The Intel Optane SSD 900P 280GB Review
by Billy Tallis on October 27, 2017 9:30 AM ESTSequential Read Performance
Our first test of sequential read performance uses short bursts of 128MB, issued as 128kB operations with no queuing. The test averages performance across eight bursts for a total of 1GB of data transferred from a drive containing 16GB of data. Between each burst the drive is given enough idle time to keep the overall duty cycle at 20%.
The burst QD1 sequential read performance of the Intel Optane SSD 900P falls in between the Samsung 960 PRO and 960 EVO. Samsung's fastest outperforms the Optane SSD by about 11%.
Our test of sustained sequential reads uses queue depths from 1 to 32, with the performance and power scores computed as the average of QD1, QD2 and QD4. Each queue depth is tested for up to one minute or 32GB transferred, from a drive containing 64GB of data.
On the longer test of sequential read performance, the Optane SSD holds on to a commanding lead after the flash-based SSDs mostly slow down relative to their burst performance.
 |
|||||||||
Both Optane devices show a jump in performance from QD1 to QD2, after which their performance holds steady. Samsung's 960s show very minor performance increases with queue depth, and at the highest queue depths the Intel SSD 750 comes closest to catching up to the Optane SSD.
Sequential Write Performance
Our test of sequential write burst performance is structured identically to the sequential read burst performance test save for the direction of the data transfer. Each burst writes 128MB as 128kB operations issued at QD1, for a total of 1GB of data written to a drive containing 16GB of data.
Samsung's 960 PRO and EVO drives all outperform the Intel Optane SSD 900P on the burst sequential write test, by up to 16%.
Our test of sustained sequential writes is structured identically to our sustained sequential read test, save for the direction of the data transfers. Queue depths range from 1 to 32 and each queue depth is tested for up to one minute or 32GB, followed by up to one minute of idle time for the drive to cool off and perform garbage collection. The test is confined to a 64GB span of the drive.
On the longer sequential write test, the Optane SSD loses ground to Samsung's three fastest SSDs but everything else slows down even more.
 |
|||||||||
Almost all of the SSDs in this bunch reach their full sequential write speed at QD2, and they are mostly differentiated by their speeds once saturated. A few drives show some unevenness during the later portions of the test, but the Optane SSD has just a minor blip in its favor at the end of the test.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
205 Comments
View All Comments
Meteor2 - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link
I always switch to 'read comments as a single page'mapesdhs - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link
I've used the scroll wheel so much, I had to buy a new mouse... :}Rektide - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
Does the P4800X self-destruct/go-read-only after it reaches the advertised 20.5 PBW endurance?That's twice what a Samsung 850 Pro managed in a stress test, but the Pro is a consumer class device. The idea that I'd buy some fancy enterprise drive that would stop operation the second it's endurance rating is over makes me fume.
mkozakewich - Monday, October 30, 2017 - link
From what I've heard, they never stop. At that point, they'll be out of warranty, but they'll continue to work at poorer and poorer performance levels.FwFred - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
I see the comments are 50/50 impressed vs not impressed by this review. I also see that ddriver is 50% of the comments 😂Notmyusualid - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
@FwFredIndeed. I thought the drive was amazing. I guess ddriver read some other article.
todd.nonja - Monday, October 30, 2017 - link
I needed a good laugh after wading through the muck that ddriver has been spewing. Thanks for that!mapesdhs - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link
Definite lol marker point. :Diwod - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
The price is much cheaper then I thought!. For what it is capable of I think this is actually cheap. This is a first gen ( third ? ) product. So i expect there should still be lots of headroom for improvement. But i still struggle to find the use of it in normal day to day computing.While latency is extremely important, you dont want your system to Jank or halt, but newer SSD is nearly avoided the problem. And as NAND gets cheaper ( Which isn't happening.... ) and better controller, I would call this problem solved.
SSD continues to uses less power, something that is important in Laptop market. And for 99% of our workload we are no longer limited by I/O. As shown in the benchmark with very little performance improvement, why should i get a Optane is an question that needs better answer from Intel.
What i think will be interesting, is the use of Optane SSD on Database server, with those kind of latency, Random Read Write, and Endurance, it think this is going to be a gigantic leap forward.
DanNeely - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
Yup. I was expecting it to be several times more expensive. Still more than I'd be willing to spend if building a new system but only; only because I don't think I could live with only half a TB for long before running low on space, and I don't want to do the multiple drives thing again. (I currently have about 400GB used on a 1 TB SSD). 2nd/3rd gen in 2-4 years when I build my new system I could see dropping $500ish for a ~2TB model if it exists then.