WEBVTT

00:00:00.030 --> 00:00:08.189
SSDs are finally at the point where their costs have fallen and their

00:00:04.980 --> 00:00:11.580
capacities are so high that they are

00:00:08.189 --> 00:00:12.679
truly a replacement for the hard drives

00:00:11.580 --> 00:00:21.769
of your which raises the question then what of

00:00:17.640 --> 00:00:23.359
the heck was Intel thinking releasing

00:00:21.769 --> 00:00:30.720
expensive 58 and

00:00:26.150 --> 00:00:34.290
118 Gigabyte SSDs for performance

00:00:30.720 --> 00:00:35.690
enthusiasts in the year 2018 I'm gonna

00:00:34.290 --> 00:00:41.309
level with you we're still not sure but we're gonna

00:00:39.390 --> 00:00:48.750
walk you through what we do know about the Intel octane SSD 800 P

00:00:45.410 --> 00:00:50.969
after this message from cable mod K blog

00:00:48.750 --> 00:00:55.350
Pro Series cables use extra thick wires for a fuller more robust look merged

00:00:53.579 --> 00:00:59.010
terminals on the component side of each cable have been eliminated for a cleaner

00:00:56.879 --> 00:01:03.829
build check them out below

00:01:06.280 --> 00:01:12.020
so just like it's smaller accelerator

00:01:09.440 --> 00:01:17.030
siblings the opt-in 800 P comes in a standard m dot two form factor which

00:01:14.240 --> 00:01:22.160
allows it to work as either a normal storage drive in any machine with NVMe

00:01:19.490 --> 00:01:28.280
or this is unofficial though in supported systems as an accelerator for

00:01:24.680 --> 00:01:31.190
your hard drive the caveat at this time

00:01:28.280 --> 00:01:35.509
though is that it only does that on your boot drive so as

00:01:33.070 --> 00:01:40.430
enthusiasts around here anyway we would really like to see more flexibility in

00:01:38.300 --> 00:01:46.130
the future for our applications like booting off of an SSD like a normal one

00:01:43.310 --> 00:01:51.590
and then using a large octane module to accelerate maybe like a gigantic steam

00:01:48.860 --> 00:01:57.289
library on a high-capacity secondary drive of course until isn't marketing

00:01:53.750 --> 00:02:00.080
the 800 P as an accelerator anyway but

00:01:57.289 --> 00:02:05.210
that didn't stop us from feeling like we needed to ask

00:02:01.179 --> 00:02:07.190
what are these things for them and their

00:02:05.210 --> 00:02:14.630
response was kind of baffling they were like well you know we feel like 58 gigs

00:02:10.429 --> 00:02:16.690
is big enough for a dedicated boot drive

00:02:14.630 --> 00:02:21.320
and I mean yeah

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

00:02:26.239 --> 00:02:34.459
hundred and thirty dollars on a storage solution by that point that wouldn't

00:02:31.790 --> 00:02:40.910
even have enough additional space left over to store the hibernation file of a

00:02:38.390 --> 00:02:48.100
high-end system with 32 gigs of RAM these days now a hundred and eighteen

00:02:43.730 --> 00:02:50.480
gigs is obviously quite a bit better but

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

00:02:55.250 --> 00:03:02.680
of the capacity that I would get with a decent NAND based SATA SSD

00:03:01.090 --> 00:03:09.019
so let's go ahead and fire it up shall we

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

00:03:12.200 --> 00:03:16.520
drive get some benchmarks fired up here shall

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

00:03:20.510 --> 00:03:28.490
960 Pro we're getting slightly higher random reads and then significantly

00:03:24.890 --> 00:03:31.370
inferior random writes but at Q depth

00:03:28.490 --> 00:03:36.710
one obtains random read performance is over triple that's really impressive

00:03:34.130 --> 00:03:40.760
given that this is closer to what most average users would be experiencing in

00:03:39.140 --> 00:03:45.020
their day-to-day lives moving on to performance test op team

00:03:43.190 --> 00:03:50.900
triples the speed of our Samsung and also has significantly lower latency

00:03:48.110 --> 00:03:57.710
eight milliseconds is a full frame delay at 120 Hertz where our SATA SSD is over

00:03:54.050 --> 00:03:59.960
two frames at sixty Hertz adding a Lucan

00:03:57.710 --> 00:04:04.670
file copy in the background our op tain drive maintains its lead but not by

00:04:02.000 --> 00:04:10.340
quite as much moving on to Microsoft Word our average scores put-up tay ninh

00:04:07.130 --> 00:04:12.440
at just over a second lead in load times

00:04:10.340 --> 00:04:16.610
with excel and powerpoint yielding smaller gains launching from obtain

00:04:14.390 --> 00:04:22.160
though it should be noted that every configuration is fast enough for normal

00:04:19.880 --> 00:04:27.170
people who don't launch ten documents at once Google Chrome launches marginally

00:04:25.010 --> 00:04:32.030
faster while Adobe Premiere saw just under a second shaved off its load time

00:04:29.410 --> 00:04:37.640
finally and this will be unsurprising if you saw our opt-in 900p video doom the

00:04:35.330 --> 00:04:43.910
only big game that would comfortably fit on even our larger module was hardly

