POST A COMMENT

43 Comments

Back to Article

  • extide - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Wow, 256Gbit dies! That would mean up to 2TB in a standard 2.5" SSD -- Crazy! Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Actually one could fit 4TB into a standard 2.5" (or even 8GB when using 32 packages) but the problem is, as far as i can tell, no single controller can adress so much space. Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    *TB obviously :) Reply
  • extide - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Yeah but it's a chicken and egg thing I think. There seems to be a max price cap of about $600 for these SSD's, and so for 64gbit NAND that was ~512GB and 128Gbit NAND it is about 1TB. When they design a controller to exist during the lifetime of 256Gbit NAND there is a good chance that someone is actually going to make a 2TB drive because that much NAND would then fit inside that 'max price' so they will design the controller for that max amount. And in the same vein a contrller for the 128Gbit era would be 'OK' with a 1TB max.... if that makes sense, heh. Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Also, there is already 2TBs drives out thre on the old 64Gbit flash :) Reply
  • fruitcrash - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    It's not that you can't address it (for ONFI NAND you can use the Volume Select command), but that you can't have more than about 8 chips on a channel because of capacitive loading. Reply
  • extide - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    NOTE: I am talking about the future NAND, NOT what is used in this drive. Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Still, 256Gbit dies can can't help you much, if controller can't adress that much space. As i've said above, once could fit 4-8TB of flash, it's just isn't possible yet. Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Any details on the 128GB version ?
    I've read somewhere, that it will be using the old 20nm flash...
    Reply
  • blanarahul - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Crucial sucks balls at making performance drives.. They should leave that market to Sandforce and Samsung, and concentrate on beating Samsung in value SSD market... Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Sandforce makes performance drives ?!
    hahahah thats new :)
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    Please read the article. Reply
  • SmilingTornado - Thursday, June 05, 2014 - link

    I am pretty sure this would be a "budget" SSD because of the $110 price tag and the fact that TigerDirect would be selling it for as little as $100 if you get a coupon Reply
  • EricZBA - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Already instock at Amazon. Sweet! http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-MX100-adapter-Intern... Reply
  • Hrel - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    "Sequential Write 150MB/s 330MB/s"

    Why so slow? Especially when $100 drives get 550MB/s at 95k IOPS.
    Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Where do you have 100$ drive, that gets 550MB/ write ?! Reply
  • extide - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    This is explained in the article... But it is because it uses fewer large capacity NAND dies to hit the low prices. For fast writed with NAND you need lots of dies, which is why the bigger versions of this drive see better performance. Reply
  • hojnikb - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    And competitors are using nasty tricks like turbowrite or compression to achive such write speeds. But actual nand inside those mainstream drives isn't capable of such speeds. Reply
  • MikeMurphy - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    330MB/s reads with zero random access penalty is ample for 99.99% of the users out there.

    There isn't much (or any) real world difference between this and something faster.
    Reply
  • isa - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Yes, I'd love to see a link to a $100 external SSD with 550MB/s at 95k IOPS. Reply
  • UltraWide - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Do you plan to include tests with encryption enabled in the future? Thank you. Reply
  • Zoomer - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    And does it support bitlocker eDrive / OPAL, etc? Reply
  • stickmansam - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Dang those prices look good

    Makes me wish I had waited to grab the MX100 instead of getting the SP920

    Similar sustained performance but MX100 has better GC and consistency
    Reply
  • nfriedly - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Neither of the Samsung buttons work for the last chart on http://www.anandtech.com/show/8066/crucial-mx100-2...

    The error in the firebug console is "TypeError: document.getElementById(...) is null"
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Fixed, thanks! Reply
  • MikeMurphy - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Why are 4k random reads so much slower than 4k random writes? Or, are the graphs mislabeled and mixed up? Reply
  • khkha - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I have just bought seagate 600 for my early 2011 mbp. Should I return the drive and buy this instead for 30gb space bump?

    Thoughts anyone?
    Reply
  • s44 - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Space will be the same, they're just advertised differently. But the Crucial idles at much lower power than the Seagate, so I'd consider switching to save battery life. Reply
  • tobho - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Some serious question over here: is this drive a real competitor to the Sammys Evo or even Pro SSDs? I was planning on buying the 256Pro but the Crucial seems to perform better in a lot of tasks. I cannot really differentiate much but the price: 256Pro = 512MX100 Reply
  • hojnikb - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Just get MX100. For the price, its a steal.. Reply
  • rvb3n - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Hi, can someone give me a suggestion for a pro SSD for a laptop with about 500 GB? Is the Samsung 840 Pro still the king (price/performance)? Reply
  • blackrain - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Looking forward to the Bench being updated with the Crucial MX100 line:

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/SSD/65
    Reply
  • blackrain - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I wonder how my Samsung 830 128GB compares to the MX100 128GB? Again, looking forward to the Bench being updated with the MX100 line. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    They were there, but just hidden so we wouldn't break NDA. Should be visible now :) Reply
  • rahuldesai1987 - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    A 256Gbit die should enable a $300 1TB and $600 2TB drive, 6 months down the line. Hope we see a TLC Samsung 850EVO soon, at even cheaper prices. Reply
  • sequoia464 - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Killer prices on these already,, picked up a 256 GB drive this morning for ~$90 delivered. Reply
  • Oyster - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    For those that are interested, looks like these are on a fire sale.

    512GB $200, 256GB $100, 128GB $70 AC

    http://slickdeals.net/f/6972254-crucial-mx100-soli...
    Reply
  • juhatus - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    Does the Samsung XP941 use Samsung's 3D NAND? Availability at least would fit as the first drive's where seen last Q3/13 on OEM machines.. Reply
  • juhatus - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    To answer for my own question: Yes and that also explains XP941's rarity

    http://english.etnews.com/device/2963105_1304.html
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    So far Samsung has only been sampling 3D NAND SSDs to enterprise OEMs, although they have just started providing some to the PC OEMs with the new 32-layer NAND. The XP941 is still regular MLC but Samsung it's only available for OEMs. Reply
  • Samus - Thursday, June 05, 2014 - link

    I've installed over 100 M500's and have personally been using a C300 since 2010 in my daily driver laptop. Rock solid drives. Who cares if they're 10% "slower" than a Sandforce drive. Reply
  • Onyx2291 - Thursday, June 05, 2014 - link

    Just ordered a 512GB for $199.99. Such good value. Reply
  • beatsbyden - Thursday, August 21, 2014 - link

    Great bargain for the price. I heard the 256GB drive is in fact a 320 GB drive with 20% overprovisioning...that would even be more a bargain. Performance decrades less than with all other brands that only have 7%. I also like the protection and encryption on the mx 100. Still have to chose between the samsung 840 evo 250gb and the mx100. Would chose the mx100 if had better writing performance...but now i have doubts...Gonna use it for audioproduction...so lots of reads and writes that would make the samsung evo 840 a better choice right....i have a Samsung 830 128GB now and i'm satisfied with it, never failed me, but need a bigger one. Should i stick with Samsung or get the MX 100? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now