Jump to content


Photo

Crucial MX100 SSD Review Discussion

SSD

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,146 posts

Posted 02 June 2014 - 02:10 PM

Though the MX100 offers a combination of respectable performance, enterprise-grade data protection and aggressive price point. The net result is an SSD that makes a compelling upgrade choice, especially for those who have had data reliability concerns in moving from hard drives to an SSD.

 


Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#2 continuum

continuum

    Mod

  • Mod
  • 3,531 posts

Posted 02 June 2014 - 04:39 PM

Looks surprisingly good in IOMeter for such an affordable SSD.

 

BTW the smaller versions are apparently quite a bit slower due to reduced parallelism, is there any plan to test smaller versions of the MX100? Or is there not enough interest?


#3 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,146 posts

Posted 02 June 2014 - 04:41 PM

We do have a 256GB but lacked the time. We can run it through a few things and see what shakes out...probably just post back here rather than do another piece on it though. 


Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#4 jamesg99

jamesg99

    Member

  • Member
  • 1 posts

Posted 04 June 2014 - 02:02 PM

Thanks for the review. I'd like this drive for a laptop so I'm interested in power consumption. Do you have any idea why your measured idle power consumption was 7 times higher than the specified 150mW typical power consumption?


#5 jaanv

jaanv

    Member

  • Member
  • 1 posts

Posted 05 July 2014 - 11:28 PM

Thanks for the review. I'd like this drive for a laptop so I'm interested in power consumption. Do you have any idea why your measured idle power consumption was 7 times higher than the specified 150mW typical power consumption?

I wonder too. It was really odd to read from the review that the drive consumes "only" 1.06 watts on idle when the specifications say it should consume 100 mW on idle. On a laptop, it can make a noticeable difference.

 

Maybe this is because of bad driver settings, e. g. DIPM disabled? Here it is claimed that "Most SSD power consumption reviews are completely wrong" because of this: http://www.silentpcr...php?f=7&t=63293 .

 

And here someone reports that the power consumption of his Intel X25-V SSD drive went down from 600 mW on Linux to 75 mW on Windows thanks to DIPM: http://ssj3gohan.twe...-(english).html (although it seems that there is nowadays some DIPM support on Linux too, but I'm no expert; and his one is of course not the same drive the current review is about).

 

Anyway, an explanation for the tenfold difference between the specs and the measurements would be very welcome.


Edited by jaanv, 05 July 2014 - 11:35 PM.

#6 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,146 posts

Posted 06 July 2014 - 09:08 AM

We're migrating to a Win8 platform now for consumer drive testing, we'll see how it looks there. 


Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users