Review Index:

Crucial MX100 2.5" SSD Full Review - 16nm Flash Makes an Appearance

Subject: Storage
Manufacturer: Crucial
Tagged: ssd, sata, mx100, crucial, 16nm

Introduction, Specifications and Packaging


Back in July of last year, Micron announced production of 16nm flash memory. These were the same 128gbit dies as the previous gen parts, but 16nm means the dies are smaller, meaning more dies from a single wafer, ultimately translating to lower end user cost.

View Full Size

It takes a bit of time for those new flash die shrinks to trickle into mainstream products. Early yields from a given shrink tend to not have competitive endurance on initial production. As production continues, the process gets tweaked, resulting in greater and longer enduring yields.

Continue reading for the full scoop!!


From our Crucial press briefing:

View Full Size

...and here's another slide showing how the MX100 steps in place of the older M500, and sits as a consumer upgrade option along side the more enthusiast M550 line.

View Full Size


View Full Size

Standard packaging, free downloadable Acronis migration / cloning software, and a 7mm - 9.5mm spacer plate used to prevent excessive motion within larger close-fit mobile SATA bays.

Video News

June 2, 2014 | 10:27 PM - Posted by godrilla (not verified)

Tempted I am on upgrading my 4 year old c300 256 gig sata 6, to these in raid 0 or 2 evos 500 gig models. I feel these are more about reliability then performance.
2 cheap ssds in raid 0 or upcoming sata express ssds.

June 3, 2014 | 12:29 AM - Posted by j0hndoe

Does this site have a mobile version?

June 3, 2014 | 01:31 AM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

Not currently, no, but that's in the works!

What device are you using? What problems did you have with the readability?

June 3, 2014 | 12:46 AM - Posted by truk007

One 840 1TB EVO is the same price as two of these right now, and the mx100s are on sale.

June 3, 2014 | 02:34 AM - Posted by random (not verified)

how about making a nas with these badboys.

June 3, 2014 | 09:39 AM - Posted by YTech

Not sure that I see much wow factor out of this one. All presented models has more or less the same performance.

Only difference with the newer model is probably the reduced cost (still minimal) which is starting to show for all SSD on the market. And the actual die has reduced in size.

For a budget, the 128GB would be my pick. An additional HDD would support additional greater storage for the same cost. All my HDD has outlast all my flash devices.

As for the controller, ain't the Marvell the same as the Sandforce? My mother board doesn't like Sandforce controllers.

June 3, 2014 | 11:47 AM - Posted by godrilla (not verified)

Which flash devices failed on you?
I have a c300 data 6 256 gig about 4 and a half years now still performs as day one.

June 3, 2014 | 11:48 AM - Posted by godrilla (not verified)

Sata 6 *

June 4, 2014 | 03:16 PM - Posted by YTech

The failed flash devices were not SSD. However, though they were primarily USB flash devices, the concept is the same. You could blame the poor components, but consumers often don't have control over that aspect.

One of the devices were replaced without any cost or questions asked as it was still under it's warranty. Luckily, before it failed, I had a backup made of its contents. Backing up your data to various media is key.

I also have another USB flash device that is 10 years old. I treat it like a travelling floppy disk. The only one that has shown best compatibility among various systems used and shows little symptoms of wear.

Currently, I have another USB flash device which is starting to show a lot of wear. It's primary cause is due to extreme data writing at low bytes. I have reduced it's wear by optimizing the tool(software) when it was targeted a the source.

All this is great. I am not suggesting that the technology is a failure, however, when looking at cost and reliability, I prefer to have each of both worlds. From experience, Disc platters can sustain much greater amount of data wear than Flash. As proof, I still have 20 years old HDD, though now it no longer has a purpose due to it's fading technology.

Hope that clarifies my comment.

September 29, 2014 | 07:24 AM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

There really is no comparison on relative reliability of USB flash drives vs. SATA and up SSDs. USB drives are not rated at anywhere near the longevity / usage.

June 3, 2014 | 05:50 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I JUST bought a 240gb M500 for $100 last week. Is is worth sending it back in exchange for an MX100 256gb, or am i better off just keeping my M500?

June 4, 2014 | 10:58 AM - Posted by mAxius

great review allyn :D though this line really needs a 1tb option.

June 5, 2014 | 01:15 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

according to this, yes you should exchange it (tho ssds are all pretty fast, and the real-life performance gains may be negligible, so ymmv)

November 10, 2014 | 05:24 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Hi Allyn,

I just read a review on They said,
"the MX100 is at greater risk of the electricity leaks that can effect transistors when they’re packed in such close quarters", is this true?

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.