Crucial mx300 275gb


Crucial MX300 - Solid State Drive | Crucial.com

The engine of your system

Increase the speed, durability, and efficiency of your system for years to come with the Crucial MX300 SSD. Boot up in seconds and fly through the most demanding applications with an SSD that fuses the latest 3D NAND flash technology with the proven success of previous MX-series SSDs. Your storage drive isn’t just a container, it’s the engine that loads and saves everything you do and use. Get more out of your computer by boosting nearly every aspect of performance.

Instantly improve system performance

The Crucial MX300 reaches read speeds up to 530 MB/s and write speeds up to 510 MB/s1 on all file types so you can boot up almost instantly, reduce load times, and accelerate demanding applications with ease. Plus, our Dynamic Write Acceleration technology uses an adaptable pool of high-speed, single-level cell flash memory to generate blistering speeds throughout the drive’s long life.

Over 90x more energy efficient than a typical hard drive2

Extreme Energy Efficiency technology within the Crucial MX300 reduces the amount of active power usage that's consumed by the drive. The Crucial MX300 extends your laptop's battery life by using only 0.075W of power, compared to a typical hard drive which uses 6.8W.

Entrust your files to a drive that lasts

With an endurance rating of up to 220TB total bytes written, the Crucial MX300 is engineered with Micron® 3D NAND to deliver years of fast performance. The 3D NAND leverages larger NAND cells to improve performance and prolong endurance.

Protect your data with AES 256-bit hardware-based encryption, RAIN technology, Exclusive Data Defense technology, and the durability inherent in SSD design.

Keep your system cool

In addition to lower active power usage, Adaptive Thermal Protection technology dynamically adjusts storage component activity. This helps keep your system cool and minimizes the risk of damage caused by overheating.

Boost drive performance by up to 10x with Crucial Storage Executive3

This downloadable tool is easy to use and helps monitor and enhance the performance of your Crucial MX300 – update to the latest firmware and enable the Momentum Cache feature in Storage Executive to instantly improve burst performance. Download the latest version here.

www.crucial.com

Crucial MX300 275GB CT275MX300SSD1

The number of benchmark samples for this model as a percentage of all 18,073,656 SSDs tested.

SSD
MX300 275GBCrucial  £72Bench 80%, 33,364 samples1x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 55% - Above average Total price: £535
How Fast Is Your SSD? (Bench your build) Size up your PC in less than a minute.

Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.

UserBenchmark of the month
Gaming Desktop Workstation CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM USB
How it works
  • - Download and run UserBenchMark.
  • - CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
  • - GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
  • - Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
  • - RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
  • - Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
  • - Identify the strongest components in your PC.
  • - See speed test results from other users.
  • - Compare your components to the current market leaders.
  • - Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
  • - Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
  • - Share your opinion by voting.

ADVERTISEMENT

Group Test Results

  • Best user rated - User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
  • Best value for money - Value for money is based on real world performance.
  • Fastest real world speed - Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.

ssd.userbenchmark.com

MX300 SATA M.2 275GB

The number of benchmark samples for this model as a percentage of all 18,073,656 SSDs tested.

SSD
MX300 SATA M.2 275GBCrucial  £40Bench 81%, 9,289 samples1x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 59% - Above average Total price: £513
How Fast Is Your SSD? (Bench your build) Size up your PC in less than a minute.

Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.

UserBenchmark of the month
Gaming Desktop Workstation CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM USB
How it works
  • - Download and run UserBenchMark.
  • - CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
  • - GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
  • - Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
  • - RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
  • - Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
  • - Identify the strongest components in your PC.
  • - See speed test results from other users.
  • - Compare your components to the current market leaders.
  • - Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
  • - Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
  • - Share your opinion by voting.

ADVERTISEMENT

Group Test Results

  • Best user rated - User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
  • Best value for money - Value for money is based on real world performance.
  • Fastest real world speed - Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.

