Crucial MX100 vs Samsung. 512gb

[marcplante]

MY wife bought a Samsung ATIV 9 2014 notebook which she absolutely loves in every way, except she's already topped out the 128 GB SSD. I was going to buy her a Crucial MX100 512GB drive since the reviews seem solid and the price is certainly right. On the performance benchmarks, the Crucial seems to be statistically slower than the Samsung in some measures, though I doubt that my wife will experience any issues in her day to day surfing and occasional video watching and casting.

Have there been any horror stories about Crucial reliability? Otherwise, the MX100 seems fairly well recommended in the 512GB range. I'll probably pick up a 256 for myself black friday to accelerate my own notebook (Asus N56, which has a nice screen and keyboard for me, but slow boot and transition times).

Thanks,

Marc

 

[BonzaiDuck]

MY wife bought a Samsung ATIV 9 2014 notebook which she absolutely loves in every way, except she's already topped out the 128 GB SSD. I was going to buy her a Crucial MX100 512GB drive since the reviews seem solid and the price is certainly right. On the performance benchmarks, the Crucial seems to be statistically slower than the Samsung in some measures, though I doubt that my wife will experience any issues in her day to day surfing and occasional video watching and casting.

Have there been any horror stories about Crucial reliability? Otherwise, the MX100 seems fairly well recommended in the 512GB range. I'll probably pick up a 256 for myself black friday to accelerate my own notebook (Asus N56, which has a nice screen and keyboard for me, but slow boot and transition times).

Thanks,

Marc

I have a budget, and given the office-worthy performance of a seven-year-old Core-Duo, acquired a "surplus refurbished" executive laptop, Gateway E475M. It came to me with an T8500 processor, but the specs equip it with a T7500. The Intel spec for the chipset limits RAM to 4GB, but the spec wasn't clear about whether it was "total RAM" or Ram-per-slot.

So I found a decent price on a pair of SO-DIMM sticks, because indications pointed to use of a 2x4GB RAM kit for a certain BIOS revision. As far as I was concerned, spending the money was still a gamble. But it worked.

Then I put in a Crucial MX100 512GB. Of course the notebook's controller was only SATA-II. But the performance was noticeably better than the WD "Blue" 500GB laptop drive I had removed.

With the RAM I was able to test and use a RAM-caching program of two trial softwares. So I settled on PrimoCache.

For a notebook used mostly for business and office apps, it seems almost worthy of the extra bucks spent. For that matter, I could always redeploy the MX100 to desktop or laptop later on.

I think with a newer laptop, replacing an electro-mechanical drive with an SSD should really prove itself.

IF I thought it wasn't such a great idea, I would have removed the MX100 by now and put it in one of my desktops.

 

[Berryracer]

I own like 4 Samsung SSDs, 840 EVO, 840 PRO, and 850 PRO. I also had a 512GB SSD and mind you I AM a power user. Believe me in the real world usage, other than synthetic benchmarks, they are all the same. So get the biggest capacity you can afford in a decent and reliable brand like Crucial and call it a day.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Yeah, between the 840 EVO and the MX100, I'd pick whichever is cheaper. (I actually have an 840EVO and an M550.)

 

[Essence_of_War]

Yeah, between the 840 EVO and the MX100, I'd pick whichever is cheaper. (I actually have an 840EVO and an M550.)

Agreed.

Now that Samsung has published fixes for their firmware bug for the EVO that slowed access to older data, it really is just a question of best price. My observations have been that the MX100 is almost uniformly cheaper at every capacity, but YMMV.

 

[kevinsbane]

For what it's worth, keep in mind that the mx100 has 3 times the idle power usage of the Samsung 840 evo, about 1 watt idle versus 0.3 watts idle. You may find that the Samsung has longer battery life on a laptop than the MX 100.

 

[Cerb]

M500 480GB (fully populated)
840 Pro 512GB (fully populated)
Q Drive 512GB
Ultra Plus 128GB (half populated)
Ultra Plus 256GB (fully populated)
Supercache 2 128GB
Formerly, M4 128GB

The Supercache 2 is all I could get in M.2 2242, and i noticeably slower than all the others, in every situation. It's better than a smaller drive, though...

It's not too hard to come up with situations where I can feel the difference between the old M4, or Supercache 2, and 128GB Ultra Plus, and the 256GB Ulta Plus, 840 Pro and M500. With the Ultra Plus 256GB, and Q Drive, I can run competing benchmarks, and make contrived situations with my VMs, that put the M500 and 840 Pro in a different league. The 840 Pro is a bit better with bursty loads, while the M500 is a bit better with the queue staying filled--they really even out, between each other, in practice. So, basically, I was able to come up with cases that matched testing of mixed workloads between those drives, in reviews that did such.

In daily use, even when being disk-intensive, the M4 and 128GB Ultra Plus' file copy speeds were/are slower than the others, and the M4 would need some idle time after big installs/updates, that the newer drives do not, less it get stuttery. They were and are otherwise impossible to differentiate.

The MX100 512GB is yet a little faster than my M500.

Whatever else you use to make your decision, don't let relative performance scores fool you: the test suites are so strenuous now that an HDD running them would be comical, and they have been surpassing even disk-intensive power users' needs for some time, now.

 

[Virgorising]

I own like 4 Samsung SSDs, 840 EVO, 840 PRO, and 850 PRO. I also had a 512GB SSD and mind you I AM a power user. Believe me in the real world usage, other than synthetic benchmarks, they are all the same. So get the biggest capacity you can afford in a decent and reliable brand like Crucial and call it a day.

I agree. While my Crucial M500 240GBs is the only SSD I've ever had so far, it rocks. Even with the SATA 2 connectivity my board limits it to. And, best upgrade we can make in any system for sure.

Wait for Black Friday if you can!!!!

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

Put it this way :

1) Samsung keeps f*cking about with firmware snafus (840, 840 EVO, Spinpoint F4, etc.)
2) Crucial is engineered for increased reliability. Know some folks at Micron and the design internals.

Getting rid of my 840s and replacing them with MX100s.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I agree. While my Crucial M500 240GBs is the only SSD I've ever had so far, it rocks. Even with the SATA 2 connectivity my board limits it to. And, best upgrade we can make in any system for sure.

Wait for Black Friday if you can!!!!

Does your motherboard have any PCI-E 2.0 slots available with at least x4 capability?

If it does, get a $75 SATA-III controller (can have RAID 0, 1, 10) which only requires the MSAHCI native driver for AHCI mode.

And some of those controllers -- using the Marvell chip -- are even cheaper.

 

[Virgorising]

Does your motherboard have any PCI-E 2.0 slots available with at least x4 capability?

If it does, get a $75 SATA-III controller (can have RAID 0, 1, 10) which only requires the MSAHCI native driver for AHCI mode.

And some of those controllers -- using the Marvell chip -- are even cheaper.

OMG! I nevah heard of this!!!! I looked below, and am not sure! I truly had no clue there was any way at all to increase transfer speed with ANY SATA 2 controlled board!

Not sure, but, given below, I kinda don't think this is an option for this board. Wut do you think?

 

[hojnikb]

OMG! I nevah heard of this!!!! I looked below, and am not sure! I truly had no clue there was any way at all to increase transfer speed with ANY SATA 2 controlled board!

Not sure, but, given below, I kinda don't think this is an option for this board. Wut do you think?

Dont do this. Save yourself the money and use sataII for the time being. Pretty much every non native sata solution is a piece of garbage, especially marvell based. Just stick with SATAII and upgrade to SATAIII motherboard when you upgrade your system.

 

[hojnikb]

For what it's worth, keep in mind that the mx100 has 3 times the idle power usage of the Samsung 840 evo, about 1 watt idle versus 0.3 watts idle. You may find that the Samsung has longer battery life on a laptop than the MX 100.

Not really true when you enable devsleep and HIPM/DIPM. Then power usage drops quite a bit (but nobody really tests this).

 

[Cerb]

Not really true when you enable devsleep and HIPM/DIPM. Then power usage drops quite a bit (but nobody really tests this).

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8066/crucial-mx100-256gb-512gb-review/8
(unless you have a tablet with 2.5" slots, those mW are not worth worrying about; but the whole Watts when not sleeping might be).

 

[Virgorising]

Dont do this. Save yourself the money and use sataII for the time being. Pretty much every non native sata solution is a piece of garbage, especially marvell based. Just stick with SATAII and upgrade to SATAIII motherboard when you upgrade your system.

Wow. I can feel your cool, deliberate, pragmatic head and the perspective it brings! Something I am sometimes missing, so many thanks for this. I ignited for a moment, cause that's wut I do. I mainly agree re stock speeds and native capacities and to respect those.

I will say, this SDD even on my controller couldn't be much faster.....runs at the high end of average.....I can't even fathom what 6X connectivity would be like.

And, I upgraded a friend's new lappy with an SSD, he has SATA3.....and the result was not that much faster than mine.

Some vehicles can be safely upgraded with big block engine and others..... not so much.
____________________________________________
Late Edit:

Intel controllers truly are faster than others. I :wub: Intel. Chips, boards, everything. I just delved and found this, below, content corroborates.....I don even run benchmarks anymore, I trust my subjective experience; this Crucial drive is FAST, even with SATA 2/3 GBs.

