4 ms·

Hi tw04 - just as a heads up, none of the SSDs were furnished by Intel. We have a budget and bought all of the drives we used on this test. Some we had to buy s

Hi tw04 - just as a heads up, none of the SSDs were furnished by Intel. We have a budget and bought all of the drives we used on this test. Some we had to buy second hand, some were scavenged from servers we have had to decommission. Intel does provide us with hardware, as does AMD, Intel, Toshiba, Samsung, WDC, Cavium and etc. In fact, we have a full list of all relationships here: https://www.servethehome.com/about/editorial-copyright-policies/ https://www.servethehome.com/about/editorial-copyright-polic... Unlike virtually every other major review site (and a large number of bloggers), as of today we still do not have direct ad sales to any of these companies. We also buy an absolute ton of gear for the DemoEval service we run which is why we have access to many different bits. For example, we have purchased a dozen Optane 900p's already since Intel would not furnish us with a U.2 drive. Intel does not want to have the 900p eat into the P4800X which is a higher margin product. As a result, this is the kind of article (Optane 900p in servers) that Intel specifically would not want us to do. Since we buy hardware, we can.

wtallis 9y ago
> Intel does not want to have the 900p eat into the P4800X which is a higher margin product. As a result, this is the kind of article (Optane 900p in servers) that Intel specifically would not want us to do. Since we buy hardware, we can. Intel has not to my knowledge actively discouraged or tried to prevent anyone from reviewing the 900p in an enterprise context. They haven't expressed any negative opinion about me including the 900p in my review of the P4800X, even though they provided hardware for both. I agree that they probably don't want the 900p to hurt the sales of the P4800X, but I don't think they're particularly concerned about that happening. Most potential P4800X customers aren't going to go to the trouble of buying and installing large quantities of 900ps instead.
tw04 9y ago
>Intel does not want to have the 900p eat into the P4800X which is a higher margin product. As a result, this is the kind of article (Optane 900p in servers) that Intel specifically would not want us to do. Since we buy hardware, we can. That's such a cop out and an inaccurate statement. In the article you make it pretty explicit that the 900p is unfit for production workloads (which I agree with). In what world is someone going to use a device that will lose data on power loss for their write cache?? I don't think Intel is the least bit concerned. You then go on to say the 4800 is a better fit, yet you don't show any performance numbers for it because "You will notice that we do not have P4800X results. We had good results, but off of where we would expect" - so you didn't post them??? I'm sorry, that reeks of you being TOLD not to post them by Intel or your "anonymous benchmark requester" - otherwise you would've posted the numbers with the note that you think they seem off. Leaving them out entirely with no explanation as to why is extremely questionable.

wtallis 9y ago

> Intel does not want to have the 900p eat into the P4800X which is a higher margin product. As a result, this is the kind of article (Optane 900p in servers) that Intel specifically would not want us to do. Since we buy hardware, we can. Intel has not to my knowledge actively discouraged or tried to prevent anyone from reviewing the 900p in an enterprise context. They haven't expressed any negative opinion about me including the 900p in my review of the P4800X, even though they provided hardware for both. I agree that they probably don't want the 900p to hurt the sales of the P4800X, but I don't think they're particularly concerned about that happening. Most potential P4800X customers aren't going to go to the trouble of buying and installing large quantities of 900ps instead.

tw04 9y ago

>Intel does not want to have the 900p eat into the P4800X which is a higher margin product. As a result, this is the kind of article (Optane 900p in servers) that Intel specifically would not want us to do. Since we buy hardware, we can. That's such a cop out and an inaccurate statement. In the article you make it pretty explicit that the 900p is unfit for production workloads (which I agree with). In what world is someone going to use a device that will lose data on power loss for their write cache?? I don't think Intel is the least bit concerned. You then go on to say the 4800 is a better fit, yet you don't show any performance numbers for it because "You will notice that we do not have P4800X results. We had good results, but off of where we would expect" - so you didn't post them??? I'm sorry, that reeks of you being TOLD not to post them by Intel or your "anonymous benchmark requester" - otherwise you would've posted the numbers with the note that you think they seem off. Leaving them out entirely with no explanation as to why is extremely questionable.