ssd.userbenchmark.com

UserBenchmark: Crucial MX300 vs MX500

Read Avg. Sequential Read Speed 474 MB/s Slightly faster read speed.+9% 433 MB/s
Write Avg. Sequential Write Speed 405 MB/s Slightly faster write speed.+8% 375 MB/s
4K Read Avg. 4K Random Read Speed 33.8 MB/s Much faster random read.+39% 24.4 MB/s
4K Write Avg. 4K Random Write Speed 85.4 MB/s +0% 85 MB/s
Mixed Avg. Sequential Mixed IO Speed 401 MB/s Faster mixed IO speed.+20% 334 MB/s
4K Mixed Avg. 4K Random Mixed IO Speed 46.4 MB/s Much faster random mixed IO.+37% 33.8 MB/s
SusWrite Avg. Sustained Write Speed 359 MB/s Much faster sustained write speed.+64% 219 MB/s
Read Peak Sequential Read Speed 515 MB/s Slightly faster peak read speed.+9% 473 MB/s
Write Peak Sequential Write Speed 468 MB/s 479 MB/s +2%
4K Read Peak 4K Random Read Speed 42 MB/s Much faster peak random read.+47% 28.5 MB/s
4K Write Peak 4K Random Write Speed 117 MB/s 119 MB/s +2%
Mixed Peak Sequential Mixed IO Speed 452 MB/s Slightly faster peak mixed IO speed.+13% 401 MB/s
4K Mixed Peak 4K Random Mixed IO Speed 59 MB/s Much faster peak random mixed IO.+42% 41.5 MB/s
SusWrite Peak Sequential Sustained Write 60s Average 459 MB/s Much faster peak sustained write speed.+71% 268 MB/s

Market Share

Based on 18,073,656 SSDs tested.
Market Share Market Share (trailing 30 days) 0.39 % Much higher market share.+56% 0.25 %
Value Value For Money 21.6 % Hugely better value.+88% 11.5 %
User Rating UBM User Rating 80 % More popular.+19% 67 %
Price Price (score) £40 Much cheaper.+44% £72
Capacity Capacity 250GB 275GB

ADVERTISEMENT

The MX500 is Crucial’s current flagship consumer SATA SSD featuring their latest second generation 64-layer 3D TLC NAND. It’s available in 250 GB, 500 GB, 1 TB and 2 TB capacities in a 2.5-inch form factor. All but the 2 TB version will also be available in M.2 (2280) form in the future. The MX500 features a Silicon Motion SM2258 controller which is a change from the Marvell 88SS1074 controller featured in the MX300 (it’s nearly two year old predecessor). Performance is around 30% better than on the MX300 which currently retails at the same price. The MX500 has an SLC cache which increases with drive capacity. Consequently, the larger capacities are better able to sustain high sequential write speeds. The 250 GB version has 250MB of SLC cache, the 500 GB has 512 MB, the 1 TB has 1 GB and the 2 TB has 2 GB. Extended sustained write performance tests show that even though speed does drop off after the cache has been exhausted, it is still maintained at very respectable levels. The MX500’s five year warranty is in line with Samsung’s 850 Evo and exceeds it in terms of endurance (just 75 TBW for the 250 GB 850 Evo versus 100 TBW for the 250 GB MX500). It doesn’t quite match up to the Samsung’s 850 Evo’s performance (effective speed 8% slower), however at current prices it is about 20% cheaper, and on balance offers better value for money. [Mar '18 SSDrivePro]

MORE DETAILS

The 275GB Crucial MX300 supersedes the MX200. Unlike its predecessor, the MX300 is TLC based and therefore suffers from weak write speeds in comparison to MLC drives. The MX300 utilises a sophisticated algorithm to enable fast burst write speeds provided that there is sufficient free space on the disk but as the drive fills up write performance drops to the relatively poor levels seen on other TLC drives (similar to mechanical drives). At current prices (70 USD) the MX300 competes well with other low end drives such as the OCZ Trion, Adata SP550 and Samsung 750 EVO. As stocks build the MX300 is likely to see further price cuts, so it could become a very interesting value proposition. See the current value leaders here. [Sep '16 SSDrivePro]

MORE DETAILS

ADVERTISEMENT

Group Test Results

  • Best user rated - User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
  • Best value for money - Value for money is based on real world performance.
  • Fastest real world speed - Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.
How Fast Is Your SSD? (Bench your build) Size up your PC in less than a minute.

Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.

UserBenchmark of the month
Gaming Desktop Workstation CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM USB
How it works
  • - Download and run UserBenchMark.
  • - CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
  • - GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
  • - Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
  • - RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
  • - Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
  • - Identify the strongest components in your PC.
  • - See speed test results from other users.
  • - Compare your components to the current market leaders.
  • - Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
  • - Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
  • - Share your opinion by voting.

ssd.userbenchmark.com

Crucial's MX300 SSD reviewed

3D is all the rage these days. Every Hollywood action flick worth its salt gets screened in both two- and three-dimensional formats, VR is pushing hapless early adopters to stumble over unseen living room furniture, and even Intel is encouraging NUC modders to 3D-print custom lids for their tiny little boxes.

