Intel's Optane SSD Compatible With NVMe; Could Boost MacBook Storage Speeds By 1000x

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel's Optane SSD Compatible With NVMe; Could Boost MacBook Storage Speeds By 1000x

Posted by msmash on Saturday March 12, 2016 @04:00AM from the need-for-speed dept.

More details have emerged about Intel's Optane, a new kind of memory and SSD that utilizes 3D Xpoint. The upcoming 3D Xpoint technology, which is supposedly 10 times denser than DRAM and 1,000 times faster than flash storage, will be compatible with NVMe, a storage protocol that allows an SSD to make effective use of a high-speed PCIe. Several MacBook Pro models already support NVMe technology. Apple is often among the first companies to adopt emerging standards and technologies, which has led many to believe that the Cupertino-based company might leverage Intel's Optane solid state drives for super fast performance speeds in its next batch of laptops. Apple is expected to announce the refreshed MacBook lineup sporting Intel Skylake processor later this year.

76 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Only Apple? by pz · 2016-03-12 04:01 · Score: 2

And the technology won't benefit non-Apple computers?

--

Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
1. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:12 · Score: 1
  
  NVMe is making its arrival to PCs as well. Apple is just often among the first to adopt the coolest and most fresh hi-tech.
2. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:22 · Score: 0
  
  And also quick to abandon?
3. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:28 · Score: 0
  
  And it will benefit Apple even though there's exactly 0 evidence that Apple is planning on putting this in any hardware.
4. Re:Only Apple? by DRJlaw · 2016-03-12 04:29 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  NVMe is making its arrival to PCs as well. Apple is just often among the first to adopt the coolest and most fresh hi-tech.
  If by "among the first" you mean later than Dell and pretty much at the same time as Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, and every other first tier motherboard manufacturer.
  Search this list for laptops which had the interface well before Apple introduced it in their line.
  Among the first... more like among the all.
5. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:32 · Score: 0
  
  Yep. You won't see old VGA connectors in Apple products, for example. There are also PCs that ridiculously feature both USB 2 and USB 3 ports, but Apple went full USB 3. Same goes for optical drives. Old crap to the trash can.
6. Re:Only Apple? by goombah99 · 2016-03-12 04:34 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Not really. Not usually. They abandon things ahead of when people think they should but then it usually turns out they were right. Floppies, serial ports, vga, these things dragged on forever, festooned on the sides of PC laptopos and desktops. The early use of postscript is why desktop publishing was so uniform on macs compared to PC, but in doing that they sort of abandoned the drivers for many other printiers. excessive ports on PCs didn't really make them more versatile it meant widespread impatability with other equipment and drivers. So leadership to the next technology also shows up in what you pare down.
  
  --
  Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
7. Re:Only Apple? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-03-12 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  That's not true. The Mac Pro does not have an optical drive.
8. Re:Only Apple? by greenfruitsalad · 2016-03-12 05:22 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  at any IT conference, you can easily spot the macbook user by the bag full of adaptors they carry with them.
9. Re:Only Apple? by Gr8Apes · 2016-03-12 05:28 · Score: 2
  
  They really only need 2, so why a full bag? 1 MDV->VGA and 1 MDV->HDMI with a HDMI->DVI plugin, which is a pretty common adapter. And the VGA is only necessary because someone refuses to update that 1990s 600x800 projector.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
10. Re:Only Apple? by Gr8Apes · 2016-03-12 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  No Apple products have carried an optical drive for quite a few years now. That was his point. Who uses them anymore, except for a few special cases? And yes, I have a BD writer hooked up, but that's all.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
11. Re:Only Apple? by Overzeetop · 2016-03-12 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, upgrading the projector is nothing. It's the cost of replacing the wires in the wall that gets expensive.
  
  --
  Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
12. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 06:02 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, because Apple sells low level hardware which is slow to begin with, so there is a room for huge improvement.
13. Re:Only Apple? by epine · 2016-03-12 06:05 · Score: 1
  
  Apple has an insatiable appetite for being first off the mark in adopting the next jizz-worthy bling ...
  FTFY.
  Where they really move the industry needle is shaking off yesterday's abrasive crusties. I give them full marks for death of the floppy.
14. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 06:09 · Score: 0
  
  Woosh! That's the sound of the trash can joke flying over your head at 3.5GHz
15. Re:Only Apple? by Phydeaux · 2016-03-12 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  WHAT!?!? Everybody knows you never go full USB3!
16. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 08:06 · Score: 0
  
