Optane P1600X 58GB $40

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

altano

Active Member
Sep 3, 2011
280
159
43
Los Angeles, CA

altano

Active Member
Sep 3, 2011
280
159
43
Los Angeles, CA

nutsnax

Active Member
Nov 6, 2014
247
92
28
113
how do these compare to the Optane M10 64GB ? Would be for SQL Server logs and maybe tempdb
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

itronin

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,234
794
113
Denver, Colorado
how do these compare to the Optane M10 64GB ? Would be for SQL Server logs and maybe tempdb
M10 is earlier gen, more consumer oriented. IIRC a lot less endurance too - but I'm too lazy to go and look. M10 is PCIE x2 whereas p1600x is x4. so at least half the performance (if not more) . The "p" is really just a much better all around drive.

If your sql server is very active and you are moving a lot of data I'd be quite concerned about "consuming" the consumer drive fairly rapidly. IMO you would be much better off with the P1600X.

I still like my optane 900p's for slog but honestly price for performance the P1600x is a better deal esp based on availability and EOL.
 

nutsnax

Active Member
Nov 6, 2014
247
92
28
113
M10 is earlier gen, more consumer oriented. IIRC a lot less endurance too - but I'm too lazy to go and look. M10 is PCIE x2 whereas p1600x is x4. so at least half the performance (if not more) . The "p" is really just a much better all around drive.

If your sql server is very active and you are moving a lot of data I'd be quite concerned about "consuming" the consumer drive fairly rapidly. IMO you would be much better off with the P1600X.

I still like my optane 900p's for slog but honestly price for performance the P1600x is a better deal esp based on availability and EOL.
what about compared to a memblaze pblaze (D700 I think?) those are pretty reasonable on ebay
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

foureight84

Active Member
Jun 26, 2018
266
240
43
M10 is earlier gen, more consumer oriented. IIRC a lot less endurance too - but I'm too lazy to go and look. M10 is PCIE x2 whereas p1600x is x4. so at least half the performance (if not more) . The "p" is really just a much better all around drive.

If your sql server is very active and you are moving a lot of data I'd be quite concerned about "consuming" the consumer drive fairly rapidly. IMO you would be much better off with the P1600X.

I still like my optane 900p's for slog but honestly price for performance the P1600x is a better deal esp based on availability and EOL.
They also don't have lane reversal capability. This means that they will not be detected on some bifurcation boards, for example, x16 to x8x4x4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

foureight84

Active Member
Jun 26, 2018
266
240
43
Also available on eBay.


Aside from SLOG, this seems like a good deal for a 2280 boot drive with PLP. Any other use cases?
Just don't forget that the 58GB version has a slower read and write speed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

nutsnax

Active Member
Nov 6, 2014
247
92
28
113
I grabbed two...maybe they won't suck. I'll have them as primary and secondary log file stores in case one massive transaction blows out one it'll spill to the other. Maybe it'll work.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

Bjorn Smith

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2019
876
481
63
49
r00t.dk
Just remember - these drives are very slow for a NVME.
IOPS are awesome, but their sequential bandwith are like a 3rd of a normal m.2 NVME drive.


So if you have a ZFS pool backed by spinners, where total sequential write speed is less than 1GB/s you are golden - anything higher - you need a better SLOG or it will slow you down.
 
Last edited:

ArthurA

Member
Sep 26, 2018
67
68
18
Also available on eBay.


Aside from SLOG, this seems like a good deal for a 2280 boot drive with PLP. Any other use cases?
That's what I'm thinking, router boot drive. Let the logs thrash it as hard as they want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

ArthurA

Member
Sep 26, 2018
67
68
18
Just remember - these drives are very slow for a NVME.
IOPS are awesome, but their sequential bandwith are like a 3rd of a normal m.2 SSD.


So if you have a ZFS pool backed by spinners, where total sequential write speed is less than 1GB/s you are golden - anything higher - you need a better SLOG or it will slow you down.
In the past I'd seen numerous references to SLOG flushing every five seconds, I presume that's still the case. How many home labbers need more than the 50GB to buffer 100GbE. Mostly it's merely alleviating seek contention and write amplification to the slowest link in the pool, your spinning rust. To my understanding with ZIL on rust if you're sustaining 1GB/s the drives are really laying down 2GB/s so these as SLOG are a weak link but how many 10Gbe VM clients are you thrashing a rust pool with to maintain a high duty cycle on 1GB/s. I'm curious what use case would churn that much data in an enthusiastic homelab, maybe exporting 100+ TB video projects to an iSCSI LUN? If you have a team of editors concurrently doing that routinely I expect you'd have chuckled and dismissed these as an option and moved on without a second thought because you have to have a couple more orders of magnitude in your budget.

I'm no where near needing that level of sustain but I do want my VMs to burst up to 4GB/s to match my 40GbE and be in the IO ball park I'd get with a decent Gen 3 M.2 on the handful of couple year old desktops I'm juggling now. If I were going to do that on spinners I'd SLOG to the 905p and WAG maybe theoretically get close with 3x 8 disk z2 vdevs but raidz and VMs is daft. The performant VMs are going on 6x Micron 9200Max with the 905p to eat the ZIL write amplification.

My current headache is deciding if I should hedge and get another 905p for $350 from Newegg's daily deal or gamble on a better price sometime in the next 6 or so months.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: T_Minus and Samir