Not even the utilitarian storage market is immune to the trend. Akin to how PCIe and NVMe have long been lurking around the corner, 3D NAND flash technologies have been threatening to rewrite the SSD landscape for a long while. But until now, only Samsung has actually released consumer drives featuring vertically stacked cells. The other manufacturers have been content to dribble out mere hints, announcements, and press releases.

Micron has finally cranked that faucet all the way open and taken the wraps off of its first 3D NAND-equipped SSD, the Crucial MX300. Micron’s 3D NAND is one of the more recent products of the company’s longstanding NAND partnership with Intel. The MX300 boasts the high-end feature list and performance specs we’d expect out of an MX-series drive, but there are couple of major shakeups under the hood. One is obviously the 3D NAND. The other is a more dubious “upgrade.” Micron’s seen fit to deploy that 3D NAND in a TLC configuration, replacing the MLC we’d grown attached to in the MX100 and MX200.

This isn’t the first time that Micron has taken an existing product line and sneaked in an extra bit-per-cell. Not so long ago, we reviewed the newly-TLC-based BX200 and were left unimpressed by its regression in performance versus its well-received predecessor, the BX100. Let’s hope that Micron has learned from that experience and has reason enough to gamble the MX series’ good name on TLC.

We should take a moment here to talk about what’s different about Intel and Micron’s 3D NAND. Planar NAND of all sorts has long been based on floating-gate transistors. To create its stacked flash product, Samsung abandoned floating gates and moved to charge-trap flash, the details of which we discussed at length when we first reviewed the 850 series of drives. Intel and Micron were more stubborn, betting their 3D NAND money on the floating-gate horse. While that choice allowed Samsung to take V-NAND to market first, Intel and Micron believe that their combined ability to leverage years of floating-gate infrastructure and expertise will give them an advantage in the long run.

The first generation of this 3D NAND stacks 32 layers into 256-gigabit MLC or 384-gigabit TLC configurations. As we’ve already noted, the MX300 uses the 384-gigabit TLC stuff. This is remarkable density. Samsung’s first-generation V-NAND (also 32-layer) only maxed out at 128Gb in a TLC die. Even Samsung’s second-generation, 48-layer stuff only peaks at 256Gb in a TLC die. Intel and Micron have been hinting that the prodigious density of their flash might eventually lead to monster 10TB SSDs in 2.5″ form factors.

For today, we’ll have to settle for a 750GB drive. This somewhat unusual capacity is a limited-edition flavor of the MX300, but it’s the only one available at launch. I’d say that Micron’s taking some Founders Edition cues from Nvidia here, but its suggested retail price for the MX300 is actually pretty reasonable at $199.99. Eventually, the product line will be fleshed out with 275GB, 525GB, and 1050GB versions, but Micron isn’t ready to release performance ratings for those drives just yet.

Crucial MX300
Capacity Max sequential (MB/s) Max random (IOps)
Read Write Read Write
750GB 530 510 92k 83k

The NAND inside the MX300 is distributed over eight packages, each of which contains two 384Gb 3D NAND dies. We routinely see SSDs which bundle as many as 16 dies into a single package, so those vague promises of 10TB in a 2.5″ drive are starting to sound pretty realistic.

Alongside the NAND packages is a fresh face: Marvell’s 88SS1074 controller. The Crucial MX series of drives has always been powered by Marvell controllers, but this chip is one of the newer ones in the company’s stable. It’s been targeted squarely at the burgeoning TLC SSD market, so it’s no shock to see that it’s been popping up in newer TLC drives like SanDisk’s X400 and Plextor’s M7V. We haven’t gotten our hands on either of those drives yet, so this is the first time we’ve had the controller in TR’s storage labs. It has all the bells and whistles you’d expect a modern SSD controller to have, like support for DevSleep and 256-bit AES hardware encryption acceleration.

In fact, the MX300 meets all the desirable encryption standards: eDrive, IEEE-1667, and TCG Opal 2.0. Another feature worth mentioning is Dynamic Write Acceleration, Micron’s implementation of a pseudo-SLC cache (see our M600 review for details). Crucial’s warranty covers the MX300 for three years, much like the warranties on the MX100 and MX200 before it. The 750GB drive has a rated lifespan of 220TB total bytes written, but the truly diligent can use the included free copy of Acronis True Image HD to ensure that their precious data outlives both the warranty and the endurance spec.

