Actually, Crucial is a parent company of Micron, so they get the best stuff possible. Also, they did change the controller to a siliconmotion one. But its still a great drive.
Actually, Crucial is a parent company of Micron, so they get the best stuff possible. Also, they did change the controller to a siliconmotion one. But its still a great drive.Wondered about that too. It appears not, from thessdreview review:
"By using the Micron FBGA Decoder, we can identify the NAND flash as having the product number MT29F512G08CKCCBH7-10:C. It is 128G-bit 16nm synchronous MLC NAND flash memory with each module being 64GB in capacity." Review Link
Maybe they know someone at Micron and can get a good price on the good stuff...Or they saved some money on the controller swap.
hojnikb- I agree 100% with you on the whole bait and switch. I wouldn't be surprised if Crucial's BX 100 uses Asynchronous. The B stands for Budget and this is an entry level SSD just as kingston's V300. Asynchronous is cheaper to make and is more readily available...It's all about the dollar,they seem to forget about performance and customer loyalty.
It's all about the dollar,they seem to forget about performance and customer loyalty.
ClockHound said:Maybe they know someone at Micron and can get a good price on the good stuff...Or they saved some money on the controller swap.
Actually, Crucial is a parent company of Micron, so they get the best stuff possible. Also, they did change the controller to a siliconmotion one. But its still a great drive.
Nothing with sandforce is reasonable. Unless you want to live on the edge.
Highly doubt that a simple clone would be the issue, since, I have done this on a few MX100's and no issues at all with them.
As long as the clone had the same hardware, as before, there shouldn't be a issue.
Then what exactly is causing BSODs or other probs on the MX100.. i thought this drive was considered stable given the many pos reviews i've seen.
Just need to know if it comes with tools that allow manual TRIM or if a 3th party prog can do this with this drive? Or does this drive come rather vanilla.
I have to agree with you on this one.
Can somebody explain what the hate towards Sandforce is. Sandforce has Durawrite which is some kind of built in TRIM from what i understand so that's a good thing, but why all the hate against it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SandForceThe first generation SandForce controllers do not fully comply with the SATA specification[26] and are incompatible with the Intel Haswell platform.[27][28]
After the introduction of the SF-2000 series controller, some customers using drives with that controller reported issues such as BSOD and freezing. In early June 2011, Corsair Memory issued a recall on the 120 GB Force 3 with specific serial numbers, but not on any other Force 3 drive with a SandForce SF-2000 controller, therefore that recall does not appear to be related to the controller.[29] In October, 2011, SandForce sent out firmware updates through their manufacturing partners such as OCZ that fixed the reported issue.[30] In August 2012, a website known as Tweaktown identified an issue with SandForce-based SSDs using firmware 5.0.1 and 5.0.2 wherein TRIM support did not perform optimally when fully erasing the SSD, but also confirmed that the 5.0.3 and 5.0.4 firmware resolved the issue.[31]
In 2012, SandForce SF-2000-based drives were discovered to only include AES-128 encryption instead of the advertised AES-256 encryption. It was speculated the lower grade encryption was used to qualify for US ITAR licences which are precluded for products featuring certain levels of encryption heading for a selected list of US-ambivalent or actively unfriendly countries.[32][33] Products such as Kingston SSDNow V+200 and KC100 were re-documented to state the use of 128-bit AES encryption.[34] Intel offered refunds for affected users of Intel 520 Series SSDs until 2012-10-01, while Kingston offered exchange program to cover the cost of shipping for customers who request a swap.[35]
I can't speak for everyone, but I sure this covers a good bit of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SandForce
Durawrite is nothing like TRIM.Hmm.. does that mean the Kingston HyperX 3K is not a good choice
Since i'm still on vista i was kinda liking its built-in Sandforce Durawrite tech, which is kinda like TRIM, but now i don't know anymore
Durawrite is nothing like TRIM.
Trim is just a command, that tells SSD when you deleted data (ie, this sector is now invalid, erase it). If trim is not present, ssd will work just fine without it but it will wait until something else gets written to the sector you deleted before, before it will erase it (ssds doesnt have any other way of knowing you deleted data -- except ofcourse trim).
Now sandforce works a little differently; it uses compression (which is a part of durawrite). With the space it gains using compression, that space is used as sort of a spare aera for incoming writes (as writing needs erased blocks/pages). Because of that, it doesnt rely on trim very much (as it can be confirmed -- when you slamm it with incompressible writes, after trimming, write almost never recovers), because it waits until the last "second" before it starts erasing blocks. But obviously trim help sandforce to know which blocks are empy, so it doesnt drag them around while doing wearlevelling.
As for 3K, this is an acient drive not worth buying. And besides, kingston is a shady company now, whith all that v300 fiasko.
Well, Samsung has poor RMA (outsourced), and doesn't support their users after the sale.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2420523
Crucial is an American company.
Easy choice for me.
So Crucials have better reliability, better RMA service, better pricing, but have lower numbers that are barely perceptible outside of a benchmark.
Seems like an easy answer to me.
That's all benchmark stuff. In REAL WORLD usage, any current SSD will outperform a standard HDD... splitting hairs over benchmarks is, quite honestly, silly and a waste of time. in normal desktop use, you won't be able to tell the difference between an MX100 vs M550 vs 840/850EVO vs (insert your favorite SSD here.)If you look at both you will see the gap is not even small, the Crucials even perform under par. OCZ Vertex 460 seems to score rather well btw.
Just upgrade your OS to a trim compatabile. VIsta is a heap of garbage, that no one should be forced to use.Right now I'm more in between the Crucial MX100 or M550, which I can get at pretty much the same price for 250 gigs.. which is the better one?
And aren't there any tools (like manual trim) for crucial drives.. or is samsung the only one giving tools like that?
The Crucial toolbox does not have a manual TRIM or garbage collection utility... I don't know if the controller handles this automatically even on an older OS like Vista.
Given your two choices, the M550 is a better drive, albeit slightly older tech. I had that same choice a few months ago... I got the M550.
That's all benchmark stuff. In REAL WORLD usage, any current SSD will outperform a standard HDD... splitting hairs over benchmarks is, quite honestly, silly and a waste of time. in normal desktop use, you won't be able to tell the difference between an MX100 vs M550 vs 840/850EVO vs (insert your favorite SSD here.)
MX/BX and EVO are value line and pretty much disposable drives. Don't cry too much over those.
Need reliability, well pay more and get 840/850 Pro.
/thread
Its not the TLC itself, that is the issue, its the smaller fabrication combined with tlc.That's true, but unfortunately only because Evo using the now much hated TLC.. why don't they just use MLC like Crucial in their Evo's?
And yes, 850 Evo has a new 3D TLC design that in theory has a lesser chance for performance degradation then TLC in 840 Evo, but if even Samsung hasn't worked out a fix and knows whats really wrong, how can you be so sure??