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
eddman - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
Nice deflection with "I did not meant it as fact since I didn't use such words."Notmyusualid - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
@ eddmanI wish AT WERE bothered by him - he is distracting in so many articles, with his nonsense opinions, that I can't see any real discussion anymore.
I doubt he has any foot in anyone's IT door, as he seems to have amazing amounts of free time to spend commenting on here. Meanwhile - I've been on the go since 05:30 this morning, come here to read about new tech, and yet again, this troll clogging up potentially useful discussion.
I believe ddriver has a mental personality disorder, I'm just not sure which one, since schizoids and narcissists can be similar in some ways, and in no way am I a psych doctor.
Therefore, I wish him nothing but the worst life has to offer.
lmcd - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
I don't care if he ends up with the worst life has to offer, I just want his internet to die for a month or two so we can see what normal comment sections look like.MamiyaOtaru - Tuesday, November 7, 2017 - link
the fact that you think you need to explain the "hypetane" "joke", or that there's anyone who wouldn't get it, says everything that needs to be said about you. You probably felt super clever coming up with that one, cramming two words together like it was the height of humor, and that it was subtle enough some people wouldn't get it. Meanwhile, it was super obvious to *everyone*, so obvious that it isn't even close to funny. It's like you are operating on a lower mental plane and don't even know it, a dunning-kruger of humor.sonny73n - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link
Lol. Brutal.Meteor2 - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link
Ha ha, indeed!Please folks, don't reply to posts to ddriver. Don't even bother reading them. Don't feed trolls!
melgross - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
Trust me, you’ve already reached the level of pointless mediocrity. You can applaud your achievement.ddriver - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
Rule N1 - never trust people who say "trust me" ;)lmcd - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link
So I'll never trust your objectivity.As if I needed incentive.
investlite - Monday, November 6, 2017 - link
LOL! Mediocrity? It's only 2.7x faster. Since you love analogies, the tesla goes 0-60 in 3 seconds. This does it in 1.4 and you're calling it mediocre. We get it, your disappointed that it's not 1000x faster. Here's my question, how have you not let go of something a company said two years ago?Talk about limiting your mindset, you've restricted your expectations to a statement two years ago when we have a tangible product in our hands now. How about you worry about what we've got instead of what was said about it two years ago?