Now put on your 3D glasses, because it’s time for the show.

IOMeter — Sequential and random performance

IOMeter fuels much of our latest storage test suite, including our sequential and random I/O tests. These tests are run across the full capacity of the drive at two queue depths. The QD1 tests simulate a single thread, while the QD4 results emulate a more demanding desktop workload. For perspective, 87% of the requests in our old DriveBench 2.0 trace of real-world desktop activity have a queue depth of four or less. Clicking the buttons below the graphs switches between results charted at the different queue depths.

Our sequential tests use a relatively large 128KB block size.

The MX300’s sequential read speeds are great, handily beating the MX200’s QD1 speeds and coming close to matching its QD4 speeds. It doesn’t fare quite as well on the sequential write side—both the BX100 and MX200 write significantly faster. The MX300 will have to take solace in the fact that it slaughters the BX200’s writes. But then again, even I can write faster than the BX200 if I’m equipped with a decent pen.

The MX300’s random results are the opposite of its sequential numbers. The drive posts read response times that are slower than most, but its write response times are excellent. That’s Dynamic Write Acceleration at its finest. But DWA isn’t a cure-all, so let’s see what happens when it isn’t allowed to work its magic.

Sustained and scaling I/O rates

Our sustained IOMeter test hammers drives with 4KB random writes for 30 minutes straight. It uses a queue depth of 32, a setting which should result in higher speeds that saturate each drive’s overprovisioned area more quickly. This lengthy—and heavy—workload isn’t indicative of typical PC use, but it provides a sense of how the drives react when they’re pushed to the brink.

We’re reporting IOps rather than response times for these tests. Click the buttons below the graph to switch between SSDs.

To show the data in a slightly different light, we’ve graphed the peak random-write rate and the average, steady-state speed over the last minute of the test.

The MX300’s peak speeds are right up there with the MX200’s. This drive’s steady-state speeds just can’t compete with its predecessor’s, though. Dynamic Write Acceleration makes the drive go like hell when it can, but once those tricks are exhausted, even 3D TLC can’t stand up to good old MLC NAND.

Our final IOMeter test examines performance scaling across a broad range of queue depths. We ramp all the way up to a queue depth of 128. Don’t expect AHCI-based drives to scale past 32, though—that’s the maximum depth of their native command queues.

For this test, we use a database access pattern comprising 66% reads and 33% writes, all of which are random. The test runs after 30 minutes of continuous random writes that put the drives in a simulated used state. Click the buttons below the graph to switch between the different drives. And note that the P3700 plot uses a much larger scale.

It’s a pretty gentle slope, but it does go up. We like it when SATA drives scale even a little bit. Let’s see how the MX300’s scaling compares to the rest of the Crucial lineup.

No touching! Amusingly, the scaling curves of the Crucial drives don’t end up intersecting at all. If queue depth scaling with a database access pattern is important to you, Crucial offers four distinct, non-overlapping behaviors to pick from. Choose your own adventure.

On the next page we put aside IOMeter to see how the MX300 performs with real-world file I/O.

TR RoboBench — Real-world transfers

RoboBench trades synthetic tests with random data for real-world transfers with a range of file types. Developed by our in-house coder, Bruno “morphine” Ferreira, this benchmark relies on the multi-threaded robocopy command build into Windows. We copy files to and from a wicked-fast RAM disk to measure read and write performance. We also cut the RAM disk out of the loop for a copy test that transfers the files to a different location on the SSD.

Robocopy uses eight threads by default, and we’ve also run it with a single thread. Our results are split between two file sets, whose vital statistics are detailed below. The compressibility percentage is based on the size of the file set after it’s been crunched by 7-Zip.

  Number of files Average file size Total size Compressibility
Media 459 21.4MB 9.58GB 0.8%
Work 84,652 48.0KB 3.87GB 59%

The media set is made up of large movie files, high-bitrate MP3s, and 18-megapixel RAW and JPG images. There are only a few hundred files in total, and the data set isn’t amenable to compression. The work set comprises loads of TR files, including documents, spreadsheets, and web-optimized images. It also includes a stack of programming-related files associated with our old Mozilla compiling test and the Visual Studio test on the next page. The average file size is measured in kilobytes rather than megabytes, and the files are mostly compressible.

RoboBench’s write and copy tests run after the drives have been put into a simulated used state with 30 minutes of 4KB random writes. The pre-conditioning process is scripted, as is the rest of the test, ensuring that drives have the same amount of time to recover.

