• expired

Intel Optane P1600X 118GB PCIe Gen 3 NVMe M.2 2280 3D XPoint SSD $96.56 (2 For $181.53) Delivered @ Amazon US via AU

This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Optane deal returns with top tier endurance, latency and random IOPS
Ideal for database, scratch disk, dedicated swap, NAS cache, ZFS SLOG and other Homelab applications
See discussion from previous deals here


Controller: Intel
Memory: Intel 3D XPoint
DRAM Cache: Unknown
Sequential Read: 1760 MB/s
Sequential Write: 1050 MB/s
Random 4K Read: 410,000 IOPS
Random 4K Write: 243,000 IOPS
Endurance (TBW): 1292 TB
Warranty: 5 Years

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Amazon Global Store
Amazon Global Store


  • I know everything you wrote are well established but Isn’t many other regular SSD’s have much better IOPs?

    • +3

      They do. You buy this for the 'top tier endurance' mentioned above.

    • +1

      Optane is an extremely niche need that goes way beyond any real home lab requirement. Think predictable latency measures in microseconds.
      Can be used as a tier 0 cache in enterprise SAN equipment etc

    • +3

      NAND small read performance is only fast when serving deep queues and it does it with latency spikes. The Optane memory has extremely good single queue depth 4k read bandwidth and latency, like 3 to 4 times better than the latest high performance consumer and enterprise NAND drives. My 6 year old Intel 900P random 4k q1t1 bandwidth is 263 MB/s while the best NAND drives get under 100 MB/s with 70 being typical. It also is unaffected by a mix of reads and writes which can as much as decimate performance on NAND drives.

    • This is not the best Optane 3D XPoint SSD (more like low end of Optane to be honest). So, its main advantage is 4K random read queue depth 1. The "endurance" advantage can be nullified with larger SSDs (2TB, 4TB) because even if Optane has 15X or even 20X endurance, those larger SSDs are just large enough to offset that.

      While this is a good cache drive and good for storing rolling log files (because using a 2TB to store log files doesn't make sense), it is hard for general public to take advantage it. The QD1 random read advantage means you have a need to open multiple apps at once a lot and repeatedly. That's not a very common usage pattern for general public. Do you have a need to open Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Chrome, Photoshop, Steam, etc… all at once all the time?

      These cost effective Optane SSDs lack max sequential read/write speed to wow people. Also, despite it's max sequential sustained write basically stays constant, even at 1050 MB/s, people won't be impressed due to advancement in SSDs (and how many of us fill SSD up completely, than remove all of files, and start filling up right away to experience the ugly side of traditional SSDs)? As for caching, other than NAS or server, unless you have 4 or more m.2 slots on your PC, you most likely wouldn't put a 120GB SSD in one of the slots.

      • Then what IS the best Optane SSD right now? Is it just any Optane SSD with only 3D Xpoint?

    • +1

      The number one attraction is latency.

      Depending on the workload involved, gen 4 SSDs can have latency figures in the realm of 100μs. Optane on the other hand can be up to 10x faster than that.

      If you had a dataset with a particular workload that's extremely latency sensitive, Optane still beats other SSDs by a large margin. Due to the way it processes writes, it doesn't need power loss protection (PLP) as well.

      With that said, consumer Optane is nerfed compared to the enterprise versions, but is attractive for homelabs for things like ZFS SLOG or L2ARC (forms of caching).

      • The problem is that majority of games and apps won't take / optimise for Optane because no matter how fast that latency is, it is still slower than RAM and VRAM.

        I have cheap Optane SSDs (including one of these) and a cheap Optane cache. The issue is finding something to justify using it in general usage. If something is latency sensitive AND you run out of RAM (let's face it, anything latency sensitive, RAM is a far better choice), then Optane could be useful.

        So basically, assuming the current norm of PC desktop RAM is 32GB or more, you need a workload where you constantly need to randomly read 64GB or 128GB+ worth of data. Furthermore, the data need to be small files / chucks because consumer grade Optane's bandwidth performance isn't impressive.

        High end Optane SSDs, which blow away PCIe gen 4 x4 SSDs, are far too expensive.

    • +1

      not sustained. the p1600x should beat gen5 SSDs after SLC cache exausts on those.

      Will also beat them outright (by orders of magnitude) for latency and small random r/w.

      • No, that's incorrect. If we are talking about reads, especially sequential reads, these consumer grade Optane is no match to PCIe gen 3 x4 flagship.

        SLC cache for writes, the issue is, SN570 2TB has a dynamic SLC cache of 900GB. It can basically write 118GB at more than double the speed than this Optane. A lot of flagship PCIe gen 4 x4's write speed after SLC cache is exhausted is > 1020MB/s. To add insult to injury, my cheapest NVMe 2TB PCIe gen 3 x4 QLC SSD has a SLC cache way larger than 118GB, and if I were to only write 118GB, it blows this Optane away.

        Random write, while the Optane has the latency advantage, at low queue depth. At high queue depth, it lacks the bandwidth in both random read and write. There is a reason why Intel stopped making Optane and why Micron (which co-created Optane) didn't even bother releasing Optane type products.

  • I always get confused, but is this suitable as a cache drive in a Synology? As I've read things that contradict whether they work or not.

    EDIT: had a look through the older threads, looks like this works with Synology NAS devices.

  • +1

    Does this work with ps5?

    • +2

      Yeah, buy it.

    • +1

      No, it doesn't. This is PCIe gen 3 x4. Optane PCIe gen 4 x4 devices cost more than a PS5 itself.

  • -2

    Only 118GB? Why?

    • +2

      Well you can get 3.2TB but if you have to ask how much…

    • or get a 2TB sansung evo about the same TBW, but double the price.

      • +2

        same tbw, double price, 10x+ slower 4k random + access latency - not the same market.

  • they're still trying to empty the optane stock?

    • are optane good?

  • -5

    Seems much more slower than gen4 SSD

    • +8

      Why do people like you make comments about stuff you don't understand?
      Optane drives have far better QD1 reads than any of your gen4 NAND-based drives.

      • It is a legit point and that's why these Optane devices don't sell. Yes, QD1 read is impressive on these, but it is just not useful to general public. Sequential read/write on this particular Optane is not attractive in today's standard.

        Unless you do a side by side comparison of opening Word + Excel + Photoshop + Chrome + Illustrator + Acrobat in one go side by side, most people won't notice the difference. However, when you do file copying, you will feel these low end Optane quite ordinary in today's standard. Windows 10/11 boot up time isn't impressive enough to wow people.

        From consumer's point of view, Intel should do a fire sale on the PCIe gen 4 x4 Optane SSDs. These gen 3 cost effective ones… they really should be priced lower.

        • +1

          Except these Optane drives clearly aren't aimed for mainstream consumers.

          They have their place in the homelab.

          • -3

            @jasonxc: Intel did indicate this can be used for PC/Client/Tablet in its product page. Yes, this is suitable for homelab, but to be honest, there is a reason why it is at this price. It's dated and doesn't really show the true power of Optane. I do wish the high end ones can really drop in price because it just doesn't feel good to own a low end Optane device.

  • +2

    This is very specialised hardware that works best at caching, not really for boot drive.
    L1techs explanation. https://youtu.be/mD6i2toN7lE?t=945

    • It'll still be faster than gen5 SSDs for boot drive due to the absurdly fast random r/w, but the 118gb capacity really screws it. Something like a 905p is much more practical.

      • It'll still be faster than gen5 SSDs for boot drive

        Boot times aren't really affected by SSD speed - there's barely any difference between crap slow SSDs and ultra fast SSDs. Any old SSD makes a great boot drive.

Login or Join to leave a comment