Monday, April 8th 2019

Intel Optane Persistent Memory 512GB Module Can be Yours for $7816

Optane Persistent Memory is being touted by Intel as the "hottest" storage medium between DRAM and NVMe SSDs in the short-term, and a successor to DRAM-based memory in the long-term, aided by its ability to hold data even in the absence of power. The company's latest Xeon Scalable "Cascade Lake" processors support Optane Persistent Memory, allowing data-centers to cram larger amounts of data accessible at DRAM-like speeds, even if at much higher latencies. It remains significantly faster than NVMe SSDs. Component retails began listing 512 GB modules of the Optane Persistent Memory, and its prices are nothing like your 512 GB NVMe SSD. CompSource lists the 512 GB module (model: NMA1XXD512GPSU4) for a whopping USD $7,816, although the product is out of stock.
Add your own comment

33 Comments on Intel Optane Persistent Memory 512GB Module Can be Yours for $7816

#1
Rahnak
Looks like a ram stick. Does it go in the same slots as well?
Posted on Reply
#3
tigger
I'm the only one
Dual channel anyone :eek:
Posted on Reply
#4
Mephis
kastriot, post: 4026665, member: 165334"
What a failed experiment.
How exactly has it failed, since this is the first version released?
Posted on Reply
#5
londiste
According to Tom's Hardware Intel's own pricing guidance puts prices to (with street prices obviously higher, especially right now when this stuff is brand new):
128GB - $577
256GB - $2,125
512GB - $6,751
Rahnak, post: 4026663, member: 172195"
Looks like a ram stick. Does it go in the same slots as well?
Yes. You cannot drop this directly into any normal DDR4 slot though, it needs support from motherboard and CPU which today is limited to Enterprise.
kastriot, post: 4026665, member: 165334"
What a failed experiment.
Optane DIMMs are slower than DRAM but they are also much cheaper for the same amount. Persistence is the second part of what Optane DIMMs are about. There are a number or use cases where either of these is very-very useful. Whether this technology makes it to desktop we will have to see in the future.
Posted on Reply
#6
tigger
I'm the only one
Does persistent mean it retains data on power off?
Posted on Reply
#7
londiste
tigger, post: 4026691, member: 24505"
Does persistent mean it retains data on power off?
Yes.
Posted on Reply
#8
IceShroom
What is the letency on those modules, as Intel people always talks about letency.
Posted on Reply
#10
Metroid
londiste, post: 4026675, member: 169790"
According to Tom's Hardware Intel's own pricing guidance puts prices to (with street prices obviously higher, especially right now when this stuff is brand new):
128GB - $577
256GB - $2,125
512GB - $6,751
Today you can get a 16gb ddr4 for 73 usd https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232258&Description=ddr4&cm_re=ddr4-_-20-232-258-_-Product , so 16 x 8 = 128gb, 8 x 73 usd = 584 usd and this intel 128gb persistent crap memory is $577? what the hell? It was supposed to be 10 times cheaper as I recall.
Posted on Reply
#11
tigger
I'm the only one
Prices are very good compared to normal ddr4, 128gb is approx $4.5k vs $695 for a 128gb stick of this. They use roughly 3x the power of normal DDR4 though

Metroid, post: 4026703, member: 178915"
Today you can get a 16gb ddr4 for 73 usd https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232258&Description=ddr4&cm_re=ddr4-_-20-232-258-_-Product , so 16 x 8 = 128gb, 8 x 73 usd = 584 usd and this intel 128gb persistent crap memory is $577? what the hell? It was supposed to be 10 times cheaper as I recall.
A single 128gb stick of ddr4 is $4k vs $695 for this
Posted on Reply
#12
dj-electric
kastriot, post: 4026665, member: 165334"
What a failed experiment.
I have no idea how TPU still allows you to shitpost in such glorious freedom, but i envy your unique ability to do so.

This type of technology has to start from somewhere, and while being delayed, its nice to know that its here. Optane has some very unique characteristics that can't be found in other products of the NAND world. Could be interesting for workstations in the future once the tech becomes a little more available and affordable
Posted on Reply
#13
jabbadap
londiste, post: 4026675, member: 169790"
According to Tom's Hardware Intel's own pricing guidance puts prices to (with street prices obviously higher, especially right now when this stuff is brand new):
128GB - $577
256GB - $2,125
512GB - $6,751
Yes. You cannot drop this directly into any normal DDR4 slot though, it needs support from motherboard and CPU which today is limited to Enterprise.
Optane DIMMs are slower than DRAM but they are also much cheaper for the same amount. Persistence is the second part of what Optane DIMMs are about. There are a number or use cases where either of these is very-very useful. Whether this technology makes it to desktop we will have to see in the future.
Well it's hard to compare that price to anything. Maybe some form of NVDIMMs would be the closest comparison point to make(Jedec's NVDIMM-P should be the closest equivalent). 1 pcs of 32GB Micron NVDIMM-N costs ~900€, but those have equal amount of SLC-Nand and dram and SLC is used just a back-up for power failures.
Posted on Reply
#14
Metroid
tigger, post: 4026705, member: 24505"
Prices are very good compared to normal ddr4, 128gb is approx $4.5k vs $695 for a 128gb stick of this. They use roughly 3x the power of normal DDR4 though