Let’s take a look at the media set first. The buttons switch between read, write, and copy results.

Not too shabby at all. The MX300 may seem to fall on the low side of the rankings in the read test, but going by raw value, it’s right in the performance band we expect out of SATA drives. The MX300 redeems itself by ending up toward the top of our SATA contenders in our write and copy tests. The 850 Pro’s MLC V-NAND writes barely any faster than Micron’s TLC 3D NAND here. Color me impressed.

Next up, let’s see how the drive does with our work set.

The work set doesn’t reveal any anomalies. The MX300 puts up roughly middle-of-the-pack speeds across read, write, and copy tests whether the test is single- or eight-threaded.

RoboBench gave us only good news. While the MX300’s results here are largely unremarkable, unremarkable is exactly what we want to see when a product line makes the transition from MLC to TLC. Micron’s 3D NAND might just be able to pull off the switch without masses of disgruntled enthusiasts taking to message boards with hurtful words. Next, we check to see if the MX300 can hack it as a primary boot drive.

Boot times

Until now, all of our tests have been conducted with the SSDs connected as secondary storage. This next batch uses them as system drives.

We’ll start with boot times measured two ways. The bare test depicts the time between hitting the power button and reaching the Windows desktop, while the loaded test adds the time needed to load four applications—Avidemux, LibreOffice, GIMP, and Visual Studio Express—automatically from the startup folder. Our old boot tests focused on the time required to load the OS, but these new ones cover the entire process, including drive initialization.

The MX300 boots up quickly and without fuss. As we’ve been saying for years, getting any SSD at all is about as much as you can do to improve startup times. The MX300 would do nicely if any of you are somehow still plodding along on spinning platters.

Load times

Next, we’ll tackle load times with two sets of tests. The first group focuses on the time required to load larger files in a collection of desktop applications. We open a 790MB 4K video in Avidemux, a 30MB spreadsheet in LibreOffice, and a 523MB image file in the GIMP. In the Visual Studio Express test, we open a 159MB project containing source code for the LLVM toolchain. Thanks to Rui Figueira for providing the project code.

Again, nothing out of the ordinary here. Application load times are absurdly predictable across all manner of SSDs. Let’s check how quickly the MX300 launches some of our Steam games.

Middlingly quickly, it turns out. Game loading time has never been a great way to tease out differences in SSD performance, and today is not the day it becomes one.

That’s all of our tests. Hit the next page for a breakdown of our test setup. Or skip right ahead to the conclusion.

Test notes and methods

Here are the essential details for all the drives we tested:

  Interface Flash controller NAND
Crucial BX100 500GB SATA 6Gbps Silicon Motion SM2246EN 16-nm Micron MLC
Crucial BX200 480GB SATA 6Gbps Silicon Motion SM2256 16-nm Micron TLC
Crucial MX200 500GB SATA 6Gbps Marvell 88SS9189 16-nm Micron MLC
Crucial MX300 750GB SATA 6Gbps Marvell 88SS1074 32-layer Micron 3D TLC
Intel X25-M G2 160GB SATA 3Gbps Intel PC29AS21BA0 34-nm Intel MLC
Intel 335 Series 240GB SATA 6Gbps SandForce SF-2281 20-nm Intel MLC
Intel 730 Series 480GB SATA 6Gbps Intel PC29AS21CA0 20-nm Intel MLC
Intel 750 Series 1.2TB PCIe Gen3 x4 Intel Ch39AE41AB0 20-nm Intel MLC
Intel DC P3700 800GB PCIe Gen3 x4 Intel Ch39AE41AB0 20-nm Intel MLC
Mushkin Reactor 1TB SATA 6Gbps Silicon Motion SM2246EN 16-nm Micron MLC
OCZ Arc 100 240GB SATA 6Gbps Indilinx Barefoot 3 M10 A19-nm Toshiba MLC
OCZ Trion 100 480GB SATA 6Gbps Toshiba TC58 A19-nm Toshiba TLC
OCZ Trion 150 480GB SATA 6Gbps Toshiba TC58 15-nm Toshiba TLC
OCZ Vector 180 240GB SATA 6Gbps Indilinx Barefoot 3 M10 A19-nm Toshiba MLC
OCZ Vector 180 960GB SATA 6Gbps Indilinx Barefoot 3 M10 A19-nm Toshiba MLC
Plextor M6e 256GB PCIe Gen2 x2 Marvell 88SS9183 19-nm Toshiba MLC
Samsung 850 EV0 250GB SATA 6Gbps Samsung MGX 32-layer Samsung TLC
Samsung 850 EV0 1TB SATA 6Gbps Samsung MEX 32-layer Samsung TLC
Samsung 850 Pro 500GB SATA 6Gbps Samsung MEX 32-layer Samsung MLC
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB PCIe Gen3 x4 Samsung UBX 32-layer Samsung MLC
Samsung SM951 512GB PCIe Gen3 x4 Samsung S4LN058A01X01 16-nm Samsung MLC
Samsung XP941 256GB PCIe Gen2 x4 Samsung S4LN053X01 19-nm Samsung MLC
Toshiba OCZ RD400 512GB PCIe Gen3 x4 Toshiba 15-nm Toshiba MLC
Transcend SSD370 256GB SATA 6Gpbs Transcend TS6500 Micron or SanDisk MLC
Transcend SSD370 1TB SATA 6Gpbs Transcend TS6500 Micron or SanDisk MLC

