Bad. They're trying to break the laws of physics

Bad. They're trying to break the laws of physics.

Where do I report them?

No one. There's no laws against world destruction.

it's good in the sense that tech will continue progressing somewhat. it's bad in that Intel seems to put money in weird places.

I mean, faster is always better but most people on Sup Forums will probably never see a benefit over current gen SSDs.

Fuckin intel with their incremental upgrades the Jews did this

>They’re aimed at the huddled masses who still use traditional, spinning-platter hard drives.

This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard. The "Huddled masses" don't have a fucking M.2 slot on their motherboard, they don't even know what a motherboard is. Selling this as some sort of "Hyper readyboost" is goddamn retarded. Anyone still using a HDD would be way better off just getting a cheap 120 GB SSD and clean installing Winderp 10 onto it.

>One limitation of Optane Memory could be a deal-breaker for many users: Intel says Optane Memory will be tied to Kaby Lake CPUs, and not just the associated 200-series chipsets. That means, for example, if you have a Z270 motherboard with a Skylake Core i7-6700K in it, it won’t work. Intel said it wanted to limit the validation work it had to do. We’d also guess that by limiting Optane to Kaby Lake, Intel gets to eliminate supporting Windows 7 and Windows 8.1.

Pretty pointless honestly for consumers right now. It's very low latency - lower latency than even the best M.2 SSDs, but I can't think of a reason to get this over a larger SSD or more RAM as a consumer. The latency difference isn't going to be felt that much with the average workloads our computers would see.

It's like readyboost, but better. It's like hybrid HDDs, but better.

(It's not actually better. It's also way more expensive.)

Optane is cool shit, but not worth it until the price/GB goes down. When you can buy 120GB Optanes for ~$100 is when it will be worth it. Probably another 2-3 years from now will be the opportune time.

You still can't install shit onto it. You have to rely on Intel's software to decide what goes on it and what doesn't. It will remain a ghetto cache device until they change this.

>You still can't install shit onto it.
Yes, you absolutely can.
If you stick it in your system without enabling their cache software, you can partition and use it like any other m.2 SSD.

It's not the suggested use case, and is a waste of its real potential, but it is very possible to have a 32GB hyper-low-latency Optane SSD.

>Intel says Optane Memory will be tied to Kaby Lake CPU
Gee, I wonder why would they do such thing.

>KABY LAKE SUPPORT ONLY
>ANYTHING LOWER GETS KEKED
>COMPETING AGAINST SSDS AND DRAM
WHAT THE FUCK INTEL HOW CAN THEY BE THIS DUMB

Isn't extortion supposed to be illegal? Or is it only illegal for normies and not for large companies?

>It's also way more expensive
Therefor it's better.

>Bound to Kaby Lake and Windows 10

Good luck fitting all your OS/programs into 32 GB and still have space to run updates.

Who are you arguing with?

that's a nice 32GB cache of CIA backdoor

So this thing is just glorified "RAM" for the hard drive?

WHY NOT JUST BUY A FUCKING SSD

>Intel says Optane Memory will be tied to Kaby Lake CPUs

Your mom. She won't do anal tonight. I even offered her an extra $100.

Never going to downgrade to windows 10.
How long do you think I can last on win 7.
How many years do you think I have to hold out until mircoshit makes a decent OS that is better than 7?

This is great news for people with HDDs or SATA SSDs, but the performance jump for PCIe SSDs will be smaller, and my impression is, visible more in benchmarks than real-world scenarios.

But it's going to shake up the storage market, hard. People on Sup Forums saying users should just "get an SSD" fail to realize that most users aren't okay with a mere 128GB or 256GB of storage to work with. Get an even bigger SSD, and the cost skyrockets. And having a small SSD for boot and an HDD for storage is too complicated for many people to handle effectively, if at all.

By sticking an Optane SSD with, say, a HDD (something that 75%+ of all PCs are still using as their boot drive), you give people what Intel SRT was supposed to originally be years ago, before people realized it was finicky to set up, NAND was too cheap to care, and the performance gains not hugely impressive: NAND-like performance, but without NAND drive-size limitations.

>Defensively argue over claims never made.
>Make "your mom" insult.
Interacting with you kills brain cells. Have some pity on other users and never post again.

It sounds like the hybrid SSD/hard drives that some companies make, except divided into separate components to take advantage of PCIe speeds with the side effect of being dependent on a specific line of processors to function. It could be interesting if other companies are able to offer something similar without being depended on a specific line of proccessor (even if it means using a full size PCIe card with its own SATA ports instead of an M.2 card).

You'll die of old age before Microshit gets their head out of their corporate asses.

If you're so certian, why didn't hybrid HDDs take off and replace everything else? Oh yeah, because they're flakey shit with inconsistent performance and not enough speed gain to justify it. And that was with hardware firmware control, not slower software.

Also, what happens if you remove the M.2 Optane drive? Your system doesn't boot? It writes everything to the HDD anyway, negating most of the benefit?

I guess I can move on to real world hobbies and just enjoy the classics.
On the bright side, guess I wont need to upgrade in my life time, since all the hardware is going to be win 10 exclusive and who the fuck wants to use that shit.
I mean it's kinda ironic.

