Mixed Random Read/Write Performance

For full details of how we conduct our Iometer tests, please refer to this article.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write

The BX100 and SM2246EN appears to do very well under mixed random workloads as it's nearlty the fastest drive we have tested, while still providing high power efficiency.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write (Power)

Crucial BX100 120GB

The reason lies in high, consistent performance as the BX100 performs about the same at all read/write distributions excluding the higher capacity models that scale lightly as the portion of writes is increased.

Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write

Mixed sequential performance is similarly good and there isn't even a big drop in performance at the smaller capacities. As we've already seen, power efficiency is very high too.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write (Power)

Crucial BX100 120GB

The BX100 does have a similar bathtub curve as others, but the good news is that the performance doesn't drop too much with mixed workload and the performance at 80/20 and 20/80 distributions is high. 

Sequential Performance ATTO & AS-SSD
Comments Locked

67 Comments

View All Comments

  • stickmansam - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    Any thoughts on how performance would be like if the BX100 didn't have the Samsung like OP?
  • bricko - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    Been researching ssd for a bit, these seem ok, but after watching the Intel discussion of their massive new Intel 750 NVMe, PCIe 3, 1.2 Tb will make one cry, 2-4 times the speed of these old SATA stuff. Half height card for pcie slot. But massive cost, like 1100 for the 1.2 Tb, but the charts are scary. Better with new X99 mobo

    http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Storage/Intel-SSD-750...

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/9090/intel-ssd-750-p...
  • Sunburn74 - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    But no real world performance benefit for 99% of us.
  • just4U - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    I think the only real problem I have with the BX100 is ... believe it or not pricing. Here in Canada I've bought 4 of these drives but I've had to scour the net for price match deals to even come close to the MX100 which.. actually was 10-20% lower in costs. Ticks me off really.. their coming close to price parity with the older model but still not there yet.. The Sandisc Ultra2 is cheaper but it's almost always out of stock.. they tried to price this damn thing like the higher end drives. :(
  • stickmansam - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    Canada has always suffered by worse off pricing and stock issues.
  • frombauer - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    Would this be a tangible empirical upgrade over a 256GB Samsung 840 Pro?
  • Margalus - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    no, nothing you would be able to notice in usage.
  • Morawka - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    whats up with the 850 EVO scores? do you guys only have laptop drives or something? Wanted to see how it compares to a 2.5" 850 Evo, and obviously the Msata scores dont compare to it.
  • Kristian Vättö - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    I haven't had time to put the 2.5" 850 EVOs through our new SSD suite yet, but I have the scores for the mSATA/M.2 versions since we just reviewed those. The performance should essentially be the same though since the hardware is no different.
  • Nordlicht - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    It would have been nice to have BX100 being compared to Transcend SSD370. Both use the same controller. However, SSD370 uses Micron's 20nm NAND whereas BX100 uses the next generation 16nm. Performance is similar?

    On the surface the SSD370 could be more reliable due to bigger feature size. BX100 commands a small price premium, though.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now