Specs for Samsung's Potential Optane Killer

[DooKey]

Samsung is going to compete with Intel in the Z-Nand market and attempt to take some of the Optane business away from them. This Register article compares the Samsung SZ985 to the Optane P4800X and the results are surprising. Samsung may have a winner here and the rest of us might get cheaper/faster Z-Nand drives as a result. Isn't competition a wonderful thing?

The Samsung drive has a higher random read IOPS rating than the P4800X, but it has an even larger advantage in random write IOPS, which is emphasised in the sequential read/write bandwidth numbers where it is two and a half to three times better.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

So the only thing left is longevity and if intels card can be raided.

 

[RealBeast]

Perhaps they made an error on the little comparison chart (I mean they're no [H] so mistakes will happen there), listing Intel R/W IOPS at 550K and Samsung at 750K/170K and then saying:

"The Samsung drive has a higher random read IOPS rating than the P4800X, but it has an even larger advantage in random write IOPS, which is emphasised [sic] in the sequential read/write bandwidth numbers where it is two and a half to three times better."

So they show a slower random write number (or perhaps left out an Intel number) and then stir in some sequential statement with no numbers?

Anyway, it will be great if Samsung markets this at prices for the prosumer market.

 

[gxp500]

Perhaps they made an error on the little comparison chart (I mean they're no [H] so mistakes will happen there), listing Intel R/W IOPS at 550K and Samsung at 750K/170K and then saying:

"The Samsung drive has a higher random read IOPS rating than the P4800X, but it has an even larger advantage in random write IOPS, which is emphasised [sic] in the sequential read/write bandwidth numbers where it is two and a half to three times better."

So they show a slower random write number (or perhaps left out an Intel number) and then stir in some sequential statement with no numbers?

Anyway, it will be great if Samsung markets this at prices for the prosumer market.

Ya I don't get it either where he got those imaginary numbers from, but when you're the author I guess you can make anything up.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Ya I don't get it either where he got those imaginary numbers from, but when you're the author I guess you can make anything up.

Worst and best case scenario numbers?

 

[Jim Kim]

Isn't competition a wonderful thing?

^This

 

[cyberguyz]

I am not a fan of Optane for the simple reason that if you are not running a least x2## chipset AND a 7th gen core CPU you get cockblocked. I really hate companies being proprietary like that!.
I really hope Samsung keeps our supported platforms options open so thers like AMD users and older platforms get some optane-like love too.

 

[craigdt]

I wish the best to both Intel and Samsung in their competitive endeavors.

I really want a Optane *something in my next build, but the current offerngs are either server grade, or Best Buy grade.

 

[daglesj]

Just a shame NTFS is so old and small file transfers will still plummet to 340kbps...

As I've said elsewhere the hardware is willing but the software is weak.

 

[OutOfPhase]

I wish the best to both Intel and Samsung in their competitive endeavors.

I really want a Optane *something in my next build, but the current offerngs are either server grade, or Best Buy grade.

Hah, I love the term Best Buy grade.

 

[kandrey89]

Article is shit, written by a lazy eye. Conclusions are drawn from misinterpreted numbers, saying Samsung is better 2-3 times when it's the opposite, Samsung is worse for WRITE IOPS by 2-3 times, 170K vs 550K. Description says Samsung is 120us latensy, but the chart shows 12-20us, wtf?!

 

[Stimpy88]

As usual, I’m sure the photocopier at Samsung has been extremely busy since Intel released Optane. But I hate Intel as much as I hate Samsung, so they can fight it out between them, and I’ll pick up some cheap next-gen memory...

 

[Shintai]

P4800X delivers 550K at a 100% span in both read and write. The SZ985 delivers 750K read and 170K write in a more relaxed setting. Latency is 60-100% higher on the SZ985. The PM1725a Samsung uses as compare with TLC NAND does 1080K/170K while being trashed by the SZ985. Says a lot

The drive also seems to depend a lot on cache. Hence the big pile of capacitors and weak write.

In short, its not even close to Optane/QuintX. Not a surprise either since they just used SLC NAND using different techniquies to offset the weakness.

Calling it Z-NAND is nothing more than PR made in Powerpoint.

And the drive was known since march.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11206/samsung-shows-off-a-z-ssd

 

[ecmaster76]

I am not a fan of Optane for the simple reason that if you are not running a least x2## chipset AND a 7th gen core CPU you get cockblocked. I really hate companies being proprietary like that!.
I really hope Samsung keeps our supported platforms options open so thers like AMD users and older platforms get some optane-like love too.

You are thinking of the dinky lil cache module they released months ago. We don't care about the chipset lock-in because it sucks and isn't worth the money vs a cheap SSD.

The Optane SSDs can (and should) be used anywhere

Even if Samsung is a bit faster I'll probably stick to Intel for the reliability and support. Hopefully prices comed down at least.

 

[OutOfPhase]

Remember folks - Optane (more specifically, XPoint memory) is not flash. The OP is incorrect indicating optane is in a "Z-nand market" .

"Z-NAND" is still NAND flash. XPoint is nonvolatile resistive memory, and has very different characteristics. Incredibly low latency and a very different write endurance model make it something which could have a few different roles in a system, not just as a SSD. Yes, that is a clear first step for it, but it's a bit of a new thing which is pretty exciting to follow.