A single 128gb stick of ddr4 is $4k vs $695 for this
I'm talking about a workstation consumer, not an enterprise consumer. Although this is for an enterprise consumer, prices are a lot more than supposed to be. If you are smart you will get a 128gb 8 slots motherboard for $500. https://www.servethehome.com/a-close-look-at-intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-modules/
Posted on Reply
#15
londiste
Metroid, post: 4026721, member: 178915"
I'm talking about a workstation consumer, not an enterprise consumer. Although this is for an enterprise consumer, prices are a lot more than supposed to be. If you are smart you will get a 128gb 8 slots motherboard for $500. https://www.servethehome.com/a-close-look-at-intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-modules/
This is not intended for a workstation consumer. At least not one that would be OK with only 128GB RAM.
128GB in one slot as opposed to 8 slots is a big difference.
Posted on Reply
#16
Vya Domus
londiste, post: 4026675, member: 169790"
Optane DIMMs are slower than DRAM but they are also much cheaper for the same amount. Persistence is the second part of what Optane DIMMs are about. There are a number or use cases where either of these is very-very useful. Whether this technology makes it to desktop we will have to see in the future.
It seems like 512GB worth of ECC DDR4 can actually be had for less than an equivalent Optane module (don't believe me look it up). Certainly, it wont have the same density as it was pointed out but this begs the question : What are those numerous use cases and why would the price tag be worth it ?

DDR5 is well on it's way and sooner or later this is will be left in the dust on all fronts, it's evident to me this technology is bound to remain in a awkward middle ground of price/performance/capacity.
Posted on Reply
#17
londiste
Vya Domus, post: 4026724, member: 169281"
It seems like 512GB worth of ECC DDR4 can actually be had for less than an equivalent Optane module (don't believe me look it up).
I cannot find a 512GB DIMM, can you?
Posted on Reply
#18
Vya Domus
I already mentioned the obvious density difference.

But I am still curios to see that list of numerous use cases this has.
Posted on Reply
#20
Metroid
While lower density memory will always be cheaper cause you can use lots of memory with just a single or dual cpu, one must use the head and see if is worth, intel is aiming for the highest and highest server companies here or things for deep learning, space and so on. Only companies like facebook will need this.

You would have to choose here, split in many computers or a single computer/mainframe. While a single mainframe is a lot lot lot better overall, is bloody expensive, from a cost benefit, I would split in many computers.
Posted on Reply
#21
Vya Domus
londiste, post: 4026733, member: 169790"
Density difference actually sums it up pretty well.
So no numerous use cases as I suspected. Thanks.
Posted on Reply
#22
londiste
Vya Domus, post: 4026736, member: 169281"
So no numerous use cases as I suspected. Thanks.
No, your own computer will not benefit from getting one.

Big Data. Databases. Server farms, including virtualization. Anything that requires heaps and heaps of memory.
Intel has has two access modes to these where Optane-aware application can access DRAM and XPoint parts separately and build application around that.
Some of possible benefits will need software support but the increased capacity is a definite selling point from get-go.
Posted on Reply
#23
Vya Domus
londiste, post: 4026741, member: 169790"
No, your own computer will not benefit from getting one.
As if I ever alluded to this idea.

londiste, post: 4026741, member: 169790"
Big Data. Databases. Server farms, including virtualization.
Nice selection of trendy words, I was hoping for some clear cut benchmarks of applications where this capacity/performance/price combination wins over the classical memory hierarchy in the aforementioned cases. I can't find any on my own so I am not necessarily disappointed. There is a big difference between what a company claims their product will do vs what it can do in reality and so far there isn't much I heard about.
Posted on Reply
#24
londiste
It will not win over classical memory hierarchy and was never intended to.
It will win in circumstances where classical memory hierarchy runs out of faster memory. Thus, bigger density is its primary selling point.
Technically it will benefit from XPoint in Optane being in between DRAM and SSD (fast ones, like enterprise NVMe drives) in terms of speed and especially latency.
Posted on Reply
#25
Vya Domus
londiste, post: 4026750, member: 169790"
It will win in circumstances where classical memory hierarchy runs out of faster memory.
That comes with many caveats, for example assuming that memory access is somewhat predictable and caching can be done effectively. Unfortunately that's not always the case.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment