The SSD Review The Worlds Dedicated SSD Education and Review Resource | 
The SSD Review uses benchmark software called PCMark Vantage x64 HDD Suite to create testing scenarios that might be used in the typical user experience. There are eight tests in all and the tests performed record the speed of data movement in MB/s to which they are then given a numerical score after all of the tests are complete. The simulations are as follows:
- Windows Defender In Use
- Streaming Data from storage in games such as Alan Wake which allows for massive worlds and riveting non-stop action
- Importing digital photos into Windows Photo Gallery
- Starting the Vista Operating System
- Home Video editing with Movie Maker which can be very time consuming
- Media Center which can handle video recording, time shifting and streaming from Windows media center to an extender such as XBox
- Cataloging a music library
- Starting applications
CRUCIAL MX100 SSD PCMARK VANTAGE RESULTS
The Crucial MX100 256GB SSD (results pictured left) achieved a Total Score of 75,278 points with a high transfer speed of 458MB/s when testing importing pictures to Windows Photo Gallery. The Crucial MX100 512GB SSD achieved a Total Score of 75,965 points with a high transfer speed of 462MB/s when testing in Windows Media Center. The application loading benchmark results only seem to reach around the low 190MB/s mark. However, both score around 75k and that in itself is still very impressive.
As we can see by our PCMark Vantage Hierarchy Chart, the Crucial MX100 places well and amongst the top 10 PCMark Vantage scores received to date:
REPORT ANALYSIS AND FINAL THOUGHTS
The Crucial MX100’s performance comes in similar to the M550, actually a little bit better. What is even more impressive is that the MX100 was not only able to meet its rated specs, but actually surpass them in our IOPS testing in Anvil’s Storage Utilities. However, this is really no surprise considering the PCB layout is the same besides the newer 16nm 128Gbit flash. In fact, looking back on our M550 report we can see the firmware revision name is the same! So basically any differences in performance should just be from the difference in NAND.
With that, the bottleneck of SATA 6Gb/s being more visible than ever in the latest consumer SSD technology. Manufacturers are also starting to pack more and more enterprise grade features and focusing more on consistency performance in their products. The MX100 is the epitome of this from its many data integrity features such as Exclusive Data Defense and RAIN to their Native Write Acceleration to maintain fast consistent write speeds. Since our Crucial M550 review, Crucial seems to have answered our suggestion of migration software with the inclusion of Acronis True Image HD…now if only they will come out with a 5 year warranty rather than their standard 3 year and possibly a software utility for users.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The current SSD market is saturated with companies, most of which aren’t even component manufacturers and just source out all their components. Micron/Intel (IMFT), Samsung, Toshiba, and SanDisk are the leading producers of NAND flash memory. Being a consumer brand of Micron, Crucial has a nice advantage here. They get to take advantage of the latest NAND at low cost. Crucial releasing the MX100 really shows how NAND flash manufacturers are again flexing their muscle by hitting the industry with lower prices and in turn, seem to be starting another price war. This seems to be the position as of late and could spell bad news for third party suppliers, although as seen at Computex, they are not afraid to take on the dragon.
So now we have seen a new release from Micron and a new release from SanDisk in the Extreme Pro. What about the other market giants Toshiba and Samsung? What will they bring to the table with their next releases?
The Crucial MX100 is a great step forward in the consumer SSD market. We support purchase of the MX100 with our Top Value award. It is riddled with so many data integrity features and such impressive performance for the low MSRP, it really deserves it.
Check out the Crucial MX100s on Amazon.
This drive is an insane value, especially given performance. It’ just too bad, that they won’t offer 1TB version.
Samsung should really update it’s aging 840EVO, because crucial is destroying them 🙂
Performance wise, the 840 EVO actually is competitive compared to this. The drawback is that it is a TLC drive. Even at 16nm, the MLC MX100 will be a better choice (that and it has power loss protection). Judging by the performance, only the 512 GB version seems to fully saturate the controller. Heck, the 512 GB version is about as fast as the M550, which is supposed to be the “performance” version of Crucial’s SSD line. The 256 GB version is slower. I would imagine that the 128 GB version is even slower.
The only thing I wish was a better controller. Marvell 88SS9189 powers this chip. On one hand, it’s a reliable, proven beast. We should not have any hitches on this drive. Usually for those who want reliable, it’s become standard advice on the computer enthusiast forums to wait a few months when a new controller hits the market to make sure that there are no issues. On the other, it’s not the fastest chip around. Write performance isn’t top notch it looks like. I guess at this price point, it’s not possible to get a top of the line chip.
We seem to be seeing the proliferation of enterprise-like features onto consumer SSDs.
This drive offers:
– Power loss protection
– Encryption support
– Some pretty solid data protection features
There have been other “enterprise-like features” on consumer drives.
– The Corsair Neutron GTX’s LAMD controller offered really good sustained write performance – especially in sequential benchmarks
– OCZ’s Vector 150 too seemed to have good performance consistency and judging by the PR around the Vector 180, it seems to be following in delivering enterprise features to enthusiasts
I think that looking forward, the lines between consumer SSD and entry level enterprise SSD are beginning to blur.
I’d love to see a LAMD-like controller with power loss protection, data protection, and offered with premium quality MLC NAND – at consumer prices like this. Judging by how ferocious competition is getting, that may not be far.
