AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer

The Destroyer has been an essential part of our SSD test suite for nearly two years now. It was crafted to provide a benchmark for very IO intensive workloads, which is where you most often notice the difference between drives. It's not necessarily the most relevant test to an average user, but for anyone with a heavier IO workload The Destroyer should do a good job at characterizing performance. For full details of this test, please refer to this article.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

Despite the lack of IO consistency, the BX100 does very well in our heaviest The Destroyer trace. It's easily faster than the MX100 and quite close to the higher-end SSDs as well in both data rate and latency.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The share of high latency IOs is very reasonable too, suggesting that the consistency is fine under real-world workloads.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Power)

And finally the power consumption where the BX100 shines in. Even though it's not the fastest drive on the market, it's by far the most power efficient and the difference to the MX100 is nearly twofold. 

Performance Consistency AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
Comments Locked

67 Comments

View All Comments

  • SeanJ76 - Monday, April 27, 2015 - link

    -and Crucial has the worst reliability record when it comes to SSD's, right next to OCZ, two of the worst SSD makers today.........that's why their so dirt cheap!
  • MarkHunt - Sunday, May 3, 2015 - link

    BX100 250GB running excellent on an old SATA 2 motherboard based C2D Hackintosh, the boot speed is incredible and applications such as Logic open with little lag, which used to happen with previous HDD. TRIM is also simple to enable with Clover bootloader.
  • rogerdpack - Thursday, May 14, 2015 - link

    unfortunately it appears the 120GB version has dramatically worse write performance, just a heads up, than its counterparts: http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Crucial-BX100...
  • kadajawi - Thursday, May 21, 2015 - link

    Wait a minute. According to pretty much every other reviewer, news site etc. the power loss capacitors are missing from the BX100, yet Anandtech says they are there. What is it now? To me that's a pretty big deal, as I don't run my laptop with a battery and the power plug may occasionally slide out...
  • LeonS - Monday, October 19, 2015 - link

    Has anyone found a definitive answer for this yet? I have searched high and low, but cannot find an answer!
  • sligett - Tuesday, June 16, 2015 - link

    Are the idle power consumption labels switched for the BX100 250GB and 120GB?
  • marvalsys - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link

    Just spent way too much time trying to clone a 500GB WD hard disk with Windows 10 to a BX100 to use in a new Lenovo Flex 3 15". Clone went fine (booting from a True Image 2015 CD) but with cloned SSD installed laptop wouldn't boot / wouldn't even POST or allow booting from any other drive. Same exact clone to a Samsung 850 EVO worked flawlessly. Call to Crucial tech support resulted in rep saying that they have no current SSDs compatible with Flex 3 15 (even though their website lists 7, including the BX100). Seems to be some confusion - buyers beware!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now