My numbers-matched '67 Vette is, of course, (original, 400ci, Tri-power) big block. It is also imaginary.:biggrin:

Re: SATA III Upgrade: PCI-E Card or New Motherboard

The upcoming Intel 330 SSD basically uses the same SandForce SF-2281 controller and should perform similarly to the cited 520. However, the 330 should cost less so you might want to reconsider you initial choice of SSD model.

Your system seems fine. It should be reasonably fast even by today's standards. If you were already building a new system that would be one thing but if you have no need or interest to do so it would be overkill just for SATA 6G ports.

Having said that, I prefer the onboard Intel controllers and would use Intel SATA 3G ports over non-Intel SATA 6G ports just about any day of the week. Installing a new SSD even on a SATA 3G port will yield noticeable improvements in everyday tasks. You need not move to SATA 6G to see improvement.

Up until recently I was running a 4x64GB 240GB SSD RAID 0 array on one of my systems. This was on the onboard Intel SATA 3G controller. In HD Tune it could hit as high as ~890mb/s seq reads with a min of about ~750mb/s or so IIRC. This is greater then what I would expect to see from a single SATA 6G port + SATA III SSD cobo and it really didn't make much difference in speed IMO over a single SATA II SSD.

Sometimes fast is just fast.​

​

 

[marcplante]

So it turns out that her device needs an m.2 ssd, so the bargain crucial is out. I'll start a new query about m.2 drives.

Thanks,

Marc

 

[Topweasel]

OMG! I nevah heard of this!!!! I looked below, and am not sure! I truly had no clue there was any way at all to increase transfer speed with ANY SATA 2 controlled board!

Not sure, but, given below, I kinda don't think this is an option for this board. Wut do you think?

Like the guy said earlier I wouldn't put time into finding a good SATA III adapter, to get halfway decent performance you have to get a SAS board and just hook up Sata drives to it and that is pointless.

But I did notice the Blue connector on the board shot up there. That should be a SATAIII port. The white and black tend to differ at times but generally it's black for chipset and white for controller embedded on a board. But Blue I have only ever seen associated with SATA III (oddly the same agreed general color for USB 3 ports as well).

What system is that board from?

 

[Virgorising]

Like the guy said earlier I wouldn't put time into finding a good SATA III adapter, to get halfway decent performance you have to get a SAS board and just hook up Sata drives to it and that is pointless.

I believe I got this now....re the phenomenon I never heard of before.

But I did notice the Blue connector on the board shot up there. That should be a SATAIII port. The white and black tend to differ at times but generally it's black for chipset and white for controller embedded on a board. But Blue I have only ever seen associated with SATA III (oddly the same agreed general color for USB 3 ports as well).

Truly? The blue? I must delve re this! I never even noticed the blue any time I've been in there!!!

What system is that board from?

This is an Optiplex 980 MT. LGA 1156 socket; I have the fastest i7 Lynnfield the socket supports, old chip, FAB CHIP. The board, as usual, is the result of Dell partnering with Intel. Obviously, it's proprietary.

What I am now getting, is, even if I invested in the card should that be viable, I would still not be getting 6GBs transfer speeds, plus there seem to be downsides re TRIM, well, I read that on the net.....and subjectively, this SSD is already wicked fast, even with SATA 2. Again, I now attribute this to Intel controllers.

Thanks so much for taking the time!!!!:thumbsup:
_______________________________________________
Edit: I am delving....I never knew the had varying LANES BEFORE! PCI slots.

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1653731/whats-difference-pcie-x16-pci-express-x16.html

And pls see Maxx-Power's contribution in below thread, scroll down a bit.....my head exploded half way into it.

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1806722/pcie-lanes-board.html
__________________________________________

Another edit: (cept I do not wanna hijakck this thread and just got I think I am):

Found This:

Elsewhere, the board offers two spare DIMM sockets that can accept a maximum of 16GB of DDR3 RAM, two spare SATA/300 ports, a pair of PCI slots and two PCI Express x16 slots, although one of these runs at just x4 speed. It's a far wider selection than is available on the ​

Lenovo ThinkCentre A58

, and the Dell is just as cleverly designed as Lenovo's range of small-form-factor machines.​

Read more: Dell Optiplex 980 review | PC Pro http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/desktops/358975/dell-optiplex-980#ixzz3I910F4qp

My apololgies to the OP who is an uber husband!


​

 

[Topweasel]

I believe I got this now....re the phenomenon I never heard of before.


Truly? The blue? I must delve re this! I never even noticed the blue any time I've been in there!!!