00:04:40.430 --> 00:04:47.420
different at all okay so in spite of

00:04:43.910 --> 00:04:50.390
using only two PCI Express Lanes versus

00:04:47.420 --> 00:04:55.730
the four for the samsung 960 pro that we used as our benchmark NVMe drive the

00:04:53.150 --> 00:05:03.130
octane 800 piece performances as the kids say think on fleek so maybe the

00:04:59.180 --> 00:05:06.560
solution then to our capacity woes is

00:05:03.130 --> 00:05:07.750
another one let's try running them in

00:05:06.560 --> 00:05:16.580
raid zero alright then bippity Boppity

00:05:12.340 --> 00:05:18.560
done now compared to a single drive the

00:05:16.580 --> 00:05:23.420
numbers look pretty good in our synthetic tests with only slight

00:05:20.780 --> 00:05:28.900
regressions at a key depth of one where raid really shines though is in the

00:05:25.610 --> 00:05:31.659
responsiveness check that latency and

00:05:28.900 --> 00:05:37.590
then even better check out the max latency while we have our file copy

00:05:34.210 --> 00:05:40.180
running that's just over one frame at

00:05:37.590 --> 00:05:46.810
240 Hertz set what I would consider to be an unreasonable load on a boot drive

00:05:44.189 --> 00:05:50.740
unfortunately though we do see some regressions in most of our program

00:05:49.000 --> 00:05:55.000
launch tests with the notable exception of Adobe premier which demonstrates what

00:05:53.379 --> 00:06:00.129
Intel's been saying all along that obtained is not about raw throughput but

00:05:57.669 --> 00:06:05.460
more about very low latency which is why you won't find how many megabytes per

00:06:02.199 --> 00:06:08.110
second it does anywhere on the Box

00:06:05.460 --> 00:06:16.509
bringing us then back to our original question maybe you can help us answer it

00:06:10.770 --> 00:06:18.639
who is this for what is it for at a

00:06:16.509 --> 00:06:25.150
hundred and thirty bucks for fifty eight gigs and 200 for a hundred and eighteen

00:06:21.819 --> 00:06:28.509
gigs the pricing is not exactly

00:06:25.150 --> 00:06:31.020
competitive it's too small for real

00:06:28.509 --> 00:06:37.210
professional work or even mainstream consumer use and raid with all of its

00:06:34.870 --> 00:06:43.690
trade-offs honestly isn't a great solution because it doesn't solve the

00:06:39.129 --> 00:06:47.169
price as for the performance I don't

00:06:43.690 --> 00:06:50.560
knows sorry guys I mean this this is not

00:06:47.169 --> 00:06:53.589
like the move from hard drives to SSDs

00:06:50.560 --> 00:06:55.750
where I was ending up in like YouTube

00:06:53.589 --> 00:07:02.439
comments shouting matches with people who didn't get why I was so excited to

00:06:58.870 --> 00:07:05.770
pay five X for one-fifth of the capacity

00:07:02.439 --> 00:07:09.240
or whatever it was octane is faster it

00:07:05.770 --> 00:07:12.580
is but the way that Intel's pitching it

00:07:09.240 --> 00:07:14.979
it's not faster in a noticeable way at

00:07:12.580 --> 00:07:20.199
least not for consumers the data center is a whole other story so

00:07:17.550 --> 00:07:24.300
we've seen other publications talk about using it as a scratch disk in a

00:07:22.389 --> 00:07:28.839
workstation or something like that obtained does have higher write

00:07:27.039 --> 00:07:35.319
endurance than the NAND flash in traditional SSDs but then in my mind the

00:07:32.339 --> 00:07:38.940
900p with its wider interface and much higher capacities is the product for

00:07:37.569 --> 00:07:44.050
that maybe with RAM price being what it is

00:07:41.740 --> 00:07:48.610
the 800 peak who would make sense as like a cheaper way to expand system

00:07:46.000 --> 00:07:56.020
memory I'm not sure about that one either it sounds like a driver nightmare

00:07:51.510 --> 00:07:59.050
now in the future as prices fall pull I

00:07:56.020 --> 00:08:02.260
will happily take my better system

00:07:59.050 --> 00:08:04.720
responsiveness but for now I have a hard

00:08:02.260 --> 00:08:10.120
time recommending paying the extra for this particular product as a boot drive

00:08:07.240 --> 00:08:15.910
so the conclusion then is good technology great technology but still

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

00:08:19.060 --> 00:08:27.340
comments if you disagree it's making of things to disagree about

00:08:24.520 --> 00:08:32.110
the way we integrate sponsors the Thermaltake p90 is an open frame

00:08:29.440 --> 00:08:36.040
tempered glass mid tower case it split up into three compartments for your

00:08:33.580 --> 00:08:40.030
graphics card your power supply and your other cooling components it's got five

00:08:38.410 --> 00:08:43.780
millimeters thick tempered glass side panels on two sides of the case that let

00:08:42.310 --> 00:08:48.850
you put your system on display and provides three-way placement layouts

00:08:46.240 --> 00:08:53.980
wall mountable horizontal laying and vertical standing it's got seven drive

00:08:51.220 --> 00:08:57.640
bays with modular drive trays and high liquid cooling expandability check it

00:08:56.200 --> 00:09:02.410
out today at the link in the video description so thanks for watching guys if you

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

00:09:05.440 --> 00:09:09.910
where to buy the stuff we featured at the link below also link down there

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

00:09:13.480 --> 00:09:22.710
join quite on set