1
00:00:00,030 --> 00:00:08,189
SSDs are finally at the point where their costs have fallen and their

2
00:00:04,980 --> 00:00:11,580
capacities are so high that they are

3
00:00:08,189 --> 00:00:12,679
truly a replacement for the hard drives

4
00:00:11,580 --> 00:00:21,769
of your which raises the question then what of

5
00:00:17,640 --> 00:00:23,359
the heck was Intel thinking releasing

6
00:00:21,769 --> 00:00:30,720
expensive 58 and

7
00:00:26,150 --> 00:00:34,290
118 Gigabyte SSDs for performance

8
00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:35,690
enthusiasts in the year 2018 I'm gonna

9
00:00:34,290 --> 00:00:41,309
level with you we're still not sure but we're gonna

10
00:00:39,390 --> 00:00:48,750
walk you through what we do know about the Intel octane SSD 800 P

11
00:00:45,410 --> 00:00:50,969
after this message from cable mod K blog

12
00:00:48,750 --> 00:00:55,350
Pro Series cables use extra thick wires for a fuller more robust look merged

13
00:00:53,579 --> 00:00:59,010
terminals on the component side of each cable have been eliminated for a cleaner

14
00:00:56,879 --> 00:01:03,829
build check them out below

15
00:01:06,280 --> 00:01:12,020
so just like it's smaller accelerator

16
00:01:09,440 --> 00:01:17,030
siblings the opt-in 800 P comes in a standard m dot two form factor which

17
00:01:14,240 --> 00:01:22,160
allows it to work as either a normal storage drive in any machine with NVMe

18
00:01:19,490 --> 00:01:28,280
or this is unofficial though in supported systems as an accelerator for

19
00:01:24,680 --> 00:01:31,190
your hard drive the caveat at this time

20
00:01:28,280 --> 00:01:35,509
though is that it only does that on your boot drive so as

21
00:01:33,070 --> 00:01:40,430
enthusiasts around here anyway we would really like to see more flexibility in

22
00:01:38,300 --> 00:01:46,130
the future for our applications like booting off of an SSD like a normal one

23
00:01:43,310 --> 00:01:51,590
and then using a large octane module to accelerate maybe like a gigantic steam

24
00:01:48,860 --> 00:01:57,289
library on a high-capacity secondary drive of course until isn't marketing

25
00:01:53,750 --> 00:02:00,080
the 800 P as an accelerator anyway but

26
00:01:57,289 --> 00:02:05,210
that didn't stop us from feeling like we needed to ask

27
00:02:01,179 --> 00:02:07,190
what are these things for them and their

28
00:02:05,210 --> 00:02:14,630
response was kind of baffling they were like well you know we feel like 58 gigs

29
00:02:10,429 --> 00:02:16,690
is big enough for a dedicated boot drive

30
00:02:14,630 --> 00:02:21,320
and I mean yeah

31
00:02:18,790 --> 00:02:28,970
technically you could install Windows 10 on 58 gigs but I mean you'd have spent a

32
00:02:26,239 --> 00:02:34,459
hundred and thirty dollars on a storage solution by that point that wouldn't

33
00:02:31,790 --> 00:02:40,910
even have enough additional space left over to store the hibernation file of a

34
00:02:38,390 --> 00:02:48,100
high-end system with 32 gigs of RAM these days now a hundred and eighteen

35
00:02:43,730 --> 00:02:50,480
gigs is obviously quite a bit better but

36
00:02:48,100 --> 00:02:57,410
even then you're gonna have to be giving me a lot of performance to give up 3/4

37
00:02:55,250 --> 00:03:02,680
of the capacity that I would get with a decent NAND based SATA SSD

38
00:03:01,090 --> 00:03:09,019
so let's go ahead and fire it up shall we

39
00:03:06,250 --> 00:03:13,120
so this is it this is the opt-in experience we are booted off our 118 gig

40
00:03:12,200 --> 00:03:16,520
drive get some benchmarks fired up here shall

41
00:03:15,590 --> 00:03:22,790
we so starting with crystal disk mark at a key depth of eight compared to a samsung