>HDD dies
>You lose your shit
>M.2 dies
>You also lose your shit

I love adding multiple points of failure. Hope all the normies have backups (Spoilers: They don't)

This isn't really a Win 10 sucks thread, but really, just fucking get LTSB or use OOSU 10 and Spybot antibeacon, then disable winderp update.

There is no point to optane unless it's cheaper than getting an SSD. It is not.

The price does not justify performance for most people so I don't see why builders would bother offering it. Lenovo got memed hard with Optane.

Also, hybrid hdd, anyone ?

It's not just that. It's having more than one drive that's fucking annoying. Would love 2TB of nvme or SSD storage that doesn't cost me the house.

I don't mind multiple drives but I can see how annoying that would get for normies. Aren't most of them storing their shit in TEH CLOUD now anyway?

>Intel SRT
this killed my SLC SSD prematurely after only 3 years

>And having a small SSD for boot and an HDD for storage is too complicated for many people to handle effectively, if at all.
Are you stupid ? optane won't be bought and implemented by end users, it will be sold with the computer that users will never upgrade. Optane won't apeal to users for the same reason that users don't want 2 drives.

People care about numbers and price. that's all. they also all have cloud storage, external hdd and usb storage. the performance gain (real life) of optane vs ssd will be nothing so people won't pay a premium for it. Computer vendors remember the intel SRT fiasco and won't fall for the optane jew.

Price will kill it, cheap laptops with 64 GB of eMMC will continue to dominate the market. Intel's NUC scam tier pricing won't help.

Its good start, but they promised too much with the 3D Xpoint hype.

>I don't mind multiple drives but I can see how annoying that would get for normies.
The cache is invisible. End-user never sees it.

...

fucking proprietary faggots all of them

Am I just retarded for thinking this, but is Optane a replacement for DRAM?

Don't mind it. Intel is trying to put as much value as they can on Kaby Lake, and if KL doesn't succeed then Optane won't see the light of day.

>comparing to a HDD and not SSD

lol k

boot time over 30s ? What ??

If HDDs are so slow, why do i have a 15 second boot time? Im not home so I cant show you, but I can give you the link to the AiO

I believe you, they must have used a pretty shitty hdd...

lol

I like the idea, depending how well it works, it could make SSDs less of a priority, so you can get a 5tb drive instead of some 512gb SSD.

Don't blame me, this is how Intel is marketing the fucking thing. My netbook with 32 GB of slow-ass eMMC storage boots faster than that, about 20 seconds, on battery. What a joke.

This. I can't into Linux I guess, so I just gave up on PC. I now use a raspberry pi for desk work.

That's the point of it that people are missing.

It may be slower and idiots keep greentexting $1500 but look up the price 256GB of DDR4.

This thing is fucking stupid as hell. I just watched the LTT video on this and cannot think of a single fucking reason for this to exist. cheaper than NVME, sure! slower than SSD? most definitely.

What kind of privledged asshole gets a Z270 and Kaby lake processor and then says "I'mma go the optane/HDD route!" there are 60 gig SSD's on amazon for $35. WTF is this even supposed to be doing?

saturated SSD's are already fast enough and even though nVME is faster, it's not even worth it considering the price and near identical performance vs, lets say, and 850 evo.

>but look up the price 256GB of DDR4
Lets not compare apples and oranges. 16 gigs of DDR4 is like $100, vs $50 for this. This is being used as a HDD cache, not like page files for the OS to use.

>M.2 dies
>You also lose your shit

No you don't you mong, it's a caching drive. Your data is still on the hdd.

>not just using Linux

>GTAV gets slower on Optane over time
Good work Intel.

It can't/won't cache files that big, I'm sure the Intel software is coded so it tries to grab smaller system files like DLLs and etc.

>limited to Kaby Lake
Dropped.
>subs are out
I can finally find out why Kokoro anally fisted a chicken.

>almost the same load on gayming

ayy

I would, if I didn't play vidya. Literally the only reason I can fathom for people to use windows is games.

Intel probably wants to sell this shit to businesses as a cheap upgrade to give cheap Dell boxes a bit of a speed boost. But no company is going to want to buy them. And your average normie doesn't even use a desktop PC. In fact they haven't owned a desktop PC in several years. So who exactly will buy this shit? Nobody.

>Using a SSD partition to speed up a HDD
Shouldn't the OS be responsible for doing this, not the mobo?

Linux can just use bcache.

Then why include it...

Windows vm+pci-e passthrough for games that won't run in Wine.
For DX9, Wine+GalliumNine is faster than Windows even...

50 bucks.

>Boundy to Kaby Lake

Looks like I'll be bound to Ryzen.

No, when Intel offered this before it was mostly done by chipset firmware. Honestly this sounds like a rebrand of their SSD caching.

Which is ironic because Intel hasn't paid much attention to desktops since Sandy Bridge.

>Windows vm+pci-e passthrough
sounds nice, but you can't pass through a video card in use, right? so you're gonna have one monitor that only works when you boot windows, and much of the dual monitor stuff is now out the windows (lel). and if you go w i d e then forgetabout it.

