Intel fills in the blanks on Optane 905P SSDs

We wrote just a couple days ago about the surprise appearance of Intel Optane 905P 3D XPoint SSDs at Newegg and other online retailers. Newegg's listings were pretty short on technical details, but the blue silicon goliath came forward today with more data about these enthusiast-targeted storage devices. The manufacturer is making versions of the drives with PCIe slot and U.2 connectors. Units in the larger PCIe card format come in capacities up to 960 GB, while the smaller 2.5″ U.2 versions top out at 480 GB.

Intel says the Optane 905P drives are a dash faster than their 900P forebears. Sequential read speeds now reach a maximum of 2600 MB/s and write speeds go as fast as 2200 MB/s. 3D XPoint drives get to flex their muscles against regular SSDs when it comes to high QD1 performance, low latency in mixed workloads, fast random performance, and extended write endurance. The manufacturer claims the drives can perform up to 575,000 4K random read IOPS and 550,000 random write IOPS. While NAND-based drives are typically rated for somewhere between 0.5 and 2 drive writes per day (DWPD), the Optane 905P's rated endurance is considerably higher at 10 DWPD.

Besides dollars and cents, the other price to pay for this level of random I/O performance comes in the form of power consumption. The 960-GB model can draw an eye-popping 16.4 W when performing burst writes and a hefty-for-an-SSD 6 W when sitting idle. The 480-GB model isn't quite so thirsty, drawing up to 12.8 W when furiously writing and 3.3 W at idle. These power consumption figures might explain why the company isn't offering the drives in the popular M.2 form factor for now. For comparison's sake, Intel claims an active power draw of 3.75 W and an idle draw of 8 mW for its smaller, slower 3D XPoint Optane 800P drives. The manufacturer's mainstream, NAND-flash-based 600P 1-TB drive draws a claimed 100 mW under stress and 40 mW at idle.

Intel didn't provide any pricing or availability information, but the Optane 905P drives' brief appearance at Newegg suggests well-heeled buyers will be able to purchase them soon. The company did say Dell will start shipping new systems with Optane 905P drives this week. The manufacturer also says that Akitio will offer a special version of its Node Lite Thunderbolt 3 storage box with the 905P inside. Intel backs its Optane 905P SSDs with a five-year warranty, but specifically says that warranty is void if the drive is used in a “multi-user datacenter environment.”

Comments closed
    • JoeKiller
    • 1 year ago

    I would enjoy a shootout with the 900 and 905 and top end SSDs.

      • DancinJack
      • 1 year ago

      [url<]https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Storage/Intel-Optane-SSD-905P-960GB-NVMe-HHHL-SSD-Review-Bigger-XPoint/Performance-Compariso[/url<]

        • Takeshi7
        • 1 year ago

        Why did they only measure “burst” rates and not sustained random I/O? Seems like they have an agenda

          • DancinJack
          • 1 year ago

          Maybe read the rest of the review.

          [url<]https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Storage/Intel-Optane-SSD-905P-960GB-NVMe-HHHL-SSD-Review-Bigger-XPoint/PC-Perspective-Custom[/url<]

            • Takeshi7
            • 1 year ago

            So basically they admit they tested this drive in a way that it wasn’t designed for. Intel’s own material says it’s meant for “high endurance” workloads. Tom’s Hardware says “Intel bills the 905P as a workstation product designed to accelerate extended workloads.”

            burst workloads do not represent this use case.

            • DancinJack
            • 1 year ago

            I never said it did. I just don’t think you should criticize something without knowing what’s going on first.

      • Chrispy_
      • 1 year ago

      For the majority of tasks that a consumer reading this site would care about, the results would be like this:

      [list<][*<]OS drive performance = same as an SSD [/*<][*<]Bootup speed = slower, because of extra driver overhead [/*<][*<]Game loading time = same as an SSD [/*<][*<]RGBLED performance = same as an SSD [/*<][*<]Application loading time = same as an SSD [/*<][*<]Synthetic benchmark scores = [b<]OMGWOW TOTALLY WORTH SPENDING $1600 \o/[/b<] [/*<][*<]Performance per dollar = :'([/*<][/list<] I think you can safely ignore Optane unless you work with huge, transaction-heavy databases on a regular basis, or you would like to run so many VM's that you overwhelm the typical 90K IOPS of a regular SSD (and as someone who runs multiple enterprise test environments off a single SATA drive (Intel DC S4500) I don't think you can tag yourself as a 'normal consumer' at that point.

        • Takeshi7
        • 1 year ago

        The fact is that this drive can install Windows Updates faster than any other drive. And that’s a benefit all consumers can take advantage of.

          • chuckula
          • 1 year ago

          While the fact that the hardware is fast enough to paper over Microsoft’s incompetence is good for the hardware, the underlying suckitude of the Windows Update process still needs to be addressed.

            • Klimax
            • 1 year ago

            Id like to see you create better and stable update process…

        • JoeKiller
        • 1 year ago

        I got a 900P. Boot times went from 28 to 18 seconds. When joining games like tf2 I’m always first on. When joining fortnight I went from ~60-70th in game to 35th usually.