All the SATA SSDs were connected to the motherboard’s Z97 chipset. The M6e was connected to the Z97 via the motherboard’s M.2 slot, which is how we’d expect most folks to run that drive. Since the XP941 and 950 Pro requires more lanes, they were connected to the CPU via a PCIe adapter card. The 750 Series and DC P3700 were hooked up to the CPU via the same full-sized PCIe slot.

We used the following system for testing:

Processor Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz
Motherboard Asus Z97-Pro
Firmware 2601
Platform hub Intel Z97
Platform drivers Chipset: 10.0.0.13

RST: 13.2.4.1000

Memory size 16GB (2 DIMMs)
Memory type Adata XPG V3 DDR3 at 1600 MT/s
Memory timings 11-11-11-28-1T
Audio Realtek ALC1150 with 6.0.1.7344 drivers
System drive Corsair Force LS 240GB with S8FM07.9 firmware
Storage Crucial BX100 500GB with MU01 firmware

Crucial BX200 480GB with MU01.4 firmware

Crucial MX200 500GB with MU01 firmware

Intel 335 Series 240GB with 335u firmware

Intel 730 Series 480GB with L2010400 firmware

Intel 750 Series 1.2GB with 8EV10171 firmware

Intel DC P3700 800GB with 8DV10043 firmware

Intel X25-M G2 160GB with 8820 firmware

Plextor M6e 256GB with 1.04 firmware

OCZ Trion 100 480GB with 11.2 firmware

OCZ Trion 150 480GB with 12.2 firmware

OCZ Vector 180 240GB with 1.0 firmware

OCZ Vector 180 960GB with 1.0 firmware

Samsung 850 EVO 250GB with EMT01B6Q firmware

Samsung 850 EVO 1TB with EMT01B6Q firmware

Samsung 850 Pro 500GB with EMXM01B6Q firmware

Samsung 950 Pro 512GB with 1B0QBXX7 firmware

Samsung XP941 256GB with UXM6501Q firmware

Transcend SSD370 256GB with O0918B firmware

Transcend SSD370 1TB with O0919A firmware

Power supply Corsair AX650 650W
Case Fractal Design Define R5
Operating system Windows 8.1 Pro x64

Thanks to Asus for providing the systems’ motherboards, to Intel for the CPUs, to Adata for the memory, to Fractal Design for the cases, and to Corsair for the system drives and PSUs. And thanks to the drive makers for supplying the rest of the SSDs.

We used the following versions of our test applications:

Some further notes on our test methods:

  • To ensure consistent and repeatable results, the SSDs were secure-erased before every component of our test suite. For the IOMeter database, RoboBench write, and RoboBench copy tests, the drives were put in a simulated used state that better exposes long-term performance characteristics. Those tests are all scripted, ensuring an even playing field that gives the drives the same amount of time to recover from the initial used state.
  • We run virtually all our tests three times and report the median of the results. Our sustained IOMeter test is run a second time to verify the results of the first test and additional times only if necessary. The sustained test runs for 30 minutes continuously, so it already samples performance over a long period.
  • Steps have been taken to ensure the CPU’s power-saving features don’t taint any of our results. All of the CPU’s low-power states have been disabled, effectively pegging the frequency at 3.5GHz. Transitioning between power states can affect the performance of storage benchmarks, especially when dealing with short burst transfers.

The test systems’ Windows desktop was set at 1920×1080 at 60Hz. Most of the tests and methods we employed are publicly available and reproducible. If you have questions about our methods, hit our forums to talk with us about them.