This is an Optiplex 980 MT. LGA 1156 socket; I have the fastest i7 Lynnfield the socket supports, old chip, FAB CHIP. The board, as usual, is the result of Dell partnering with Intel. Obviously, it's proprietary.

What I am now getting, is, even if I invested in the card should that be viable, I would still not be getting 6GBs transfer speeds, plus there seem to be downsides re TRIM, well, I read that on the net.....and subjectively, this SSD is already wicked fast, even with SATA 2. Again, I now attribute this to Intel controllers.

Thanks so much for taking the time!!!!:thumbsup:
_______________________________________________
Edit: I am delving....I never knew the had varying LANES BEFORE! PCI slots.

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1653731/whats-difference-pcie-x16-pci-express-x16.html

And pls see Maxx-Power's contribution in below thread, scroll down a bit.....my head exploded half way into it.

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1806722/pcie-lanes-board.html

Yeah PCIe is very flexible they can have the power and length they want even for the smallest of actual lanes assigned to them.

It's not just Intel. AMD makes great integrated SATA controllers. The problem is outside normal chip-set manufacturers (really its just them nowadays). You can have companies like VIA or Marvell creating controllers and even they can do a halfway decent job. But then you have to rely on cards manufacturer to do a good job as well. Companies like SIIG for example care more about cost and overall compatibility and don't put an ounce of effort into performance. You have to go through dozens of sub $100 cards to find one that gets better than SATA II performance.

Well sorry to get the hopes up but Q57 chipset doesn't have SATA III support. Probably the last Core series chipset to not include at least 2 port support. Dell probably used it as marker for which device would get plugged into it, probably wouldn't choose that color going forward. I should note though I suggested it in my previous post. The color for the ports isn't standardized. But when for not aesthetic reasons most motherboard manufacturers use Blue for the SATA III ports.

 

[Virgorising]

Yeah PCIe is very flexible they can have the power and length they want even for the smallest of actual lanes assigned to them.

Fascinating!!!!!

It's not just Intel. AMD makes great integrated SATA controllers.

I confess a strong bias toward Intel. Not dissing AMD, I am just a bigot in this, I guess, from early conditioning.

Well sorry to get the hopes up but Q57 chipset doesn't have SATA III support.

Indeed, that's my chipset. Not surprised, I thought I knew every part of this system when I chose it (used of course, on ebay, then, I just upgrade, do this all the time re the Optiplexes)...and I think I did.

I am being objective when I say, with this system, I can't even imagine what having 6GB would be like.....given how fast this drive is as it is, including boot time.

Dell probably used it as marker for which device would get plugged into it, probably wouldn't choose that color going forward. I should note though I suggested it in my previous post. The color for the ports isn't standardized. But when for not aesthetic reasons most motherboard manufacturers use Blue for the SATA III ports.

Having learned about this now, I kinda think the colors SHOULD, maybe, be standardized.

SO INTERESTING!!!!!!! Thanks for all these goodies!!!:biggrin:

 

[marcplante]

Thanks for all the inputs. I also got feedback on Notebook reviews, that pointed out the M.2 SSD requirement, then I went to Amazon where I found a Transcend M.2 SSD 512 GB drive (cute little things) for $245. I'll grab an adapter to plug it into the USB port to clone, then do an install. BTW the Amazon product reviews confirmed that it will fit and work in the notebook I am working on, despite the fact that Samsung support says the notebook only supports a 256GB drive.

I'll provide a post mortem if any of this doesn't play out as documented.

 

[Engineer]

I've been high on Samsung since the 830 drives but just bought a MX100 512GB for $165 after cashback / coupon. Need the space to speed up my VM's (which are currently on Hitachi 5400 rpm drives which are slower than life itself). I don't recall many SSD's (or HDD's) getting a SOLID 5 stars on every site that I've monitored it on.

Can't wait!!!

 

[dave_the_nerd]

I've been high on Samsung since the 830 drives but just bought a MX100 512GB for $165 after cashback / coupon. Need the space to speed up my VM's (which are currently on Hitachi 5400 rpm drives which are slower than life itself). I don't recall many SSD's (or HDD's) getting a SOLID 5 stars on every site that I've monitored it on.

Can't wait!!!

Life isn't slow - it's going by far too fast for my tastes, frankly.

 

[Virgorising]

Life isn't slow - it's going by far too fast for my tastes, frankly.

Important comment. We need reminding re this, I think!

 

[Engineer]

Just got my 512GB MX100 installed and scored 1054 on AS-SSD.

Copied my very slow work XP laptop VM from my 5,900 rpm Hitachi drive to the MX100 and did a full boot to loading my latest working program. Time went from 7:40 to 3:40 (this laptop has a hundred industrial software packages installed and every damn one of them throw something into the booting mix - but I've got to have them all).