Intel 750

astar wrote on 4/9/2015, 12:36 AM

Surprised no one has talked about the Intel 750 SSD. For video editing it would seem like a good performer for uncompressed work or multiple lightly compressed streams. Certainly for capture.

What does seem off, however, is up until the X99 chipset most boards would be highly throttling the GPU interface to attempt to keep up with this PCIe SSD. Certainly not a device to host on any of the chipset PCIe slots. Maybe this is strictly a server device, or maybe we will be seeing much more full bandwidth CPU slots in future motherboards. The DMI link between CPU and Chipset would seem to hold this device back.

Any thoughts?

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-ssd-pcie-nvme-750,28872.html

Comments

GeeBax wrote on 4/9/2015, 1:05 AM

Maybe if you can afford to burn precious PCIE lanes, but many users prefer to use them for GPUs.

videoITguy wrote on 4/9/2015, 4:27 PM

This issue is not exactly news...there have been similar PciE lane burner devices out for several years. The trick is to mate it into a motherboard chipset equip that is going to handle your overall configuration. I have been successful in doing it with special MB's but then again I could care less about supporting any GPU anywhere in my hardware.

GeeBax wrote on 4/9/2015, 5:23 PM

[I] but then again I could care less about supporting any GPU anywhere in my hardware.[/I]

That's fine if all you want to run is Vegas, but if you use Resolve, then a GPU is essential.

Hulk wrote on 4/9/2015, 7:53 PM

I know there are some here who disagree with me on this but there are very few Vegas projects that will be able to saturate the 500MB/sec transfer rate of a single quality SSD. I wouldn't worry too much about sequential transfer rates and the limitations of SATA3.

OldSmoke wrote on 4/9/2015, 8:06 PM

The problem really are the limited amount of PCIe lanes available in today's systems topping out at 40 lanes for the socket 2011 and 2011v3.

john_dennis wrote on 4/9/2015, 10:54 PM

"[I]...there are very few Vegas projects that will be able to saturate the 500Mb/sec transfer rate...[/I]"

That's a big B. SATA 3 = 6Gbit/sec. or 600MB/sec.

Hulk wrote on 4/10/2015, 6:27 AM

I was referring to the "real world" ~500MB/sec SATA3 transfer rates.

And yes, that IS a big "B" as in byte and not bit!

astar wrote on 4/10/2015, 9:20 PM

I agree on the SATA3 opinion. I look at these devices as a road map for future products coming down the road. If you envision a 4k world editing world, 4k uncompressed or even light compression, with multiple streams will exceed SATA3 quickly. 4K-8-bit@100Mbs is a highly compressed image. Try the math on 4K-10-bit @ 60fps and then quarter that, and then double or triple for stream composites.

After looking at this further the X99 is apparently built ready for this device, due to the DMI2.0x4 bridge. That would allow placing the SSD on the chipset lanes.

wilvan wrote on 4/11/2015, 1:39 AM

Gonna order 2 of those for one of the Z820's , defintely worth it and the way to go for 4k and higher.