Intel 750 Series 1.2TB NVMe PCIe SSD Review

[Rookie_MIB]

My thinking on that missing 800GB size and price point is:

Buy two 400GB and raid them. 😀 I'm really thinking that would be pretty darn fast assuming that:

1) It scales well.
2) It's even possible to do.

 

[atheus]

My thinking on that missing 800GB size and price point is:

Buy two 400GB and raid them. 😀 I'm really thinking that would be pretty darn fast assuming that:

1) It scales well.
2) It's even possible to do.

3) Even if it's theoretically possible, you have enough spare PCIE lanes to do it.

 

[JOSHSKORN]

This card vs M.2 SM951, which is faster?

 

[Rookie_MIB]

My thinking on that missing 800GB size and price point is:

Buy two 400GB and raid them. 😀 I'm really thinking that would be pretty darn fast assuming that:

1) It scales well.
2) It's even possible to do.

3) Even if it's theoretically possible, you have enough spare PCIE lanes to do it.

Ha. Good point. Does the article spec how many PCI-e lanes it takes? Looks like an x8, so in that case most moderately spec'd motherboards should be able to handle it. If you don't want a good graphics experience of course, although having an x8 PCI-e v3 should be sufficient.

 

[Eggz]

Ha. Good point. Does the article spec how many PCI-e lanes it takes? Looks like an x8, so in that case most moderately spec'd motherboards should be able to handle it. If you don't want a good graphics experience of course, although having an x8 PCI-e v3 should be sufficient.

The interface is only x4 per card, up to PCI-e 3.0.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9090/intel-ssd-750-pcie-ssd-review-nvme-for-the-client

RAID isn't bootable on current chipsets (x99 & z97) with the current BIOS, but it is possible in software for pure storage.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Storage/Intel-SSD-750-Series-12TB-PCIe-and-25-SFF-Review-NVMe-Consumer

 

[mapesdhs]

Some people might also eventually do NVMe SSD for boot and AHCI SSD for storage, especially if AHCI drops in price but sticks around. I don't know if we can do a full move away from mechanical yet, though, because of the less sudden and more gradual way spinning drives die. Putting irreplaceable data on only one SSD would be scary to me without RAID 1 or some other redundancy.

Where have you come from? You keep posting sensible stuff, it's freaking me out! 😀

Ian.

 

[iliketoprogrammeoo99]

This driver is now on preorder at amazon.

http://amzn.to/1DDKwoI

 

[Eggz]

Also, here are two Amazon links to the 2.5 in form factor

400 GB - http://www.amazon.com/Intel-400GB-Solid-2-5-Inch-SSDPE2MW400G401/dp/B00VPK0KLS/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1429542704&sr=8-4&keywords=INTEL+750+2.5+400+gb

1.2 TB - http://www.amazon.com/Intel-1-2TB-Internal-2-5-Inch-SSDPEDMW012T4R5/dp/B00UHJJQ3Q/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1429542664&sr=8-3&keywords=INTEL+750+2.5

 

[eamon]

This drive - certainly the 1.2TB version looks pretty pointless. At just 70GB per day for 5 years that a total of just around 100 complete drive writes (it's not apples-to-apples, but the raw NAND life expectancy of the 850 pro is 6000 drive writes).

Maybe that's OK for a very light workload - but if you have a light workload, why are you getting this extremely high-end drive?

The only conclusion I can draw is that intel is trying to artificially limit the endurance to segment the market, but as a result, this drive looks like it's left with almost no market at all - almost everyone's better served either by a cheaper drive (light usage), or a more expensive drive (heavy usage).

The only workload I can imagine this drive being useful for is an extremely heavy workload that's very light on writes.

 

[Eggz]

The only workload I can imagine this drive being useful for is an extremely heavy workload that's very light on writes.

Enter photographers!
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html

Database applications like Lightroom fit the bill. Mass storage of original files goes to HDDs, and the Catalogs (i.e. database files) to on an SSD. With the new facial recognition tools, as well as the ability to apply changes and run searches across gigantic libraries or high-res images, ridiculously fast random reads will kick ass!

And just a shout out to the LR users out there, coupling a fast drive with the new GPU usage (released yesterday) shows promise in what was previously a very sluggish program (even on the fastest hardware).

 

[tazmo8448]

I would like to see what the overall benefit is using this product on an everyday home user level. And if possible maybe a paragraph for us less technically gifted to understand in layman terms what it does. I understand that it speeds things up but am fuzzy on just what it does over and above a regular SSD that used for running the OS. In other words does it speed up the overall usage even using HDD as storage? Is it something that 'hot rods' the CPU? See what I mean.

 

[mapesdhs]

"I would like to see what the overall benefit is using this product on an everyday
home user level. ..."