> The only thing I wish was a better controller. Marvell 88SS9189 powers
this chip. On one hand, it’s a reliable, proven beast. We should not
have any hitches on this drive. Usually for those who want reliable,
it’s become standard advice on the computer enthusiast forums to wait a
few months when a new controller hits the market to make sure that there
are no issues. On the other, it’s not the fastest chip around. Write
performance isn’t top notch it looks like. I guess at this price point,
it’s not possible to get a top of the line chip.
Actually, Marvell *89 (and 87*) is a wicked fast silicon; so fast in fact, that the fastest drive on sata6gbit is acutally based on the very same controller (or a older revision of that) — Sandisk Extreme PRO.
Its not the controller, that makes the MX100 a lesser performing drive. Its the use of “subpar” NAND and firmware that makes mx100 (and other crucial drives) middlerange at best. But to be honest, its not like someone buying such a drive is gonna notice the difference anyway. Especially writes speeds (which are often criticized). Bulk of workload is reads anyway. There is little use for very fast sequential writes on consumer drives anyway.
Re-reading the Sandisk reviews, you may be right. They do use the same family of controller. Hmm interesting, so it is the NAND that is holding the chip back.
Hmm, this drive might get somewhat faster with newer firmware. But yeah you are right that the 16nm NAND is not that good.
” But to be honest, its not like someone buying such a drive is gonna
notice the difference anyway. Especially writes speeds (which are often
criticized). Bulk of workload is reads anyway. There is little use for
very fast sequential writes on consumer drives anyway.”
It will depend on how the end user uses their SSD.
But I agree that for most consumers, they are mostly doing reads, so read speed will dictate real speed most often. Then again, it’s probably not worth for most consumers paying the premium for something like the Extreme Pro either. For real world stuff, it’s probably not noticeable for most consumers.
I think we are seeing some sort of segmentation like we did for hard drives. Western Digital for example has a “Black” series of drives that are faster, at the expense of cost:capacity, noise, and power consumption.
Higher end SSDs seem to cost about 50-60% more per unit of storage, but offer higher quality NAND.
looks like someone turned off their cstates for once
Yes… we are running a bit of a balancing act on this one, leverage coming from the fact that all new motherboards are optimized with C States off. It is still very funny how little education there really is on the benefits vs vulnerability with C States on or off.
Can the Guide get an update about “C States” ?
It looks like one was planned but I do not see it in the Guide:
https://www.thessdreview.com/Forums/ssd-optimization-guide/2763-altering-c1e-c3-c6-ssd-performance-enhancement-pros-cons-3.html
This HP Guide claims “C States” affect latency due to turboing: https://www.fusionio.com/load/-media-/2ojjak/docsLibrary/Configuring_and_Tuning_HP_Servers_for_Low-Latency_Applications-c01804533.pdf
Thanks.
It’s worth noting that the 256 is actually a 320 drive. With 20% overprovisioning the MX100 performance won’t degrade like a bargain drive with 7%
Ralph-
What do you mean by, “…the 256 is actually a 320 drive…”? When you pop it in, how many GB are available? Could somebody clone a nearly full 320GB HDD (Hard Disc Drive) onto this?
Jim
He meant it’s not 256, you get 220 GB (not 320 wtf) 🙂
Actually, you get 238GiB of useable space 🙂
“Although the total RAW capacity of these SSDs are 256GB and 512GB, usable storage space is only 238GB and 476GB respectively.”
This is incorrect. Usable storage space is still 256GB and 512GB. The 238GB and 476GB is just Windows reporting the available space with the wrong suffix. It should be 476GiB, which is equal to 512GB. You can see it is in fact 512GB, by going into the properties window for the drive and you will see the capacity listed as over 512,000,000,000 bytes.
it’s hard to chose between the samsung evo 250 gb and mx 100. read different reviews on the mx100 that contradict one another. Guess some of these review sites get payed to say something positive or negative insteead of being objective. I have a samsung 830 now and i’m satisfied with it, never failed me. But i need a bigger one now. I like the protection and encryption on mx100. Samsung 840 evo doesn’t have that right? The price of the mx 100 is a bargain, but the writing performance is not great. Yeah single mode is ok, but not mixed workloads. Some give me some advice. Gonna use it for audioproduction
Just go with MX100.
While on paper write performance isn’t all that great, its actually better than EVOs (330 vs 250MB/s) once evo runs out of fake SLC cache.
Powerloss protection, MLC flash and lower price makes it a nobrainer against EVO.
You either get price/GB king or something a lot better (like 850pro or pci-e based solutions). Everything thats inbetween makes little sense, given how much more it costs.
I bought the drive, but Crucial failed to deliver. Got it on sale and even got an order confirmation from Crucial. Didn’t mean anything though, the next day they cancelled my order, telling me if I wanted to buy that drive I still could, but at a much higher price. I might be able to understand that if they hadn’t confirmed my order at the original price, but they did. For unethical companies that’s a bait-and-switch technique (and illegal) not what you’d expect from a company that wants you to think they’re reputable. No way I’d ever buy a product from a company with that much contempt for customers and customer service. If you can get a similar price for a similar product from any other company you’ll be better off. That or hope you never have problems with the product and need customer service. Ever.