  I looked at that list, only these have NVMe:
  Dell XPS 13 9350, announced 10-2015
  Lenovo Yoga 500, announced 6-2015
  Lenovo Yoga 900S, announced CES 2016
  Lenovo Y900, announced CES 2016
  NONE OF THEM are earlier than:
  Apple Macbook 2015, released 4-2015
  Perhaps you can find an example to support your statement yourself. Still Apple will be AMONG the first.
17. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 08:39 · Score: 0
  
  Thanks for cherry picking to suit your argument. The first laptop I looked at ASUS Launches the new ZENBOOK UX303 Ultrabooks starting at $899 - dated 2014/08/13. It began shipping in Sept/2014.
18. Re:Only Apple? by Octorian · 2016-03-12 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  And the people who put wires in the wall (or make the intermediary systems those wires connect through) were still putting in VGA a decade after it make sense to do so.
19. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 09:12 · Score: 0
  
  I can't find any clue the UX303 supports NVMe, it's M.2 SATA/AHCI only AFAICS. Or where did you find out it does?
  Also, cherry picking? I looked at the list he provided himself to support HIS argument, and found it not supportive.
20. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 09:40 · Score: 0
  
  They're both too lazy to research that M.2 != NVMe
21. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 10:45 · Score: 0
  
  I looked at the list he provided himself to support HIS argument, and found it not supportive.
  The server and desktop links were not supportive? Desktops are somehow not PCs? Looks like cherry picking to me, even if the laptop entries do not match the article date in that last link.
22. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 11:01 · Score: 0
  
  my ASUS MB has 2.0 3.0 and 3.1 :)
23. Re:Only Apple? by radarskiy · 2016-03-12 11:37 · Score: 1
  
  Where I work:
  a) VGA is the most common video port on the laptops issued by the company. (2nd most common is mini-DVI.)
  b) VGA is the most likely to get you a image at the native resolution of the variety of displays at a reasonable refresh rate without any jittering.
  So putting in VGA is a sign that interfaces are chosen based on what makes sense, rather than religion.
24. Re:Only Apple? by Holi · 2016-03-12 11:38 · Score: 2
  
  Apple just recently added NVME support to OS X (beginning of this year). Windows has had support since 2014 and Linux has had it since 2012. I would say that's a strange definition of "Among the first", more like dead last.
  
  --
  Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
25. Re:Only Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 17:58 · Score: 0
  
  Ok, I understand. Yes, his argument is indeed partly correct.
  And I responded to the part that AFAIK is not, and asked for a more specific example than "Search this list for laptops which had the interface well before...", which is quite the hyperbole considering it isn't fact based.
26. Re:Only Apple? by snapperbazaar · 2016-03-13 00:16 · Score: 1
  
  apple always come with new thing that's why i am loving apple
27. Re:Only Apple? by ganjadude · 2016-03-13 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  seriously im not sure if i am supposed to be excited about intels achievement, or that apple (might) usse this technology (sometime down the road)
  
  i expect this kind of post on a mac fanboi forum
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
28. Re:Only Apple? by OffTheWallSoccer · 2016-03-13 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  Apple is just often among the first to adopt the coolest and most fresh hi-tech.
  Well, that didn't help 1394/Firewire become popular, sadly.
29. Re:Only Apple? by lsatenstein · 2016-03-13 13:10 · Score: 1
  
  And the technology won't benefit non-Apple computers?
  The drives will be faster than an I/O interrupt, but don't fret, your internet speed is the bottle neck. Oh wait, we are going to communicate via laser beam on fibre to the ISP.
  
  --
  Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
30. Re:Only Apple? by armanox · 2016-03-13 14:28 · Score: 1
  
  Pshh...I'm upgrading to Twisted Vortex Beams.
  
  --
  I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
31. Re:Only Apple? by Overzeetop · 2016-03-14 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  What makes you think these rooms had installations done in the past decade? We're not all 3 year old start-ups building out brand new lease spaces with $200/SF upfit budgets. Some of these locations I work in are 100 year old buildings with 6 thick reinforced concrete floors and solid masonry walls. When you see what it costs to get new wiring, half the time the owner just says "Fuck it, get me another easel and a giant Postit pad," or "we'll paint on the wall with tree sap and crushed beetles instead."
  
  --
  Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Will world leaders use this too? by goombah99 · 2016-03-12 04:20 · Score: 0

I think that the full headline should have been,
Will Intel's optante cure cancer when they use next years apple computers to write legislation on comptuers 1000x faster? Ot maybe the headline should be
Will a new generation of porn addiction begin when downloaded videos start 1000x faster using Intel's optane?