Conclusions

As usual, let’s condense the MX300’s performance results into a single rating before we make any sweeping judgements. We distill the overall performance rating using an older SATA SSD as a baseline. To compare each drive, we then take the geometric mean of a basket of results from our test suite. Only drives which have been through the entire current test suite on our current rig are represented.

By this measure, the performance of the MX300 750GB lands exactly in line with the MX200 500GB we reviewed a while back. Can’t make this stuff up, folks. Our fears that the drive would turn out to be a BX200-style misstep turned out to be unfounded. Micron has succeeded in keeping the bar for the MX series’ performance at the same height. That’s not to say that the MX300 is a drop-in replacement for the MX200. Our testing suite exposed noticeable differences between the two drives’ performance characteristics in some tests. Taken in the aggregate, though, our benchmarks put the two drives on roughly equal footing.

The performance checks out, but what about the price? In the scatter plot below, the most compelling position is toward the upper left corner, where the price per gigabyte is low and performance is high.

The MX300 750GB lands near the left edge of the plot, which is a great position. Micron’s suggested price tag of $199.99 works out to $0.27 per gigabyte, making it the fourth-cheapest drive per unit of capacity in this graph. That’s just a hair cheaper than the $0.28 per gigabyte that the MX200 500GB is currently going for. Micron is clearly making efforts to ease the MX300 into the market right in the space that the MX200 will leave behind. The one potential fly in Micron’s ointment is the fact that Mushkin’s Reactor 1TB frequently goes on sale near the $200 mark. Fortunately for the MX300, at the time of this writing the Reactor 1TB is up to $249.99 ($0.25 per gigabyte) on Newegg. For a couple pennies more per gig, the MX300 gets you encryption features and an Acronis license, niceties the Mushkin drive lacks.

Crucial MX300 750GB

June 2016

Micron took a bold step by debuting its 3D NAND in a TLC drive poised to replace a well-loved MLC predecessor. Unlike the last time we tested the fruits of such a move, the switch to 3D NAND in the MX300 was well-executed, and we’re happy to call the MX300 a worthy successor to the MX200. If the MX300 is any indication, Intel and Micron’s 3D NAND has a bright future ahead of it. We can’t wait to see what it’s capable of in denser packages and in MLC configurations. For now, we’re happy to call this drive TR Recommended.

techreport.com

Crucial MX300 275 i 525 GB – test

Jakiś czas temu mieliśmy okazję przetestować nośniki Crucial MX200 250 GB i 500 GB, które zrobiły niezłe zamieszanie na rynku dysków SSD – oferowały bardzo dobrą wydajność, a przy tym były dostępne w przystępnej cenie. Producent postanowił jednak pójść o krok dalej i niedawno zaprezentował ich następców o oznaczeniu MX300 – to właśnie one miały stawić czoła coraz tańszym modelom konkurencji. Trudno uciec od porównania z modelami Samsung SSD 850 EVO wyposażonymi w rewolucyjne kości pamięci 3D V-NAND, niemniej jednak nośniki amerykańskiego producenta plasują się w trochę niższym przedziale cenowym.

Głównym atutem nośników MX300 są pamięci Intel Micron Flash Technologies (IMFT) 3D NAND, które miały być odpowiedzią na koreańskie 3D V-NAND. Również mamy do czynienia z pamięcią składającą się z wielu warstw (jak na razie z 32, ale w planach są bardziej złożone układy), lecz w tym przypadku producent postawił na konstrukcję z bramką pływającą (Floating Gate), a nie rozwiązanie typu CTF (Charge Trap Flash) – głównie ze względu na większe doświadczenie z takim typem pamięci oraz teoretycznie możliwość konstruowania wydajniejszych i pojemniejszych nośników.

Wykorzystanie pamięci 3D TLC NAND pozwoliło na stworzenie modeli o pojemności 275 GB – 1050 GB w przypadku nośników M.2 2280, a w przypadku dysków 2,5 cala nawet 2050 GB (niestandardowa pojemność to skutek zastosowania kości pamięci 3D NAND 384 Gb – 48 GB). Postanowiliśmy się przyjrzeć 2,5-calowym modelom o pojemności 275 i 525 GB, a więc tym, które zapewne będą cieszyć się największą popularnością na naszym rynku.

Czym wyróżniają się dyski Crucial MX300 275 i 525 GB?

