What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
blog.zuthof.nl
What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
1–10 of 164 posts
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#2[dead]
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#3It stands out, because it didn't sell. Which is weird because there were some pretty big pros about using them. The latency for updating 1 byte was crazy good. Some databases or journals for something like zfs really benefited from this.
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#4I don't have the inside scoop on Intel's current mess, but they definitely have a habit of killing off their coolest projects.
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#5Related: "High-bandwidth flash progress and future" (15 comments), https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46700384
In an era of RAM shortages and quarterly price increases, Optane remains viable for swap and CPU/GPU cache.
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#6For a good technical explanation at the physical level of a memory cell:
https://pcper.com/2017/06/how-3d-xpoint-phase-change-memory-...
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#7I feel sorry about the situation. From my perspective Optane was a godsend for databases. I was contemplating building a system. Could've been a pinnacle of vertical scalability for cheap.
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#8I feel sorry about the situation. From my perspective Optane was a godsend for databases. I was contemplating building a system. Could've been a pinnacle of vertical scalability for cheap.
[deleted]
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#9It stands out, because it didn't sell. Which is weird because there were some pretty big pros about using them. The latency for updating 1 byte was crazy good. Some databases or journals for something like zfs really benefited from this.
It feels like everyone figured out what to do with them and how just about when they stopped making them.
Re: What makes Intel Optane stand out (2023)
#10It stands out, because it didn't sell. Which is weird because there were some pretty big pros about using them. The latency for updating 1 byte was crazy good. Some databases or journals for something like zfs really benefited from this.
When most people are running databases on AWS RDS, or on ridiculous EBS drives with insanely low throughput and latency, it makes sense to me.
There are very few applications that benefit from such low latency, and if one has to go off the standard path of easy, but slow and expensive and automatically backup up, people will pick the ease.
Having the best technology performance is not enough to have product market fit. The execution required from the side of executives at Intel is far far beyond their capability. They developed a platform and wanted others to do the work of building all the applications. Without that starting killer app, there's not enough adoption to build an ecosystem.