42
00:03:20,510 --> 00:03:28,490
960 Pro we're getting slightly higher random reads and then significantly

43
00:03:24,890 --> 00:03:31,370
inferior random writes but at Q depth

44
00:03:28,490 --> 00:03:36,710
one obtains random read performance is over triple that's really impressive

45
00:03:34,130 --> 00:03:40,760
given that this is closer to what most average users would be experiencing in

46
00:03:39,140 --> 00:03:45,020
their day-to-day lives moving on to performance test op team

47
00:03:43,190 --> 00:03:50,900
triples the speed of our Samsung and also has significantly lower latency

48
00:03:48,110 --> 00:03:57,710
eight milliseconds is a full frame delay at 120 Hertz where our SATA SSD is over

49
00:03:54,050 --> 00:03:59,960
two frames at sixty Hertz adding a Lucan

50
00:03:57,710 --> 00:04:04,670
file copy in the background our op tain drive maintains its lead but not by

51
00:04:02,000 --> 00:04:10,340
quite as much moving on to Microsoft Word our average scores put-up tay ninh

52
00:04:07,130 --> 00:04:12,440
at just over a second lead in load times

53
00:04:10,340 --> 00:04:16,610
with excel and powerpoint yielding smaller gains launching from obtain

54
00:04:14,390 --> 00:04:22,160
though it should be noted that every configuration is fast enough for normal

55
00:04:19,880 --> 00:04:27,170
people who don't launch ten documents at once Google Chrome launches marginally

56
00:04:25,010 --> 00:04:32,030
faster while Adobe Premiere saw just under a second shaved off its load time

57
00:04:29,410 --> 00:04:37,640
finally and this will be unsurprising if you saw our opt-in 900p video doom the

58
00:04:35,330 --> 00:04:43,910
only big game that would comfortably fit on even our larger module was hardly

59
00:04:40,430 --> 00:04:47,420
different at all okay so in spite of

60
00:04:43,910 --> 00:04:50,390
using only two PCI Express Lanes versus

61
00:04:47,420 --> 00:04:55,730
the four for the samsung 960 pro that we used as our benchmark NVMe drive the

62
00:04:53,150 --> 00:05:03,130
octane 800 piece performances as the kids say think on fleek so maybe the

63
00:04:59,180 --> 00:05:06,560
solution then to our capacity woes is

64
00:05:03,130 --> 00:05:07,750
another one let's try running them in

65
00:05:06,560 --> 00:05:16,580
raid zero alright then bippity Boppity

66
00:05:12,340 --> 00:05:18,560
done now compared to a single drive the

67
00:05:16,580 --> 00:05:23,420
numbers look pretty good in our synthetic tests with only slight

68
00:05:20,780 --> 00:05:28,900
regressions at a key depth of one where raid really shines though is in the

69
00:05:25,610 --> 00:05:31,659
responsiveness check that latency and

70
00:05:28,900 --> 00:05:37,590
then even better check out the max latency while we have our file copy

71
00:05:34,210 --> 00:05:40,180
running that's just over one frame at

72
00:05:37,590 --> 00:05:46,810
240 Hertz set what I would consider to be an unreasonable load on a boot drive

73
00:05:44,189 --> 00:05:50,740
unfortunately though we do see some regressions in most of our program

74
00:05:49,000 --> 00:05:55,000
launch tests with the notable exception of Adobe premier which demonstrates what

75
00:05:53,379 --> 00:06:00,129
Intel's been saying all along that obtained is not about raw throughput but

76
00:05:57,669 --> 00:06:05,460
more about very low latency which is why you won't find how many megabytes per

77
00:06:02,199 --> 00:06:08,110
second it does anywhere on the Box

78
00:06:05,460 --> 00:06:16,509
bringing us then back to our original question maybe you can help us answer it

79
00:06:10,770 --> 00:06:18,639
who is this for what is it for at a

80
00:06:16,509 --> 00:06:25,150
hundred and thirty bucks for fifty eight gigs and 200 for a hundred and eighteen

