3 ms·

I love toys and I would love to jump feet first into optane, but a dollar per gigabyte is hard to stomach.

• JoshTriplett 8y ago
  About a decade ago, I paid around $600 for the 80GB X25-M, the first SSD that focused on performance rather than just low latency. One of the best system upgrades I've ever had. A dollar per gigabyte doesn't seem half bad at all for the top end of performance.
  • berbec 8y ago
    My first hard drive upgrade was a 80MB HardCard - an ISA hard disk for my PC XT 286. I recall it cost clost to $1,000. There's always going to be the top tier storage that costs an arm and a leg - that just means two steps down gets affordable. Optane pricing will drive down NVME which will drive down SATA SSD.
    • dragontamer 8y ago
      The main issue is that video gamers don't see any benefits to NVMe NAND drives. So the "hardcore gamer" market is beginning to stall out on SATA SSD drives. Why pay 2x more for NVMe NAND if your video game load times aren't any better?
      • zlynx 8y ago
        They are better at load times. Just not 2x better.
        • berbec 8y ago
          The price/performance of a couple 860 Evos in raid0 is hard to beat
• coldtea 8y ago
  >a dollar per gigabyte is hard to stomach. My first HD in 1991 cost like $100 and was 40MB. So, there's that. Besides "a dollar per gigabyte" is $1000 for 1TB. 512MB SSDs used to cost ~ $1000 just 5-8 years back...
• SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
  I feel my sibling comments (I paid $x y years ago, get off my lawn) are missing your point. If you're looking to fill a whole datacenter with Optane the price compared to current storage tech is eye watering. This technology is aimed at servers with a high IO load and a lot of RAM caching, not home users. Of course, as with previous SSD tech, the price will come down fairly rapidly.