Optane Lives! This exotic 1.5TB SSD is a great Cyber Monday Deal at an all-time low $399

Intel Optane 905P
(Image credit: Intel)

Intel's exotic Optane SSDs are undoubtedly still the most responsive SSDs ever created, with low-QD random read and write speeds, not to mention latency, that easily slays any SSD on the market (see our benchmarks below). Intel famously killed off its future Optane development, but the drives are still available, albeit typically at eye-watering pricing. Today, that pricing hill has become significantly easier to climb, with Newegg offering the 1.5TB Optane 905p Series SSD for only $339, a savings of $280. 

Yes, that works out to roughly 23 cents per GB, which is very high relative to today's cheap flash SSDs that can dip as low as five cents per GB. However, Optane's advantage comes from its ultra-fast and ultra-endurant 3D XPoint tech. 

Intel's Optane Memory drives are hands-down the fastest SSDs in certain tasks, laying waste to competing NAND-based SSDs in nearly every conceivable latency and low-QD random read/write metric - but they are more expensive and come in smaller capacities. That means you'll want to use it primarily for a boot drive while using a standard flash-based SSD or a hard drive for bulk data storage.

Granted, you'll probably need to be a storage aficionado to appreciate this drive, though — I personally have three 960GB Optane drives in my daily system, so I can attest that they still offer unrivaled loading times and snappiness compared to standard SSDs. However, this drive is mostly intended for use in servers for write-heavy applications. Otherwise, you should only select this drive if you're fully aware of its eccentricities. 

Intel Optane 905P Series 1.5TB: now $399 at Newegg

Intel Optane 905P Series 1.5TB: now $399 at Newegg (was $679)
This 2.5" U.2 Optane SSD requires a special cable and connector for use, but the payoff is access to 1.5TB of the lowest-latency and most endurant storage on the planet. The drive delivers up to 575K/550K random read/write IOPS and can absorb an incredible 27.37 petabytes of data writes, which is simply unmatched by any modern SSD.  

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

As you can see in our SSD benchmark hierarchy, we've tested hundreds of new SSDs. The Optane 905p tops out at 575K/550K random read/write IOPS, which isn't as high as the one million+ IOPS touted by the latest flash SSDs. But as you can see in the chart above, none of them can match the Optane 905p in our QD1 4K random IOPS tests — the best measure of the 'snappiness' of your drive in everyday tasks, like OS and application loading. It isn't even close.

This drive is best known for its ultra-low latency, but it also doesn't match the 12GB/s sequential speeds we see with the latest PCIe 5.0 flash drives, instead delivering up to 2,600 MB/s of read/write throughput over its older PCIe 3.0 x4 connection. However, sequential throughput has no real impact on day-to-day operating system usage, which is where this drive truly shines. 

The Optane 905p is also nearly indestructible, at least in terms of write endurance — the drive can absorb 27.37 petabytes of data over the five-year warranty, which works out to over ten full drive writes per day. That's leaps and bounds ahead of standard flash SSDs. 

If you aren't slotting this into a modern server, you'll need a conversion kit to turn either a PCIe slot or an M.2 port into a solution with a U.2 connector. Here are a few examples of those types of devices, like a riser card or an M.2 converter, that I use in my own system. Yes, that's a lot of pricing and complexity hoops to jump through to get access to what is an admittedly older SSD, but it remains among the top performers in key metrics, making it worth it for certain uses. 

For more savings, check out our up-to-the-minute Black Friday tech deals live blog. There, you'll find the latest deal news and buying advice from our editors all day and night.

For even more savings, see our lists of the best Black Friday SSD deals, Black Friday GPU deals, Black Friday CPU deals, Black Friday gaming laptop deals, Black Friday monitor deals, Black Friday 3D printer deals, and Black Friday PC hardware deals overall.

Paul Alcorn
Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech

Paul Alcorn is the Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • bit_user
    Interesting find. Here's a better, zoomable view of that graph, since I don't see a zoom button in the article (you can also just right-click it and open the image in a new tab):

    If I could live with a mere 400 GB and really needed it for the performance, I'd still pay 75% more and get the 400 GB P5800X. It's a whole generation newer and uses PCIe 4.0.
    https://www.provantage.com/intel-ssdpf21q400gb01~7ITE93AQ.htmhttps://www.newegg.com/intel-800gb-optane/p/N82E16820167485
    The downside of either is that the U.2 enclosure requires cable adapters for most consumer motherboards and burns a lot of power, so you'll want to front-mount it in your case to keep it cool. From the Newegg listing for the 905p (and Intel's stats for the 400 GB P5800X), here are the power figures:
    Metric

    905p (960 GB)

    905p (1600 GB)

    P5800X (400 GB)
    Power - Active
    16.4 W

    18.6 W

    14.0 W
    Power - Idle
    6 W

    6.2 W

    3.8 W

    That's more power than a mechanical 3.5" HDD, both active and idle!

    The main reason to buy Optane is for its leading QD1 random IOPS and sustained write performance & endurance. The thing is that most people aren't limited by either of those. We recently saw that most games' loading times aren't even I/O-limited.
    https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/ssd-benchmarks-hierarchy-weve-tested-over-100-different-ssds-over-the-past-few-years-and-heres-how-they-stack-up.3827997/post-23144950
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    To all reading this...
    One of these will not increase your FPS in games.

    That is all....
    Reply
  • bit_user
    USAFRet said:
    One of these will not increase your FPS in games.

