Final Words

Shortly put, the MX100's task is to replace the M500 and it does that brilliantly. While the MX100's main goal is to lower the price by using smaller lithography NAND, it also provides a minor increase in performance over the M500 and offers the same industry-leading set of features. Given the success of the M500, Crucial had no reason to do a major overhaul with the MX100 and to be completely honest, there isn't really anything left to be desired. The performance and features are already present, so I really can't see how Crucial could make the MX100 significantly better. Sure the performance isn't record breaking but the MX100 isn't aimed at the enthusiast and professional segment where that is a concern.

My only criticism is towards the M550 and how it's positioned in the market. As I mentioned in the M550 review already, I don't really see where the drive fits in the market. It's not fast enough to compete in the enthusiast/professional space but on the other hand there is no reason for an average user to pay the premium for it, especially as the MX100 provides equivalent performance in nearly all scenarios. The 1TB M550 is the only model that makes sense but that is only because the MX100 tops out at 512GB; to be honest I would rather have a 1TB MX100 with the M550 being discontinued. I think the M550 as it currently stands doesn't really contribute anything to Crucial's SSD portfolio and all it does is cause confusion among potential buyers.

NewEgg Price Comparison (6/2/2014)
  120/128GB 240/256GB 480/512GB
Crucial MX100 (MSRP) $80 $110 $225
Crucial M550 $100 $165 $305
Crucial M500 $72 $110 $230
Plextor M6S (MSRP) $130 $165 $400
Plextor M5 Pro Xtreme $200 $230 $459
ADATA Premier Pro SP920 $90 $150 -
Intel SSD 730 - $205 $440
Intel SSD 530 $110 $165 -
OCZ Vector 150 $115 $200 $339
OCZ Vertex 460 $114 $400 $280
Samsung SSD 840 EVO $110 $181 $280
Samsung SSD 840 Pro $144 $250 $400
SanDisk Extreme II $98 $180 $420
Seagate SSD 600 $105 $136 $314

And here's where the other shoe drops. The MSRPs (Manufacturer Suggested Retail Prices) are just insane; none of the big brands even come close to the prices of the MX100. You are basically getting a 256GB MX100 for the price of a 120/128GB SSD, which is awesome. Obviously these are not final prices but in my experience the MSRPs tend to be more conservative than aggressive, so final retail prices may end up being even lower. I wonder how Samsung in particular is going to respond because the 840 EVO should have a cost advantage due to the use of TLC NAND, but right now the EVO is priced $30 to $70 higher while not providing any substantial added value.

All in all, I have nothing negative to say about the MX100. With the performance and feature set, combined with pricing that basically doubles the amount of storage you get for your dollar, it's an absolute no-brainer. Unless you are an enthusiast or professional with a heavy IO workload, the MX100 is currently the drive with the best bang for the buck in the market by far.

Power Consumption


View All Comments

  • sonny73n - Saturday, December 20, 2014 - link

    Samsung Evo comes to mind ;-) 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.
  • 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
  • nfriedly - Monday, June 02, 2014 - link

    Neither of the Samsung buttons work for the last chart on

    The error in the firebug console is "TypeError: document.getElementById(...) is null"
  • 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?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now