  • wykorzystanie pamięci 3D TLC NAND
  • wysoka wydajność
  • atrakcyjna cena

MX300 to z założenia tańsze nośniki, które mają konkurować z innymi modelami wyposażonymi w zwykłe kości pamięci TLC NAND, a przy tym wyróżniać się wyższą wydajnością i lepszą ceną w przeliczeniu na GB. Jak w rzeczywistości wypadną nowe nośniki?

Model Crucial MX300 275 GB Crucial MX300 525 GB
Interfejs SATA III 6 Gb/s SATA III 6 Gb/s
Format 2,5 cala 2,5 cala
Pojemność 275 GB 525 GB
Deklarowany odczyt maks. 530 MB/s 530 MB/s
Deklarowany zapis maks. 500 MB/s 510 MB/s
Deklarowany IOPS – odczyt 55 000 92 000
Deklarowany IOPS – zapis 83 000 83 000
Deklarowany pobór prądu 55 mW (spoczynek), 70 mW (praca) 55 mW (spoczynek), 70 mW (praca)
Wytrzymałość 1,5 mln godzin 1,5 mln godzin
Kontroler Marvell 88SS1074 Marvell 88SS1074
Kości pamięci Micron 3D TLC NAND Micron 3D TLC NAND
Pamięć podręczna Micron LPDDR3 Micron LPDDR3
Wymiary 100,45 x 69,85 x 7 mm 100,45 x 69,85 x 7 mm
Waga 56 g 56 g
Zastosowane technologie Dynamic Write Acceleration, Adaptive Thermal Protection, Power Loss Protection, Data Path Protection, Active Garbage Collection, S.M.A.R.T., ECC, DevSLP Dynamic Write Acceleration, Adaptive Thermal Protection, Power Loss Protection, Data Path Protection, Active Garbage Collection, S.M.A.R.T., ECC, DevSLP
Gwarancja 3 lata (ograniczona współczynnikiem TBW - 80 TB) 3 lata (ograniczona współczynnikiem TBW - 160 TB)
Cena 330 złotych 600 złotych

Nośniki zamknięto w 2,5-calowej, metalowej obudowie o grubości 7 mm – oznacza to zatem, że zmieszczą się one nie tylko w komputerach stacjonarnych, ale również w cieńszych laptopach. Gdyby jednak nasz laptop był przystosowany do montażu grubszych dysków, to w zestawie znajdziemy ramkę zwiększającą profil do 9,5 mm. Oprócz tego producent dodaje kod do pobrania pakietu Acronis True Image HD, który przyda się przy przesiadce ze starego na nowy dysk.

W środku znalazła się płytka drukowana, na której umieszczono 4-kanałowy kontroler Marvell 88SS1074, kości pamięci Micron 3D TLC NAND, a także pamięć podręczną typu LPDDR3-1333. Przy okazji dodano jeszcze sporo kondensatorów, które odpowiadają za podtrzymanie zapisu danych w przypadku zaniku zasilania (funkcja Power Loss Protection).

Co ważne, producent udziela na dyski 3-letniej gwarancji, ale ograniczono ją współczynnikiem TBW – w przypadku modelu o pojemności 275 GB możemy zapisać 80 TB, a w przypadku modelu o pojemności 525 GB już 160 TB. W przypadku domowego użytkowania wartości te wydają się odpowiednio wysokie, bo dają 73 i 146 GB zapisywania danych dzień w dzień przez cały czas trwania gwarancji.

Teoretycznie możemy spodziewać się transferów sięgających 530 MB/s przy sekwencyjnym odczycie i 500 MB (275 GB) lub 510 MB/s (525 GB) przy sekwencyjnym zapisie danych. Liczba operacji też wygląda całkiem nieźle, bo w przypadku mniej pojemnej wersji jest to odpowiednio 55 000 i 83 000 IOPS, a w przypadku bardziej pojemnej już 92 000 i 83 000 IOPS.

Warto jednak zauważyć, że producent dodatkowo zastosował tutaj autorską technologię Dynamic Write Acceleration, która odpowiada za dynamiczne przydzielanie buforu działającego na zasadzie szybkiej pamięci SLC NAND i zapewne wartości te dotyczą operacji wykonywanych właśnie w obszarze tego bufora.

Tak przynajmniej wygląda teoria, ale jak nośniki MX300 wypadną w praktyce? Na kolejnych stronach to sprawdzimy, zarówno w testach syntetycznych, jak i podczas realnego użytkowania komputera.

www.benchmark.pl


Смотрите также