    That is all....
    95% agree. However, badly-written games might experience less stuttering.
    "The issue purportedly pertains to SSD optimization, with the game file system incessantly relying on very small block sizes and a low queue depth to stream assets into the game."

    https://www.tomshardware.com/news/badly-optimized-ssd-usage-starfield-traversial-stutter
    That goes right to one of these drives' main strengths. I haven't followed the issue, but hopefully the publisher already patched it.
    Reply
  • atomicWAR
    bit_user said:
    95% agree. However, badly-written games might experience less stuttering.
    "The issue purportedly pertains to SSD optimization, with the game file system incessantly relying on very small block sizes and a low queue depth to stream assets into the game."https://www.tomshardware.com/news/badly-optimized-ssd-usage-starfield-traversial-stutter
    That goes right to one of these drives' main strengths. I haven't followed the issue, but hopefully the publisher already patched it.
    Having 'problem game' drive doesn't actually sound like a bad idea. Put your worst optimized games/new releases on it and as a game is fixed move it to another drive...or not if they don't get it running properly. But generally its likely not worth the cost if I had to guess, for gaming at least. I am half tempted to grab one for an OS drive though...
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    atomicWAR said:
    I am half tempted to grab one for an OS drive though...
    I'm trying really hard to come up with a justification for one of these, to replace the 980 Pro or 660p.

    Still not feeling it.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    If you're looking at Optane for boot drive just get one of the P1600X 118GB drives and call it good. Plenty large enough for OS install, costs less (more per GB, but you can generally buy them anywhere from $60-75), and will use less power. The only real downside is sequential performance (mine was 1793 read/1071 write when I tested it back when I got it), but this shouldn't really be a problem for an OS drive.

    I really wish we'd get some P5800X firesale action, but no other SCM can match it still so I just don't see that ever happening.
    Reply
  • Co BIY
    Just because it's not practical for most and least of all me and my use case (Or essentially non-use case?) doesn't mean I don't want one.

    I love cobbling stuff together with adapters for theoretical performance gains so I can prove I'm real techie and not just another consumer who doesn't even know how this stuff works.
    Reply
  • kiniku
    I've owned 2 Optane drives and I'm a gamer 90% of the time. Random reads and writes do not noticeably improve the consumer PC user experience. Random iOPS improves the opening of numerous small files like Excel Word documents, photos, etc. Where Optane did help significantly was on server storage juggling multiple users making simultaneous requests for small files at once. And Optane has very long longevity. Whereas faster sequential speeds improve the loading of large programs, including demanding games, and booting Windows. Optane died because it did nearly nothing for Windows consumers PCs and it was very expensive. For PC gamer types, Optane was mostly marketing buzzspeak trying to push it to consumers in the hopes of INTEL making their budgets. Back then sequential speeds weren't all that different on conventional Nvme SSDs compared to Optane drives. It failed and INTEL lost a lot of money. Today that is all over. Looking for the fastest? Get yourself an NVME PCI 5.0 SSD. That being said even that isn't really all that different than a PCI 3.0 SSD. But Optane was shuttered by INTEL years ago. For a reason. Unless you are running a multi-user server, don't throw your money away. Today they are trying to unload these on Black Friday to uninformed consumers.

    On the upside, I did get the Optane-only Star Citizen ship bundled with my first Optane. LOL
    Reply
  • bit_user
    kiniku said:
    Unless you are running a multi-user server, don't throw your money away.
    Even there, they are a niche product. They are typically reserved for things like holding the journal of a filesystem RAID'd over several NAND-based enterprise SSDs or to hold the index for a distributed filesystem. Both write-heavy, high-IOPS tasks, where you don't need a ton of capacity.

    kiniku said:
    Optane died because it did nearly nothing for Windows consumers PCs
    Nah, I think consumer was very much a secondary market.

    They died because their capacity scaling is so bad that they'd even struggle to be price-competitive against DRAM-based, NAND-backed drives, which would smoke them on performance, where & when it counts.

    The P5800X @ 800 GB launched somewhere around $2500, which works out to 0.32 GB/$. Current pricing on 64 GB DDR4 ECC RDIMMs is 0.44 GB/$ (provantage) or as high as 0.91 GB/$ (newegg). So, you could already pack a drive full of it + a battery (and optionally enough NAND to hold a snapshot of the DRAM) for less money. Okay, size and power might be a problem, for now - but, we've been promised die-stacked DDR5, enabling DIMMs with capacities up to 1 TB.

    The other thing is, yeah Optane has crazy write endurance. However, to equal a 100 DPWD Optane SSD, you just need a NAND-based drive 10x as big that can manage 10 DWPD. And it'll be cheaper. Or, do the DRAM thing I mentioned and get like 1000 DWPD.

    No matter how you look at it, Optane was out of rope. If you can't scale it, the economics just don't work.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    bit_user said:
    Nah, I think consumer was very much a secondary market
    I think the argument can be made that it was almost entirely an afterthought because at first Intel didn't think anything of using Optane in SSD form period. It was the worst pivot I've ever seen a company make for what should have been a really good product. They should have just scrapped Optane Persistent Memory (it's very good, but so very very niche) and pushed Optane in SCM SSD format.

    Now this might not have saved it as we'll never know if the reason it was axed is that they couldn't continue to layer scale or the capital investment to keep it going simply didn't make sense. I'd like to think it was the former because the latter means it was killed to appease investors.
    bit_user said:
    They died because their capacity scaling is so bad that they'd even struggle to be price-competitive against DRAM-based, NAND-backed drives, which would smoke them on performance, where & when it counts.
    Is this currently actually a thing or are you just referring to what CXL can easily enable? I've never come across anyone doing anything like this at all because it's simply not viable for any current server you'd be needing SCM for.
    Reply