I'd say your choice of words is key here, "everyday home user", ie. it's very unlikely
you'd notice any difference between a good SATA SSD and a PCIe device.

Ian.

 

[tazmo8448]

"I would like to see what the overall benefit is using this product on an everyday
home user level. ..."

I'd say your choice of words is key here, "everyday home user", ie. it's very unlikely
you'd notice any difference between a good SATA SSD and a PCIe device.

Ian.

thanks that is what i was after about the only real thing i do over and above is gaming (think BF4)

 

[mapesdhs]

thanks that is what i was after about the only real thing i do over and above is gaming (think BF4)

In that case this PCIe device would indeed be overkill. You'd be fine with just an EVO or something.
Heck, any of the numerous older good models would also work perfectly ok, like a Vertex4, Vector,
Samsung 840, the original 840, etc. I don't think I'd get a budget model, but something midrange.

Ian.

 

[josejones]

Epic disappointment from Intel!!!

THEY ARE DELAYING THE NEW NVMe 750 SERIES - AGAIN!!!

Why on earth did Intel make such a to-do over their new NVMe 750 series with that countdown clock and all the adverts counting down to April 4th when they weren't ready and nobody could buy the SSD until May and now they've just delayed it until May 16th.

Dumb move Intel

Hardly any questions were explained in Intel's adverts or countdown day.

http://www.myce.com/news/intel-showcases-nvm-express-ssds-consumers-75324/

Intel SSD 750 Delayed Until May 16

What the hell are they thinking?

 

[Rookie_MIB]

I would like to see what the overall benefit is using this product on an everyday home user level. And if possible maybe a paragraph for us less technically gifted to understand in layman terms what it does. I understand that it speeds things up but am fuzzy on just what it does over and above a regular SSD that used for running the OS. In other words does it speed up the overall usage even using HDD as storage? Is it something that 'hot rods' the CPU? See what I mean.

I'll see if I can break down some of the advantages into simpler terms:

First up, the big difference is in the main 'cpu controller' of the drive. Most drives have a controller which will have between four and eight lanes to write data to the individual NAND chips. Obviously, the more lanes the controller has, the faster it can send out data. The one in this particular drive doesn't have four, it doesn't have eight, it has EIGHTEEN. This means it can dispatch more writes (more than 2x) over even the faster SATA eight channel controllers.

Next is NVMe vs SATA/AHCI. NVM Express is a reworking of the protocol on how the OS interacts with the drive. With a traditional AHCI setup, you have a single command queue which can hold 32 commands that are awaiting execution. With the NVMe, it has 65,000 queues which can each hold 65,000 commands awaiting execution. This means the drive queues will always remain full, and the drive will never be sitting 'idle' waiting. As fast as the CPU can fill the queues with commands and data, and face it, CPUs are operating at a far higher level than the drives, the drives will have data to read/write. This alleviates some of the idle time.

Last is that the NVMe drives use PCI-e lanes exclusively which are much faster for transfer than SATA. SATA has a maximum throughput of 6Gbits/second. PCI-e (v3.0) lanes have almost 8Gbits/sec throughput -per lane-. So, an NVMe drive which utilizes an x4 lane configuration has a throughput of around 32Gbits/sec, or around 4GBytes/sec throughput.

So - by putting a beast of a controller with a lot of channels, a big heatsink to keep it cool, on an x4 PCIe lane and using the latest low-latency protocols, they've put together a very fast drive.

As for it being useful for your typical user, heck, even a power-user, it's not really what you would ever need. I have a Samsung 830 SATA drive and it's two generations back and it's still stupidly quick.

 

[tefowler]

Couple of typos; corrections in brackets like thiz [this].

Section 2
A [An] M.2 SSD that is roughly the width, depth and thickness of a stick of gum can't dissipate the same amount of heat as a HHHL PCIe card with a big heat sink.


Section 7
Verdict : It's the fastest client SSD every [ever] given to the public but you need the workload to take advantage of it.

 

[tefowler]

Typo update - two in that first sentence:

Section 2
A [An] M.2 SSD that is roughly the width, depth and thickness of a stick of gum can't dissipate the same amount of heat as a [an] HHHL PCIe card with a big heat sink.

 

[tefowler]

This may be a duplicate. Typo update - two typos in first sentence:

Section 2
A [An] M.2 SSD that is roughly the width, depth and thickness of a stick of gum can't dissipate the same amount of heat as a [an] HHHL PCIe card with a big heat sink.

 

[Bidwell]

I know the 750s are not support on windows server platforms, but will they work as a data drive?

 

[mark0718]

"At idle, the 750 Series products consume just 4W of power. That jumps to 25W under heavy load."

How was the power consumption measured?
Is it a quote from the manufacturer's literature, a measure of the
total system power consumption, or an actual measure of the power
used by the card?