Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #8924 > unrolled thread

3D XPoint(of Intel Optane) is better than Z-NAND

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  3D XPoint(of Intel Optane) is better than Z-NAND Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com> - 2018-06-09 17:42 -0400

#8924 — 3D XPoint(of Intel Optane) is better than Z-NAND

Hello,


I will explain sequential writes and random writes, so that
you understand that Z-NAND that is Samsung's tweaked flash technology 
has limitations, and 3D XPoint(of Intel Optane) is better than Z-NAND:

When people talk about sequential vs random writes to a file, they're 
generally drawing a distinction between writing without intermediate 
seeks ("sequential"), vs. a pattern of seek-write-seek-write-seek-write, 
etc. ("random").


So now read the following to understand:

The random write speed rating on Intel's P4800X is only 9% slower than 
the random read speed, while the Samsung SZ985 will have a random write 
speed that is 77% slower than random reads. Samsung has not been able to 
overcome all of the limitations of flash memory, but they have produced 
some impressive improvements.

Read more here:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/samsung-launches-z-ssd-sz985-up-to-800gb-of-z-nand.813279/


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web