淺談intel 800p的致命缺點—耗電

林素毅 wrote:
我這邊擔心你又顧左右(恕刪)

林素毅 wrote:
我這邊擔心你又顧左右而言他，我這邊乾脆幫你直接整理好好了，



Intel的800p latency時間大約為10ms
Samsung的960p latency時間大約為5000ms


然後再用你的圖去看兩者的省電模式



結果Intel的測試是差不多在PS3模式
而Samsung時間很明顯是在PS4模式之下

我們再來看一下在PS4模式底下，Intel宣告是低於8mW
而Samsung 960p呢？可以自己好好看一下



我在這邊聲明一點，我做這些整理並不是要"證明哪家SSD好，哪家SSD差"
而是要告知樓主，這種錯誤數據的比較法是有問題的，
更何況你還直接斷定某一家的SSD就是比較差，是非常有問題的一件事情
使用簽名檔
是

否

Joseph Ju wrote:
Intel的800p latency時間大約為10ms
Samsung的960p latency時間大約為5000ms(恕刪)

Unfortunately, our usual idle power testing method didn't work with the 800p, leading it to show only a modest reduction in power rather than a reduction of multiple orders of magnitude. This may be related to the fact that the Optane SSD 800p indicates that it may take over a full second to enter its idle state. This is an unusually high entry latency, and something in our system configuration is likely preventing the 800p from fully transitioning to idle. We will continue to investigate this issue. However, based on the specifications alone, it looks like the 800p could benefit from an intermediate idle state that can be accessed more quickly.

(I should mention here that the last Intel consumer SSD we reviewed, the 760p, also initially showed poor power management on our test. We were eventually able to track this down to an artifact of our test procedure, and determined that the 760p's power management was unlikely to malfunction during real-world usage. The 760p now ranks as the NVMe SSD with the lowest idle power we've measured.)