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
1. Re:Will world leaders use this too? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-03-12 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  Intel's new Optane SSDs are so fast, you achieve orgasm even before your porn videos files are opened.
2. Re:Will world leaders use this too? by greenfruitsalad · 2016-03-12 05:25 · Score: 2
  
  all i care about is: will it be fast enough for in-place execution? can we finally eliminate the need for ram AND storage? i like the idea of HP's "machine"
3. Re:Will world leaders use this too? by Intron · 2016-03-12 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  all i care about is: will it be fast enough for in-place execution? can we finally eliminate the need for ram AND storage? i like the idea of HP's "machine"
  Since DRAM isn't fast enough for in-place execution, why do you care? All computers have multiple storage tiers: registers, cache, RAM, etc.
  
  --
  Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
4. Re:Will world leaders use this too? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 06:21 · Score: 0
  
  all i care about is: will it be fast enough for in-place execution? can we finally eliminate the need for ram AND storage? i like the idea of HP's "machine"
  I certainly hope so, or at least I hope it's a step towards that. Our sexbots will need in-place execution, after all. (all I care about are sexbots)
5. Re:Will world leaders use this too? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 07:41 · Score: 0
  
  I've been thinking about this as well, ever since Intel/Micron made the announcement last year. It's a pretty cool shift - the notion of a single memory/storage array. I'd guess it'd be a trade-off - slower than DRAM but faster than flash and no data loss when power is cut off.
  What would some of the benefits be? Near instant suspend/resume, what else?
  What would have to change? There was some recent article I saw about Xpoint modules being fitted to DRAM sockets. Or would they be consigned to a "storage" like tier a-la hard drives/flash drives. Would motherboards have to be rearchitected to support this?
  I also get the feeling than the mainframe guys are shaking their heads and chuckling that this is probably something that already existed in their days and it's just being "reinvented" today :)
  Tariq
Ha ha ha, no. by rasmusbr · 2016-03-12 04:21 · Score: 2

I'm pretty sure someone messed up the numbers, because they don't make any sense.
The current MacBook Pro has an SSD that is only 10x slower than its RAM in terms of data rate (not in terms of latency of course). This new SSD would be 100x faster than the RAM, which would be pointless.
1. Re:Ha ha ha, no. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:40 · Score: 0
  
  Optane is supposedly 10 times slower than RAM in terms of latency.
  Which is lot faster than SSD.
2. Re:Ha ha ha, no. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:50 · Score: 0
  
  Seven times faster is a better bet, as Intel demoed the comparison with the P3700 at IDF. Although the media latency is minuscule compared to flash, the controller and OS latency comes in the way. Ethernet controller style interrupt coalescing might be useful, even.
3. Re:Ha ha ha, no. by cthulhu11 · 2016-03-13 15:53 · Score: 1
  
  Codename: OBLIO
RAM, SSD or cache drive? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:26 · Score: 0

This could be used for all three, no?
4TB drive with 64gb cache drive = awesome
Sorry by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:35 · Score: 1, Interesting

Since when is disk/SSD speed the bottleneck for non-server systems?
1. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:40 · Score: 0
  
  You make a good point. The performance bottleneck on my Linux workstation isn't the disk. These days, the performance bottleneck is based on how long it takes me to figure out what the hell just went wrong with systemd, and how to fix it. Even in optimal cases where numerous other Linux users have experienced the same problem and there are many mailing list postings or Stack Overflow answers for me to choose from it still takes me at least a few minutes to get my computer booting again.
2. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:48 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, I'll bite.
  A lot of us use Laptops (luggables) as portable servers. With 32Gb of RAM and an i7 we can run many VM's.
  I'm working on one at the moment. 1 Oracle VM, 1 SQLServer VM, 2 Application VM's. Total Disk Space > 200Gb. My current laptop is an HP Elitebook. 17in Screen and 3.5Gb of SSD.
  The faster the storage the better IMHO.
  If apple would support 32Gb of Ram I'd move to a MacBook.
3. Re:Sorry by Gr8Apes · 2016-03-12 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  With this new SSD performance, do you really need more RAM? Virtual RAM (ie, that "slow" disk based overflow) might support your needs. If you need 16GB+ in a single set of processes concurrently, then yes, 32 or 64GB is appealing. I'm running on 24GB and had considered 48GB, but after analyzing my usage parameters, I almost never hit swap with a couple of changes in habits and an upgrade to 10.10. (Safari and Firefox were notorious memory hogs, Safari is much much better in 10.10 - no I don't run Chrome spyware for my main browsing)
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
4. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 06:00 · Score: 0
  
