Intel Optane Worth it ?

[Brett_Bst]

Is the optane faster than a M.2 for loading Windows ? seeing as they come in 16 or 32gb ?

[Jurrunio]

Not worth atm. If 120GB Optane is about the price of $100 then I might consider it. At it's current form, no.

[ARikozuM]

Not at the current sizes. I would wait for X-Point SSD's. 

[DrMacintosh]

Just get an 120GB SSD for dirt cheap and keep your HDD. 

[Merp83]

6 minutes ago, Brett_Bst said:

Is the optane faster than a M.2 for loading Windows ? seeing as they come in 16 or 32gb ?

N.O.

[iRileyx]

Pretty sure that Optane acts more like a cache and you can't choose what gets stored on it. So making it work for the OS might be a bit tricky.

 

And also not worth it.

[Brett_Bst]

but would it make things load faster ? I wasn't sure if you could actually have it as a normal storage space, it works as system ram ? like the In between for the HDD/SDD and ram ?  is that correct ? 

[Ashleyyyy]

2 minutes ago, Brett_Bst said:

but would it make things load faster ? I wasn't sure if you could actually have it as a normal storage space, it works as system ram ? like the In between for the HDD/SDD and ram ?  is that correct ? 

no. it puts your most used apps (web browser, ms office, some games etc, on itself, and those things will load faster. everything else, including your os, will load at normal hdd speeds.

[iRileyx]

Seems i remembered my info incorrectly, you can install Windows onto it, but according to some articles there's no room for windows updates afterwards. http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-3407444/installed-win-intel-optane-space-updates-installs.html

 

It's only recommended to use it as cache, rather than storage. it is possible to store files on it which was my mistake  

[xentropa]

It is possible to use it as a standalone drive but 32 gb isnt enough space to reliably install and run windows on.

 

I've seen some benchmarks and frankly I am unimpressed.  I don't think 2x the IOPs justifies 10 times the $/gb

 

As one guy here mentioned once: Optane is just a DIY SSHD.

[Max_Settings]

9 minutes ago, Brett_Bst said:

but would it make things load faster ? I wasn't sure if you could actually have it as a normal storage space, it works as system ram ? like the In between for the HDD/SDD and ram ?  is that correct ? 

Optane makes things load faster if they are on a HDD, it does virtually nothing for SSDs. However Optane only works on the drive that your OS is installed on, so unless your OS is on a HDD, Optane is worthless.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, firelighter487 said:

no. it puts your most used apps (web browser, ms office, some games etc, on itself, and those things will load faster. everything else, including your os, will load at normal hdd speeds.

It holds all files, not apps, based on how often they are used. Optane does not store the whole app within its storage. OS files will also be held within its algorithm. 

 

7 minutes ago, RKRiley said:

It's only recomendded to use it as cache, rather than storage. it is possible to store files on it which was my mistake  

Z270 has Optane cache as an option, but it can still be used only as "manual" storage if the user chooses. All other chipsets before Kaby Lake will have the module as a standalone storage option. 

[Ashleyyyy]

5 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

It holds all files, not apps, based on how often they are used. Optane does not store the whole app within its storage. OS files will also be held within its algorithm.

i didn't know that. cool.

 

5 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Z270 has Optane cache as an option, but it can still be used only as "manual" storage if the user chooses. All other chipsets before Kaby Lake will have the module as a standalone storage option. 

does the b250 chipset also have support?

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, firelighter487 said:

does the b250 chipset also have support?

All chipsets released alongside KBL have Optane support as far as I'm aware. 

[Daniel644]

 

Optane is completely pointless at it's current price point and capacity, for what they cost you can buy SSD's that are 4 times higher capacity and run at there fast speed across EVERYTHING loaded on the SSD, not just the 16 or 32GB of "cache" space of the Optane module that has to "swap out" files on the Optane whenever you change your workflow.

[cat1092]

Looks to me that Intel Optane is a modern version of ReadyBoost, which (I recall) began as a feature of Windows 7 in 2009. 

 

There are many SSD's that's faster on promo & NVMe models has became mainstream. For $99 each, purchased two MyDigitalSSD BPX 240GB NVMe SSD (PCIe 3.0) & one has faster read speeds (2.7GB/sec) on the Ultra M.2 port of my Z97 MB. The other runs on my budget AMD AM3+ ASRock 970M Pro3 in the 2nd GPU slot via PCIe adaptor (PCIe 2.0) & write speeds are very close to the Z97 at 1.34GB/sec (reads are about the same, expected for PCIe 2.0). That's amazing, who'd had thought the AMD FX line and NVMe in the same sentence? Plus the fantastic write speeds, pic below. 

 

At any rate, my first SSD, back in 2011, a 128GB Crucial M4 is faster than Optane.

 

Intel Optane is not worth it at it's price point as SSD are built much better (& faster) than 7 years ago, referencing to the Crucial M4 above. 

 

Cat