In the video, it was used with a 3TB WD Blue.
It wasn't being compared to much.
I think in the video he says that it was his fault for not hitting the time quickly enough. I think.

Since before then, 45nm Core2Quad was the last time intel had dedicated Desktop dies made.
45nm Dual-Core core2 was mobile chips.
65nm Core2 was the last full-stack desktop product.

Yeah, Intel really jewing themselves out of the market. Again.

>readyboost
thanks for vista flashbacks

Do your monitors only have a single input?
I use DVI input for linux host and DP for Windows VM on my main monitor.
Windows doesn't get any auxiliary monitors in my setup, since I don't game on them.

For the 16 GB version. That won't even cache an entire Windows install plus program files. Install and first boot times will still suck. The thing has trash lifetime (1 year lol)

Might as well save your $50 and go buy a 64 GB USB 3.0 stick and set up ReadyButt. Doesn't require a Baby Lake and 200 series motherboard either.

>I use DVI input for linux host and DP for Windows VM on my main monitor.
Oh shit why didn't I think of this.

I think you're saying that you just switch the inputs on your maybe multimonitor setup when you want to use windows?

Now I just need to justify doing this lol and I'll try it out. Why do you do this, might I ask?

> 2 minutes to boot
> 9 seconds to open word
wtf is this fake data? Even my 7 year old desktop opens the latest word in 3 seconds max, and that on a shitty 5400rpm HDD.
Linus cuck tips lying as usual

>Sponsored by Intel
>Intel provided the hardware
>Linus ran a stopwatch app on his phone
>"It's all his fault! Damn dirty trolls!"

My PC with a shitty Low end Sandisk SSD boots up to login before my LCD turns on, which is 5 seconds.
Why the fuck are the results so bad here?

faster data collecting

Because HDD caching is and always will be junk garbage for plebians.

How is this in any way different than a hybrid SSD?
Laptop from 2012 came with some "Intel turboshit" and it was just a 32GB mSATA disk with a 500GB HDD. How is this any different?

Intel said this is just the beginning, future versions will have gigantic bandwidth and speed.

As the most basic concept of being a big cache pool, it doesn't.
But this specifically differs in that optane extends the addressable memory pool for the OS, without any fancy configuration or bullshit fuckery from middle-layered software slowing things down.

So it's hardware level hybrid SSD?
Like an actual hybrid SSD, just connected through m2, not sata.
Oh, and the OS gets to say which files to cache.

So I don't have to use Windows as my day-to-day OS.

I don't want my data/usage statistics/preferences/etc sold off to the highest bidder.
I'm under no illusion that if a three-letter-agency wanted my data, they'd have it - but not running Windows prevents my data being sold off to underwrite some bastards balance sheet.

>1.2GB/s and writes of 280MB/s
Is it so much to ask for 1GB+/s of write speed.
I just want a good slog, man.

>How many years do you think I have to hold out until mircoshit makes a decent OS that is better than 7?

You have two options, Wintard. Learn how to make Linux work on your machine, or get a Mac. Check my goddamn captcha if you don't believe me. Microsoft will never make a good operating system ever again. I recommend Linux first. Mac if you have the cash.

It is "fake RAM", since everybody on this board seems to be struggling with the idea.
This is basically an SSD that the OS directly recognizes as RAM. It doesn't see it as a drive, or as cache, or any of that. Using this is identical to installing another 375GB of RAM into a system (albeit slower than normal).

For 99% of everybody this is not useful. But if you're working on a video editing workstation and already maxed out the RAM the board will take, this is a $50 drop in for another 16-32GB of "RAM" that will significant speed application launch times and let you work with much larger loads.

Now just scale that same concept up to 375GB and 750GB and etc for big servers.

That does sound useful, but not really how Intel is marketing it to consumers.

Well the underlying technology that makes this work is actually really goddamn important, but as with all first-revision products it's not "all the way there" yet. So that may be why there's such a weird amount of hype around what amounts to a workstation product.

Can the $50/$77 shit consumer versions function as makeshift RAM as well ? Or is that limited to the server version?

>calls others wintard, suggests a mac

dropped

>GUYS
>GUYS
>INTEL IS MAKING AN SSD THAT'S AS FAST AS RAM AND HAS A BETTER PRICE TO GB RATIO THAN HARD DRIVES
>oh never mind it can't even store information correctly so it's only going to be a cache for actual storage
Wew. I hope you faggots didn't get your hopes up.

So, the readyboost anons weren't meeming?
So no persistent file caching, this is somehow supposed to decrease load times?
SSD's as ram is a fun concept, but for me it's more so that I can run fuckhueg processes, not to speed up boot times.
What sort of crippled system did they send linus to get performance gains like ?
Wait, increased speed over usages, something has to be persistent. Either it loads files into memory early on, I doubt it'd keep any memory structures.
Maybe it loads files in on it like a ramdisk, then when something wants it next boot it makes them available, but at the same time doing the whole "Look at me, I'm RAM" thing?
That makes sense.

>buying NSA ssd
lol

...