Thank you for your interest in the Intel® Optane™ Memory.
Unlike the Intel® Optane™ Memory, the Intel® Optane™ SSD 900P Series is not a system acceleration solution, so it is not intended to be used as a cache drive. Both devices share the Optane™ label because they are based on the 3D XPoint™ technology.
For more information about the features and benefits of the Intel® Optane™ SSD 900P Series, please check the following link: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/memory-storage/solid-state-drives/gaming-enthusiast-ssds/optane-900p-series.html
Regarding your question about the “injection” of the drivers before or after the OS installation, there is no performance advantage per se. This is an option that we provide to customers that may want to install the OS on multiple systems, since integrating the drivers to the image may safe some time.
If you have another question, don’t hesitate to contact us.
Cool, that was most of what I needed to know.
Just interested in the "not intended to be used as a cache drive" part. Is that "it will work but its not designed to be used like this" or "it wont work at all this way"?
I really hate multiple drive letters so cache + main drive would have been optimal.
I am thinking that in any event the 900P is a killer OS drive and I could always just use a 2nd larger drive for less often used/less disk access dependent stuff.
What I meant that is that it is not designed to be used as cache drive. I haven’t personally tested this drive as secondary cache drive for a primary hard drive (it is not a validated configuration) so I can’t assure you that it will work.
I understand that you find more convenient to have a cache + main drive configuration, but due to the features and specifications of the Intel® Optane™ SSD 900P Series, the performance of your system will probably be better the way you pointed it out: Intel® Optane™ SSD 900P as primary drive and a second, larger drive, for less frequently accessed data.
Since I am likely going to go with a 900P as a boot drive as a 2nd option anyway I will test this and report back, it will be a week or so from now.
Thinking about this more I think I remember running into a similar situation back when we were using SATA SSDs to cache 64 gigs of data via Intel SRT.
You could use a 64 gig partition for SRT and the rest could become a NTFS folder mounted within your OS drive.
You would have the same effect here. 1 drive letter and the entire SSD would be used, 64 gigs for SRT, the rest as a "fast" folder reserved for certain apps/data.
I kind of have a feeling that I can do something similar here. I will let you know either way.
You are welcome.
We are glad to hear that you are interested in sharing your experience with the community, we really appreciate it.
In case you have any update or another question, don’t hesitate to contact us.