The Intel Optane SSD 900p 480GB Review: Diving Deeper Into 3D XPoint
by Billy Tallis on December 15, 2017 12:15 PM ESTConclusion
As expected, the 480GB Optane SSD 900p performs about the same as the 280GB model. That makes it one of the overall fastest SSDs money can buy, but the Optane SSDs don't win in every test.
Higher performance is often an important selling point for higher capacity SSDs—and sub-par performance can be a major reason to avoid the smallest model in most product lines. This doesn't really apply to the Optane SSDs, so consumers are faced with the simpler question of how much fast storage they really want to pay for. As the most expensive "consumer" SSDs on a per-GB basis, the Optane SSDs force potential buyers to consider just how much blazing fast storage they actually need. I'm currently using an Optane SSD in one of my machines as a cache in front of a RAID array of hard drives. For this use case, even the 280GB model is larger than necessary. But as a primary storage device, the 480GB model would definitely feel less crowded.
Given the high price per GB of the Optane SSDs so far, the upcoming 960 GB and 1.5 TB models of the Optane SSD are going to be an even tougher sell: The market for $1200+ SSDs is pretty small, and very few users actually need a full TB of data within ten microsecond's reach.
Our first round of power measurements of the Optane SSD 900p showed what we expected: the Optane SSD 900p requires far more power than M.2 NVMe SSDs, and usually ends up being less efficient than a good M.2 SSD in spite of the great performance of the Optane SSD. It's hard to score well on efficiency with an idle power draw of over 3.5W. The Optane SSD 900p did score a clear efficiency win for random reads at low queue depths, where its performance advantage over flash-based SSDs is greatest.
Don't hold your breath for a M.2 version of the 900p, or anything with performance close to the 900p. Future Optane products will require different controllers in order to offer significantly different performance characteristics. Higher sequential performance to compete against the top flash-based SSDs will require a higher channel count, making for a more expensive drive with an even larger and more power-hungry controller. Lower power consumption will require serious performance compromises. In the near term, we're much more likely to see a new controller that's a step up from the Optane Memory M.2's single channel, but not large enough to rule out using the M.2 form factor. A three or four channel controller should be able to fit within a M.2 card's physical, electrical and thermal limits, but would offer much lower performance than this Optane SSD 900p.
| 250-280 GB | 480-512 GB | 1TB | 2TB | |
| Samsung 960 EVO | $127.99 (51¢/GB) | $240.00 (48¢/GB) | $449.99 (45¢/GB) | |
| Samsung 960 Pro | $289.99 (57¢/GB) | $619.00 (60¢/GB) | $1227.00 (60¢/GB) | |
| Intel Optane SSD 900p AIC | $389.99 (139¢/GB) | $599.99 (125¢/GB) | ||
| Intel Optane SSD 900p U.2 | $369.99 (132¢/GB) |
For the most part, the Optane SSDs are holding to their MSRPs, leaving them more than twice as expensive per GB as the fastest NAND flash based SSDs. They're a niche product in the same vein as the extreme capacity models like Samsung's 2TB 960 PRO and 4TB 850 EVO. But where the benefits of expanded capacity are easy to assess, the performance benefits of the Optane SSD are more subtle. For most ordinary and even relatively heavy desktop workloads, high-end flash storage is fast enough that further improvements are barely noticeable.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
69 Comments
View All Comments
thestryker - Friday, December 15, 2017 - link
I'm curious if the power consumption on the u.2 version would be any different.Any chances of Intel hooking AnandTech up with a u.2 version? I know the storage bench system doesn't have u.2, but I'm sure there's a system around which does. I believe there's also a sku with m.2 to u.2 adapter also.
Billy Tallis - Friday, December 15, 2017 - link
The U.2 drive uses the same 12V supply as the add-in card, unlike SATA SSDs that use 5V. Any differences in power consumption would probably be minor variations due to different operating temperature.CheapSushi - Friday, December 15, 2017 - link
It's been so satisfying to see all the Optane haters, dismissers, general naysayers and "meh, ___ is good enuff" crowd, who pretend to be enthusiasts, finally backtracking on their comments about it. Good times.tricomp - Saturday, December 16, 2017 - link
Can't wait seeing my customer's jaws dropping... I build heavy multi-core workstations for 3D and post production. Using 480 jet like this for the OS is something they will truly appreciatemapesdhs - Monday, December 18, 2017 - link
Responsiveness, etc. with pro apps wasn't tested here. Where's the evidence it would be any better than a 960 Pro? I'd be more interested in a Puget Systems review with real world situations.tricomp - Monday, December 18, 2017 - link
I agree with mapesdhs. The main strength of this unit should be tested and compared, not to mention - mentioned - in an article called "deeper diving into 3D Xpoint"lilmoe - Saturday, December 16, 2017 - link
Pardon the ignorance, but is can XPoint memory packages run on lower voltages, or is operation dependent on a single constant voltage setting? Are there any plans for low-power based XPoint like LPDDR or DDRL? If so, I wonder how much performance and latency would degrade.As it is, these will never be able to compete with NAND in terms of power. Lots of users (like) me want this kind of power on the go. Samsung and others are simply NOT trying anymore. I've REALLY delayed purchasing a mobile workstation till these technologies get sorted out and it's clear for me what type of expansion I'll need for compatibility.
wanderer66 - Saturday, December 16, 2017 - link
There won't be mainstream memory modules until late next year, based on what I've read. I wouldn't count on seeing mobile workstation/laptop capability until 2019 or 2020, and that depends on several things: 2nd or 3rd gen optane modules using less power (due to die shrinkage), and a reference design from Intel that supports them on that kind of motherboard. Even then count on them consuming 10-15 watts for a loaded configuration.wanderer66 - Saturday, December 16, 2017 - link
Two things: This is first gen Optane architecture. *First Gen* sisters and brothers... In the next several years, performance will evolve as the controllers improve (greater parallelism and other performance tweaks), power usage will decrease as process optimization and die shrinkage improves, and the design moves beyond being able to use NVMe as the interface, which it will.Second, 550k iops. That's mind-blowing, really. This may not be hugely important to single-user workstations, but in the hosting/cloud markets, this is one of the largest leaps that can be made..
In five years time, Optane will be to flash SSDs what flash SSDs are to HDDs today.
djayjp - Sunday, December 17, 2017 - link
Would *really* like to see real world testing, not traces. In such tests no difference is ever apparent between the bargain basement SSDs and the absolute top tier, thus the current tests AT uses are nonsense.