not far from the price of normal nvme for pci express 3.0

 

in the end each one justifies what they pay foe what they get, i cant justify nor the size or the price

 

dont forget that optane ask for intel hardware first, later came amd support

 

it went from a high price unique market part, now it will try to compete with the other company that was involved in optane development and with normal nvme, not a easy market, not when ssds still are good enough

[porina]

1 hour ago, goto10 said:

the fastest, well, fastest how, and for who

I said already, it particularly excels at low QD random reads. In that use case, my 900p 280GB is about 5x faster than my 970 Evo, and "only" cost 4x as much per capacity at the time of buying. Flash might be cheaper but it performs way worse. The only storage I used that was faster was a ramdisk, and that's about double the price per capacity again over Optane (at the last time I looked).

 

Quote

perhaps is faster, but is not better, and there is no way to justify the price, not when it is barely faster than pci express 4 nvme rhat is not far from the price of normal nvme for pci express 3.0

PCIe 4.0 doesn't change the performance of the storage types. It increases sequential slightly over PCIe 3.0 until we get better controllers.

 

Quote

dont forget that optane ask for intel hardware first, later came amd support

Optane drives have worked on AMD systems form day 1. The only Intel tie in is if you want to use Intel's cacheing software. With AMD, you can use either AMD or other 3rd party software to do similar.

 

Quote

it went from a high price unique market part, now it will try to compete with the other company that was involved in optane development and with normal nvme, not a easy market, not when ssds still are good enough

I'm not saying everyone should get Optane, but the fact is it does have performance that no other flash reaches. If you need it, you need it. If you don't, for sure, buy something cheaper. Samsung and Toshiba have tried to re-create something like Optane using nand, but while improved they're still not as fast, and still cost far more than regular flash. 

[goto10]

3 minutes ago, porina said:

I said already, it particularly excels at low QD random reads. In that use case, my 900p 280GB is about 5x faster than my 970 Evo, and "only" cost 4x as much per capacity at the time of buying. Flash might be cheaper but it performs way worse. The only storage I used that was faster was a ramdisk, and that's about double the price per capacity again over Optane (at the last time I looked).

 

PCIe 4.0 doesn't change the performance of the storage types. It increases sequential slightly over PCIe 3.0 until we get better controllers.

 

Optane drives have worked on AMD systems form day 1. The only Intel tie in is if you want to use Intel's cacheing software. With AMD, you can use either AMD or other 3rd party software to do similar.

 

I'm not saying everyone should get Optane, but the fact is it does have performance that no other flash reaches. If you need it, you need it. If you don't, for sure, buy something cheaper. Samsung and Toshiba have tried to re-create something like Optane using nand, but while improved they're still not as fast, and still cost far more than regular flash. 

i was talking about faster how, under what circumstances, random reads

 

what that represents for end user, all is relative, you can be happy and do all you want with a good emmc ssd

 

you could be upset with the best nvme

 

better how, in that how sense, how is better for you, for example loading games, or loading windows, loading files for a video project in adobe, faster or better how, under what circumstances, what use case, on those circumstances, when you look at it, well everything is relative, which one is the best,or better for you?

 

about optane and amd, i was talking about optane and the tool to increase hard disk performance, asking you to have a intel platform with the right cpu and motherboard to support the feature

 

later was added amd support, well, not really, amd allows you to use the drive in a similar way, but we are on a time where speed up a hard disk doesnt matter, because 1Tb nvme exist and is affordable for a big portion of the market

 

dont look optane as  a winner or a looser

 

it is a interesting offering, but is not ideal for everyone