        When writing software in my IDE for and indexing the libraries the process feels immensely faster. I didn’t measure the last one.

        This is against an Intel 520.

        I’d think the target audience of this site would want this. PC enthusiast right? We’re the hot rod builders not the budget builders. Or maybe I’m an outlier. I understand value but i want to know what’s best.

          • JoeKiller
          • 1 year ago

          10 seconds of the boot is just the system posting as well.

          • Chrispy_
          • 1 year ago

          I think your machine was misconfigured in the first place then, and possibly still misconfigured now.

          UEFI booting W10 from a SATA SSD takes 7-8 seconds to logon, Windows 8.1 is around double that. The initialisation of the Optane drive adds two or three seconds and it might reclaim one of those on a W8.1 or W7 boot.

          You’re clearly using modern hardware in legacy mode, which was fine in 2005 but everyone has moved on. Sites that tested the 900P all stated that game loading times and windows bootup results are inseperable from NVMe SSDs and that SATA SSDs are a hair slower.

            • moose17145
            • 1 year ago

            TR’s load testing even indicated there will be effectively zero difference between NVMe and SATA in real world load times.

            And I understand what JoeKiller is getting at where we are kind of supposed to be the Hot Rod builders of the computer world… but I also understand the sentiment of not really wanting to spend as much money as one of these things costs given the minimal advantages it has on a typical desktop. I could very much see these being awesome if you are running the right type of workloads to take advantage of these.

            But for me, spending well over a grand for what will effectively be little more than a large (and extremely fast) game drive is a little hard to justify.

            Part of what a lot of us nerds also pride ourselves on too, is knowing we can build a computer that often times performs much faster than most normal peoples computers despite having less powerful hardware. Or knowing we can build a truly overpower PC for much less money than a boutique PC would cost.

            • Chrispy_
            • 1 year ago

            You get it, at least.

            $1600 (if the Amazon pricing is even remotely accurate for these things) for insignificant performance increase is only of appeal to ePeen braggists, and people with infinite money. The rest of us will take an NVMe or even SATA drive and either pocket the remaining $1250 or spend it on 64GB DDR4, a GTX1080Ti or some kind of awesome PCMR ultrawide G-sync monitor.

            • Takeshi7
            • 1 year ago

            An Intel 520 is far from a state-of-the-art SSD, too. SO maybe that could be a part of it.

            • Chrispy_
            • 1 year ago

            I just tested W10 full UEFI boot from “off” (I disable fast startup that turns shutdowns into hibernates) and it was 6 seconds from power button to logon screen.

            This was an Ivy bridge chip in a Z77 board booting off a nearly-full 250GB Samsung 830 drive. Properly OLD hardware. Anyone getting boot times that are 4-5x longer than that needs to fix their BIOS and startup options, it’s sure as hell not related to the performance of the SSD.

            • Takeshi7
            • 1 year ago

            It could also be the motherboard he’s using. I’ve found that the higher end motherboards with more features take longer to boot just because they have so many more components they have to initialize when they boot up.

            My high end gaming PC with BIOS RAID and several 3rd party storage/USB/peripheral controllers takes much longer to post/boot than my stripped out mining motherboard that has almost no extraneous components.

    • DavidC1
    • 1 year ago

    “The manufacturer’s mainstream, NAND-flash-based 600P 1-TB drive draws a claimed 100 mW under stress and 40 mW at idle.”

    No, 100mW for 600p is what they call typical, or more commonly used term average power. That’s when idle states are taken into account, and in consumer usage these drives are mostly idle.

    3.75W for 800P isn’t average power, but akin to TDP for CPUs. It’s power use under load.

    • ddarko
    • 1 year ago

    [quote<]Intel didn't provide any pricing or availability information, but the Optane 905P drives' brief appearance at Newegg suggests well-heeled buyers will be able to purchase them soon[/quote<] They're gone on sale at Newegg today. They have been going in and out of stock during the day. The prices for the 480GB and 960GB drives are $599 and $1299, respectively.

    • meerkt
    • 1 year ago

    Why would it need 3-6W at idle, when the 800P makes do with 8mW?

    And no “multi-user datacenter environment”? I thought endurance was supposed to be better than flash, especially considering the 10 DWPD spec.

      • moose17145
      • 1 year ago

      Wrong product for that. This is the consumer product.

      For datacenter environments, Intel has other, even more expensive (and also not yet 10nm) Optane offerings.

      • DavidC1
      • 1 year ago

      The 800P is mainstream and has NVMe idle power management features, the 900P and 905P doesn’t. The Optane Memory drives without the idle power management had an idle power of 1W. Not that you’ll care too much on a add-on card that’s big as some graphics cards.

    • chuckula
    • 1 year ago

    OK Intel, I appreciate that these products are massively overpriced and power-hungry.

    But I need massively overpriced, power-hungry, [b<]and 10nm[/b<] to really be happy here!

      • Neutronbeam
      • 1 year ago

      You’ve always been needy Chuck.

        • MOSFET
        • 1 year ago

        And a little nerdy.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This