  Ugh...aren't systems always limited by the speed of the slowest parts?
  When is this not true.
  You will always get more bang for your buck upgrading the slowest part of the system over the fastest part.
  I guess you are talking about games that are optimized for in-memory running?
  Is that what a non-server system implies?
5. Re:Sorry by Billly+Gates · 2016-03-12 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  Shoot I am running 8 vms now. My cpu has not ever gone beyond 20% like ever lol. However, I got the i7 k series which do not support VT-d which means it uses software for disk access without IOMMU by can virtualize everything else with hyper-v. My host Win 8.1 reports a 390MS for disk access. My server 2k12R2 guests report 3250 MS latency.
  So a slower i5 with vt-x and vtd on a type 1 hypervisor can perform the best. I could trade my i7k to an i7S but I surprisingly do not need a faster cpu to my astonishment for that insane load.
  Virtualbox or vmware workstation might need a beefy i7 as they are type1 and use software
  
  --
  http://saveie6.com/
6. Re:Sorry by Gr8Apes · 2016-03-12 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  I regularly load my CPU to 1100%+ (yes, 12 virtual cores) for long periods of time. I guess it depends upon your work load types (Video processing) It's amazing how much time it takes to render some HD+ Camera video into a useable 10 minute video segment, for instance.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
7. Re:Sorry by spire3661 · 2016-03-12 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  'portable server'? I think you mean WORKSTATION. You dont 'lug' a server, you migrate it from one fixed location to another. You are running non-operational simulations on a workstation, you are not serving.
  
  --
  Good-bye
8. Re:Sorry by angel'o'sphere · 2016-03-12 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  Since the time that processes claim at least the amount of ram as 'swap image' on the swap space.
  And: since the time that every tab in a web browser is its own process.
  So my 8GB ram laptop conquers 8GB of disk space for every process, browser tab or ordinary process.
  Luckily they don't use so much space and optimize usage. Nevertheless about 200GB of my 512GB flash SSD is occupied by 'processes' on the swap file.
  Nevertheless switching tabs is no longer instant but takes up to 3 seconds. Faster disks make that faster.
  
  --
  Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
9. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 11:15 · Score: 0
  
  I got the i7 k series which do not support VT-d
  Pretty sure VT-d is a chipset thing, I have a i7 k with the option for VT-d in the bios
10. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 16:13 · Score: 0
  
  That isn't how VM threading works.
11. Re:Sorry by Gr8Apes · 2016-03-13 11:30 · Score: 1
  
  Depends on what you run in your VMs... I had a single VM running and loading near 12 full cores as well. Again, use cases determine everything.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
and we're gone! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:37 · Score: 0

Gone into official fudzilla style tabloid speculation.... congrats, this will be my last visit for slashdot... for sure ;)
whaat by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:49 · Score: 0

http://www.muveej.com edskfjs;f
Cost by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:50 · Score: 0

Intel said they were going to target a price range that inbetween NAND and RAM. These new drives are going to cost a pretty penny, and very much an initial target for enterprise.
A Mac machine is usually well made, and more expensive than the parts themselves. I can't imagine a single Optane machine going for less than 5k USD at release.
1. Re:Cost by unixisc · 2016-03-12 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  There ain't much of a price gap per GB b/w NAND & DRAM. And in any case, an SSD that's as fast as DRAM would be more valuable and thereby cost more, and probably eliminate the need to have RAM in the first place.
Got a PCI-E x4 slot? Good to go. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 04:58 · Score: 0

The only thing BIOS support will hold you back on is using the Optane drive as a boot device. Windows 8.1+ has NVMe support built-in, any linux kernel after 3.1 supports NVMe (assuming it's enabled in the config).
So technically the pool of computers capable of using Optane is large. If you've got a M.2 or Sata Express port in your PC, chances are your BIOS already supports NVMe.
The only thing you won't have support for is the Optane devices that will plug-in to a DDR4 slot. Those will be a Intel only thing for now, requiring a new chipset.
Learn to swim by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 05:01 · Score: 1