81
00:06:21,819 --> 00:06:28,509
gigs the pricing is not exactly

82
00:06:25,150 --> 00:06:31,020
competitive it's too small for real

83
00:06:28,509 --> 00:06:37,210
professional work or even mainstream consumer use and raid with all of its

84
00:06:34,870 --> 00:06:43,690
trade-offs honestly isn't a great solution because it doesn't solve the

85
00:06:39,129 --> 00:06:47,169
price as for the performance I don't

86
00:06:43,690 --> 00:06:50,560
knows sorry guys I mean this this is not

87
00:06:47,169 --> 00:06:53,589
like the move from hard drives to SSDs

88
00:06:50,560 --> 00:06:55,750
where I was ending up in like YouTube

89
00:06:53,589 --> 00:07:02,439
comments shouting matches with people who didn't get why I was so excited to

90
00:06:58,870 --> 00:07:05,770
pay five X for one-fifth of the capacity

91
00:07:02,439 --> 00:07:09,240
or whatever it was octane is faster it

92
00:07:05,770 --> 00:07:12,580
is but the way that Intel's pitching it

93
00:07:09,240 --> 00:07:14,979
it's not faster in a noticeable way at

94
00:07:12,580 --> 00:07:20,199
least not for consumers the data center is a whole other story so

95
00:07:17,550 --> 00:07:24,300
we've seen other publications talk about using it as a scratch disk in a

96
00:07:22,389 --> 00:07:28,839
workstation or something like that obtained does have higher write

97
00:07:27,039 --> 00:07:35,319
endurance than the NAND flash in traditional SSDs but then in my mind the

98
00:07:32,339 --> 00:07:38,940
900p with its wider interface and much higher capacities is the product for

99
00:07:37,569 --> 00:07:44,050
that maybe with RAM price being what it is

100
00:07:41,740 --> 00:07:48,610
the 800 peak who would make sense as like a cheaper way to expand system

101
00:07:46,000 --> 00:07:56,020
memory I'm not sure about that one either it sounds like a driver nightmare

102
00:07:51,510 --> 00:07:59,050
now in the future as prices fall pull I

103
00:07:56,020 --> 00:08:02,260
will happily take my better system

104
00:07:59,050 --> 00:08:04,720
responsiveness but for now I have a hard

105
00:08:02,260 --> 00:08:10,120
time recommending paying the extra for this particular product as a boot drive

106
00:08:07,240 --> 00:08:15,910
so the conclusion then is good technology great technology but still

107
00:08:14,170 --> 00:08:21,840
looking for a reason why people might want to buy this one let us know in the

108
00:08:19,060 --> 00:08:27,340
comments if you disagree it's making of things to disagree about

109
00:08:24,520 --> 00:08:32,110
the way we integrate sponsors the Thermaltake p90 is an open frame

110
00:08:29,440 --> 00:08:36,040
tempered glass mid tower case it split up into three compartments for your

111
00:08:33,580 --> 00:08:40,030
graphics card your power supply and your other cooling components it's got five

112
00:08:38,410 --> 00:08:43,780
millimeters thick tempered glass side panels on two sides of the case that let

113
00:08:42,310 --> 00:08:48,850
you put your system on display and provides three-way placement layouts

114
00:08:46,240 --> 00:08:53,980
wall mountable horizontal laying and vertical standing it's got seven drive

115
00:08:51,220 --> 00:08:57,640
bays with modular drive trays and high liquid cooling expandability check it

116
00:08:56,200 --> 00:09:02,410
out today at the link in the video description so thanks for watching guys if you

117
00:09:01,090 --> 00:09:06,790
dislike this video you can hit that button but if you liked it hit like get subscribed maybe consider checking out

118
00:09:05,440 --> 00:09:09,910
where to buy the stuff we featured at the link below also link down there

119
00:09:08,980 --> 00:09:16,480
we'll have our merch store which has cool shirts like this one as well as our community forum which you should totally

120
00:09:13,480 --> 00:09:22,710
join quite on set