Crucial MX100 vs. Samsung 850 EVO

[omega3]

Its not the TLC itself, that is the issue, its the smaller fabrication combined with tlc.

I understand what you say, however the best article I found about this specific issue is over here (click link).

Snippet from the article dealing with both models:

"Is this a fundamental problem with TLC NAND?

There are several ways to evaluate these ongoing issues. It’s entirely possible that Samsung fixed the majority of the problem in their first update, but that there’s still a few errors that need to be patched up. On the other hand, it’s possible that the drifting performance on the 840 EVO is a fundamental issue with its NAND arrays that Samsung can’t fix over more than the short term. If so, it would put a bullet through the company’s push to use TLC NAND. The 850 EVO is going to be getting a great deal of additional attention thanks to this issue — if the same problems manifest on this drive, it’s going to be taken as proof that TLC NAND simply isn’t ready for prime time, no matter what."

Just to know, where did you find convincing info that the prob would not affect the 850 evo? Keep in mind that the 840 evo probs only showed up after a couple of months and Samsung hasn't even released that second patch (read: they don't know yet).

 

[spat55]

I'll say Crudical because my 840 evo has been slowing down and needs refreshing to make it come back to standard speed, which I should have to do. Not the end of the world but when buying a SSD I'd try a MX100 or BX100 or go Intel.

 

[omega3]

I'll say Crudical because my 840 evo has been slowing down and needs refreshing to make it come back to standard speed, which I should have to do. Not the end of the world but when buying a SSD I'd try a MX100 or BX100 or go Intel.

To refresh, what do you do? Use manual trim in Magician or do you mean an erase, but then all your data is obviously gone?

 

[hojnikb]

To refresh, what do you do? Use manual trim in Magician or do you mean an erase, but then all your data is obviously gone?

Trim is not gonna help you with read degradation issue. You need to rewrite all the data to refresh it.

 

[omega3]

Trim is not gonna help you with read degradation issue. You need to rewrite all the data to refresh it.

Can you use a (3th party) tool (or Magician in case of Samsung) to rewrite all the data to refresh it.. and does that indeed mean the data on your ssd drive is gone if not backed up somewhere?

 

[dsplover]

Just a happy MX-100 user here. Built a spare ASRock Extreme 6 keeping the XP941/M6e as my spare now, their speed is awesome but not as beneficial for my particular apps, hence a new build using stable cheap products and Windows 8.1.
MX-100s are just a great steal for the price if you use 256GB sizes.

 

[Hulk]

Just a happy MX-100 user here. Built a spare ASRock Extreme 6 keeping the XP941/M6e as my spare now, their speed is awesome but not as beneficial for my particular apps, hence a new build using stable cheap products and Windows 8.1.
MX-100s are just a great steal for the price if you use 256GB sizes.

I just picked up a 512GB MX100 for my new laptop for $190. Not a bad price. I was really torn between the MX100 and the 850 EVO. But in the end the fact that I know there will be no discernable difference in speed and there *may* be a long term read issue with the 850 EVO pushed me to purchase the MX100. And yes I know the 850 EVO uses a much larger process size due to the 3D NAND but I'm still skeptical of TLC NAND at this point. Once Samsung actually fixes the issue with the 840 EVO and the 850 EVO have some time under their belts I'm going to sit out the TLC NAND drives.

 

[corkyg]

For $190 one can now buy the BX100.
http://ssdboss.com/ssds/Crucial-MX100-vs-Crucial-BX100

 

[Hulk]

For $190 one can now buy the BX100.
http://ssdboss.com/ssds/Crucial-MX100-vs-Crucial-BX100

I'm confused. Why at the same price would anyone buy the BX100 over the MX100? What am I missing?

From Anandtech January 8, 2015:

"Feature wise the BX100 drops all the M-class features, so there is no hardware-accelerated encryption or SLC caching. Pricing is $70 for 120GB, $110 for 250GB, $200 for 500GB and $400 for 1TB, so it's very competitively priced like the MX100, although given the lack of features I would have like to see a bit lower pricing since the MX100 currently retails for about the same prices. Availability is also Q1'15 and we will be getting samples soon."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8861/crucial-announces-mx200-bx100-ssds-ssd-toolbox

 

[pauldun170]

I see there are still folks reporting lockup issues with the MX100

http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Crucial-SSDs/MX100-very-short-freezes-lockups-in-Win7/td-p/164588
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Crucial...2GB-freeze-Win-8-1-laptop-battery/td-p/163604
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Crucial-SSDs/MX100-will-not-boot-sometimes/td-p/158815

 

[Hulk]

I see there are still folks reporting lockup issues with the MX100

http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Crucial-SSDs/MX100-very-short-freezes-lockups-in-Win7/td-p/164588
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Crucial...2GB-freeze-Win-8-1-laptop-battery/td-p/163604
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Crucial-SSDs/MX100-will-not-boot-sometimes/td-p/158815

Wow! Thanks for posting this. I'm on the phone right now cancelling my MX100 order.

Luckily my order was still processing and I was able to cancel it. I was going to put that drive into my new Lenovo T450s but after reading the links you provided I decided to not even mess with it.

Back to the drawing board. I'm thinking about the Sandisk Extreme Pro now. A little pricey but seems like a good SSD.

 

[Diogenes2]

I have an MX100 512 as system drive in X99 system.. Running since Nov /14 with no issues..

Planning on putting two of them in RAID 0 soon..

 

[SSBrain]

Back to the drawing board. I'm thinking about the Sandisk Extreme Pro now. A little pricey but seems like a good SSD.

There have been reports of failing NAND on those SSDs:
http://forums.sandisk.com/t5/SanDis...0GB-7-retired-blocks-in-one-month/td-p/335531
http://forums.sandisk.com/t5/SanDis...e-pro-with-increasing-bad-sectors/td-p/337657

 

[ggadrian]

You are gong to find people having problems with virtually anything on the internet. People that have problems complain.

I would get the mx100, I have deployed many crucial SSD's (they're my go to ssd's) because they are a very good value for the money and they don't give me headaches. Sure there are faster drives, bu who cares? It's not like you're really gonna notice the difference unless you run a very taxing software.

I wouldn't worry too much about having problems with your new SSD, it's mostly about luck, and if you get a bad drive just RMA it.

 

[omega3]

You are gong to find people having problems with virtually anything on the internet. People that have problems complain.

I would get the mx100, I have deployed many crucial SSD's (they're my go to ssd's) because they are a very good value for the money and they don't give me headaches. Sure there are faster drives, bu who cares? It's not like you're really gonna notice the difference unless you run a very taxing software.

I wouldn't worry too much about having problems with your new SSD, it's mostly about luck, and if you get a bad drive just RMA it.

Just wondering but if you wanna do things like manual trim on a Crucial MX100 or M550, are there any tools out there by Crucial or 3th party that can be used for that?

 

[Essence_of_War]

I'm confused. Why at the same price would anyone buy the BX100 over the MX100? What am I missing?

You wouldn't. The MX100 is being discontinued to bifurcate into the MX200 and the BX100 at, likely, two different price points. The BX100 seems like it will be even cheaper than the MX100 currently is (it's already at ~$180) while the MX200 is sitting about the MX100 prices.

So if you need an SSD right now, and the prices are close, I'd certainly go with the MX100, but I wouldn't expect that option to be available indefinitely.

 

[Hulk]

There have been reports of failing NAND on those SSDs:
http://forums.sandisk.com/t5/SanDis...0GB-7-retired-blocks-in-one-month/td-p/335531
http://forums.sandisk.com/t5/SanDis...e-pro-with-increasing-bad-sectors/td-p/337657

I did a little further research and decided to just get a MyDigitalSSD 128GB m.2 card for my Lenovo t450s. The plan is to move the OS to the m.2 card and I'll leave the 500GB hard drive for data. Then in perhaps a year or so I'll just replace the hard drive. The MyDigitalSSD was primarily designed as a cache device so while the read scores are very good the writes are not, but as an OS only drive it should work really well. Plus it's only $65.

Seems like the only drives showing really good reliability and compatibility across the board are the Intel ones. Even the much maligned Sandforce based Intel SSD's.

Finally while I realize that many of these SSD issues are anecdotal and may possibly be due to user error (compatibility issues), defective units, or other one-off issues, I'd rather stay a year or so behind the curve and lower my chances of issues. I've been there done that so many times. Not really interested in beta testing hardware/software that I've paid for these days. It was kind of fun being on the cutting edge 20 years ago. Not so much today since I have a 2 year old and a 6 year old!

 

[corkyg]

According to ssdreview.com, BX100 does very well in performance vs. MX100.
BX100: http://www.ssdreview.com/review/compare/crucial-bx100-250gb-25-inch-mu01/

MX100: http://www.ssdreview.com/review/compare/crucial-mx100-512gb-25-inch-mu01/

Comparison: MX100 vs BX100 @ssdreview.com

4K Random Read
MX100
175.64 MB/s
BX100
246.01 MB/s

4K Random Write
MX100
72.86 MB/s
BX100
73 MB/s

Windows 7 Boot-up Time
MX100
14 s
BX100
6.1 s

Avg. Power Consumption
MX100
2.31 Watts
BX100
1.77 Watts

4K Random Read Access Time
MX100
3.43 ms
BX100
3.42 ms

4K Random Write Access Time
MX100
1.42 ms
BX100
1.02 ms

 

[Face2Face]

I got my MX100 256GB yesterday. I love it thus far, it's much faster than my old SandForce based Corsair Force 3 240GB. I even ran the AS SSD Bench vs. a friends 850 Pro 512GB. The MX100 holds its own I would say.

 

[Glaring_Mistake]

There have been reports of failing NAND on those SSDs:
http://forums.sandisk.com/t5/SanDis...0GB-7-retired-blocks-in-one-month/td-p/335531
http://forums.sandisk.com/t5/SanDis...e-pro-with-increasing-bad-sectors/td-p/337657

Interesting.

Well some people are bound to have these kind of issues so from so few reports nothing can be determined.

Still,I have an Extreme Pro and have also experienced these issues and would find it interesting to see if there is something else happening other than sample variation.

Actually,mine had about 8 reallocated sectors after a few months of use and when I saw this I tested it to see if it would develop a few more after having written a bit more to it.

Around 400 gigabytes later (about 1,6tb in total written to it) it had 8 new reallocated sectors for a total of 16.
And that's on a 960gb SSD which should have a higher endurance compared to the other smaller ones.

I'm also interested in seeing if SanDisk Support will still think that it is not an issue and continue to maintain that my SSD is perfectly healthy.

 

[omega3]

I got my MX100 256GB yesterday. I love it thus far, it's much faster than my old SandForce based Corsair Force 3 240GB. I even ran the AS SSD Bench vs. a friends 850 Pro 512GB. The MX100 holds its own I would say.

Seems the MX100 is a good buy. Which OS do you use?

Also, if you wanna do things like manual trim on a Crucial MX100 or M550, are there any tools out there by Crucial or 3th party that can be used for that?

 

[Face2Face]

Seems the MX100 is a good buy. Which OS do you use?

Also, if you wanna do things like manual trim on a Crucial MX100 or M550, are there any tools out there by Crucial or 3th party that can be used for that?

Both PC's have Windows 8.1 Pro. I'm sorry, I'm not sure about any tools?

 

[Hulk]

According to ssdreview.com, BX100 does very well in performance vs. MX100.
BX100: http://www.ssdreview.com/review/compare/crucial-bx100-250gb-25-inch-mu01/

MX100: http://www.ssdreview.com/review/compare/crucial-mx100-512gb-25-inch-mu01/

Comparison: MX100 vs BX100 @ssdreview.com

4K Random Read
MX100
175.64 MB/s
BX100
246.01 MB/s

4K Random Write
MX100
72.86 MB/s
BX100
73 MB/s

Windows 7 Boot-up Time
MX100
14 s
BX100
6.1 s

Avg. Power Consumption
MX100
2.31 Watts
BX100
1.77 Watts

4K Random Read Access Time
MX100
3.43 ms
BX100
3.42 ms

4K Random Write Access Time
MX100
1.42 ms
BX100
1.02 ms

You're right. Despite Anandtech's preliminary performance "guess" the BX100 does indeed seem faster than the MX100 pretty much across the board.

 

[omega3]

You are gong to find people having problems with virtually anything on the internet. People that have problems complain.

I would get the mx100, I have deployed many crucial SSD's (they're my go to ssd's) because they are a very good value for the money and they don't give me headaches. Sure there are faster drives, bu who cares? It's not like you're really gonna notice the difference unless you run a very taxing software.

I wouldn't worry too much about having problems with your new SSD, it's mostly about luck, and if you get a bad drive just RMA it.

Just wondering but if you wanna do things like manual trim on a Crucial MX100 or M550, are there any tools out there by Crucial or 3th party that can be used for that?

 

[Hulk]

Just wondering but if you wanna do things like manual trim on a Crucial MX100 or M550, are there any tools out there by Crucial or 3th party that can be used for that?

I'm pretty sure most modern drives have TRIM built into the firmware. You can check with CrystalDiskInfo quite easily.