Apple is often among the first companies to adopt emerging standards and technologies ... Apple is expected to announce the refreshed MacBook lineup sporting Intel Skylake processor later this year.
Oh wow. And yet I can order a Lenovo T560 right now that has a Skylake processor (i7-6600U) and a PCIe-NVMe SSD (that can be easily swapped out for an Optane or any other NVMe SSD you want). Let me just wait until later this year for Apple to lead the way, though.
1. Re:Learn to swim by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · 2016-03-12 05:08 · Score: 1
  
  What counts as "among the first companies" though? Does 5th place still count?
2. Re:Learn to swim by drinkypoo · 2016-03-12 05:31 · Score: 1
  
  What counts as "among the first companies" though? Does 5th place still count?
  They were among the first to adopt USB, and thunderbolt. They did lag a bit on USB2, but eh. So did most PCs. That they are using old CPUs right now doesn't really change that they are often among the first to adopt new technologies.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
3. Re:Learn to swim by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 08:57 · Score: 0
  
  "Among the first" is pretty stretchable: They were more than 2 1/2 Years late in implementing USB (First Mac with USB came out in late 1998, USB 1.0 was available to the market from January 1996) - the oldest mainboard I still have that has USB onboard is - I believe - a BioStar made 80486 Board (Socket 3) from ~1996.
  Its single USB Port is a nightmare (I once blew a resistor when I connected a modern, power-hungry device), but it's USB nevertheless...
4. Re:Learn to swim by Gondola · 2016-03-14 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  "Among the first" is weak language. It could feasibly refer to major hardware manufacturers or even operating systems (considering how few there are, that's a really weak statement, but still technically true.)
Eventually... by Areyoukiddingme · 2016-03-12 05:54 · Score: 4, Informative

The fanboy with stars in his eyes is completely ignoring the fact that Intel has shown first 3D XPoint products that are just twice as fast as flash-based SSDs. The 1000x density and speed factors he's slobbering over are projected ceilings, which will take years to achieve in actual hardware.
1. Re:Eventually... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 12:10 · Score: 0
  
  I think what they said was that cell intrinsics (as in, at the scale of a single bit) are 1000x faster/denser/whatever.
  Building an actual product (as they demonstrated at IDF) runs into other architectural limitations.
  The fact that they demonstrated significant performance gains in spite of these other limitations is encouraging.
2. Re:Eventually... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-13 05:06 · Score: 0
  
  I'm more interested in:
  - Cost in $/GB and how it stacks up to traditional MLC/TLC SSDs
  - Endurance (supposedly 1000x better, but where's the proof?)
  - Latency compared to MLC/TLC SSDs (supposedly 5x-7x the IOPS)
  Also supposedly has better (more consistent) latency performance then TLC/MLC NAND, not sure why.
3. Re:Eventually... by TeknoHog · 2016-03-13 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  The 1000x density and speed factors he's slobbering over are projected ceilings, which will take years to achieve in actual hardware.
  Ah, just like the 10 GHz P4 that was just on the horizon, as the Networst architecture was designed for clock speeds rather than real-life performance and efficiency.
  
  --
  Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
super fast performance speeds by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 06:03 · Score: 0

super fast performance speeds
mac by Anonymous Coward · 2016-03-12 06:11 · Score: 1

The fastest processors and GPU available three years ago. As long as you buy the most expensive product.
Also: So fucking what. by aliquis · 2016-03-12 06:38 · Score: 1

If you got a PC and want this SSD you'll have it, if you don't you won't. Free choice.
Guess an alternative head-line would be:
"Future Macbook buyers will be forced to buy ridiculously expensive SSD-drive"
alternative
"Finally! Now you can get an Intel Octane drive with your Macbook too!"
Or
"Why the fuck aren't the latest and greatest Macbooks equipped with .."
Of course it's likely user-exchangeable in this case even in a Mac but you get the point...
Sensible chuckle by MacDork · 2016-03-12 09:36 · Score: 1

Apple is often among the first companies to adopt emerging standards and technologies, ... Apple is expected to announce the refreshed MacBook lineup sporting Intel Skylake processor later this year.
Yes, Skylake. The technology that's been shipping since fall of last year.
not 1000X anytime soon by duckintheface · 2016-03-12 09:43 · Score: 2

This headline is very misleading. Yes, 3D XPoint itself is 1000 times as fast as flash. But it's limited by the interface speed. Using the PCIe-NVme interface, the Optane SSD will be about 7 times as fast as a flash SSD. To take advantage of the full 3D XPoint speed, there will have to be a new, custom interface, and probably some software and operating system changes. All this is great but the headline is jumping ahead of the linked stories.

--
"He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition