For a mere $100 you can pick up the 256GB model or for $200 you can double that to 512GB. That certainly makes the drives attractive but the performance is there as well, often beating its predecessor the MX500 series. If reliability is a concern the onboard RAIN feature guards against writes to bad flash, there are onboard capacitors to allow writes to finish in the case of power outages and a 3 year warranty. Check out the full review at The Tech Report if you need a second opinion after Allyn's review.
"The Crucial MX100 is the first solid-state drive to use Micron's 16-nm MLC NAND. It's also one of the most affordable SSDs around, with the 256GB version priced at $109.99 and the 512GB at $224.99. We take a closer look at how the two stack up against a range of competitors, and the results might surprise you."
Here are some more Storage reviews from around the web:
- Crucial MX100 Solid State Drive @ Benchmark Reviews
- Toshiba Q Series Pro 256GB SSD @ NikKTech
- Samsung 845DC EVO @ SSD Review
- OCZ Vertex 460 240GB Review @ OCC
- OCZ RevoDrive 350 480GB PCIe SSD Review @ Legit Reviews
- Vantec EZ SWAP M3500 Series Review @HiTech Legion
- Netgear ReadyNAS RN312, RN314 & RN316 @ Legion Hardware
- Thecus N4560 SOHO/Home NAS Server Review @ Madshrimps
- Thecus N7710-G @ techPowerUp
- ADATA XPG SDXC UHS-1 U3 Card @ The SSD Review
I was going to with a 512 gig
I was going to with a 512 gig raid but every raid ssd review suggests raid results only favor synthetics, real world results are favorable in single ssds, load times and access times are better as well.
Try out a RAM cache with one
Try out a RAM cache with one SSD. It may surprise you.
This review on rapid cache on
This review on rapid cache on the evo is actually worse.
http://techreport.com/review/25282/a-closer-look-at-rapid-dram-caching-on-the-samsung-840-evo-ssd/8
Samsung EVO or the Crucial
Samsung EVO or the Crucial MX100?
Depends on the price? If you
Depends on the price? If you go with 512/500 gig which is max on the mx100 it’s it’s cheaper on mx100 but slightly better on evo real world very similar, at the lower size ones the evo is better because the writes are better but the mx100 is again cheaper. I would go with the mx100 only for the 512 gig size.
Stupid there’s no TB options.
Stupid there’s no TB options. At these prices, they could sell a $450 1TB or $900 2TB.
If it was up to me I would do
If it was up to me I would do 4 terabytes and for 20 cents a gig but it’s not
The difference is that they
The difference is that they could sell a 1TB or 2TB drive for the prices above.
I think I has to do with 16
I think I has to do with 16 nm yields
No, it’s just marketing. A
No, it’s just marketing. A 1-2TB MX100 would cannibalize M550 sales. They’ll eventually release a higher capacity MX100 (or successor) and when they do, maybe it will be $0.30/GB.
I went with the 512 MX100
I went with the 512 MX100 just can’t beat the price.
I’ve replaced so many of
I’ve replaced so many of their memory sticks I will never buy crucial anything…gladly pay another 40 bucks for samsung
When it comes to ram corsair
When it comes to ram corsair and in recent years g.skill is top brands, but for ssds marvel and Samsung are top
I agree. Crucial sucks dirt
I agree. Crucial sucks dirt when it comes to reliability on their RAM stick products. They are always failing on me when I go buy their RAM sticks for memory upgrades in my desktop tower computers.
My m4 has been stable for
My m4 has been stable for years….mlc, not tlc tho.
I’ll take 2 of the C-note
I’ll take 2 of the C-note value SSDs and RAID them for more IOps, everything else staged on the hard drive. do these drives come with some tiered caching management software to auto stage code and data between a SSD raid and hard drive longer term and back up volume/s.
Yesterday my Crucial C300
Yesterday my Crucial C300 256gb and C300 128gb both DIED after I tried to update the firmware. Crucial won’t replace or repair them because they are almost 4 years old, and they only have 3 years warrenty. The drives were top of the line when I bought them and they were EXPENSIVE. Fucking waste of money, and crappy support. The drives were working fine until their firmware update program fucked them up. :/
I think they ought to replace them don’t you?
I think I’ll try a Samsung EVO 256gb next. Running Windows 8 on an old mechanical disk now. Just.. Eeeew. 🙂
Waste of money? Strange you
Waste of money? Strange you say that when they ran for the full length of their warranty without an issue.
We’ve got a shit tonne of them and we’ve had 1 failure. With that one we’re not even sure it was the drive as it worked in a laptop fine afterwords.
I got it for 100 bucks.
I
I got it for 100 bucks.
I tested it on SATA II and SATA III
http://www.yinfor.com/2014/09/sata-ii-vs-sata-iii.html