• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Mushkin SSD DX vs MX

J

JoseJones

Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2012
Messages
602
This will be my first SSD if I get one. So, is getting an SSD for O.S. & programs a no-brainer or is it really worth all the extra money?

I'd get at least a 120g for O.S. & programs along with a Caviar Black 1T with 64mb cache. I'm being told that using the HDD for documents & storage will be no difference. So, apparently, the SSD would just be for quick boot-up and quick opening of programs and quicker loading of games, which is sweet but, is it really worth it?

Anyway, I'm trying to figure out which is best between the Mushkin MX and DX versions. The DX version includes "SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor with unthrottled - IOPS firmware"

While the MX version says: "Synchronous-Mode MLC NAND"

Here's the Mushkin website page for SSD's. Mushkin says that the Chronos Deluxe, MX & regular Chronos all use the SF-2281 controller so, I'm completely lost as to which is best.

I was originally planning on the Intel 520, 120G "Cherryville" but, Mushkin prices have really dropped recently and I'm still unclear which is the better SSD with regards to life-span and reliability.

Another issue right now is that the Mushkin DX 240g is only around $15 more at Newegg. 120g is enough for me but, dang, it's hard to pass up a 240g for only $15 more.

Another important question is if I'd be better off waiting for the next newer or upgraded version of SSD's? I mean, for me in this new i7 Ivy system, both the HD & SSD are operating at sata 3 (6g/ps) and since I'll have to use a HD for documents & storage the benefits will be as noted above.

I've just read this helpful article but, it was written before Mushkin came out with their SF-2281 version I think: NAND Flash Faces Off - Synchronous vs. Asynchronous
 
Last edited:
The difference is in the type of flash chips used internally.

The Chronos uses async NAND, the MX uses sync NAND and the DX uses premium sync NAND.
The DX will be the fastest of the bunch under test, though this isn't always as apparent in real world use.

If the 240GB DX is only another $15 more than the 120GB DX, then personally I think that would be a no-brainer - though I suppose you'd have to compare other maker's models/prices too.

I use a DX in my main desktop PC and am very happy with it, though as with all these things, you look at the best deals available at the time (and I don't necessarily mean the cheapest ;) ) .
 
Thanks, Billy.

So, after reading the HF article I've learned to avoid the Chronos async NAND. Now, I just need to figure out if the DX version is really that much better than the MX version and how specifically. I'd like to know which is best regarding life-span and reliability. It's really weird to me because they both use the SandForce SF-2281 so, I'm still completely lost as to which is better and just how much better since the price difference is considerable.

120g is enough for me but, if the 240g DX is only a few bucks more I should just get it anyway then? I guess Mushkin doesn't make a 160 or 180g DX. I wish Mushkin offered a 5 year warranty instead of just 3 years.

I'm considering Mushkin SSD and RAM for my new i7 build due to suggestions by others who say they make outstanding RAM and SSD's. Is this true?
 
I was just reading Tom's article for Best SSDs For The Money: May 2012 and they say:

"when it comes to SandForce-based SSDs, they only achieve their peak performance when you're moving around compressible bits of data."
Click to expand...

Someone responded saying:

"Both the Mushkin Chronos and the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe use a SandForce controller. That pretty much rules out both for professional photo and video work."
Click to expand...

Is this true? Does this mean I'm wasting my time with these Mushkin SSD's?

The HF article states:

"The blanket statement in most reviews these days is that asynchronous flash when paired with SandForce SF-2281 controllers only affects performance when dealing with incompressible data, or rather data that has already been compressed before it gets to the SandForce controller, such as .jpeg or .mp3 files. This is simply not accurate."
Click to expand...

My new i7 Ivy build will be mostly for work in our small business we operate out of our home and we work with Adobe CS, Word, Photo Shop, Premiere, Office, XSite Pro (website builder) and more almost everyday. We also have to build our own websites create our own product description videos and HD documentary DVD's, Powerpoint Lectures and send fairly large uploads to our manufacturer.
 
The SF controllers experience their best performance with highly compressible data (since the controller compresses the data on the fly, then writes it to the flash, minimizing write times). I believe (somebody correct me) that this only applies to write performance. I wouldn't think that compressible vs incompressible matters for read operations.

Even with compressible data you're going to get SSD performance and ridiculous seek times. However, if you're looking to maximize sustained write speeds and have a lot of incompressible data, you might want to check the benchmarks for other SSDs and see if something fits your needs better.
 
Last edited:
^ Thanks jwcalla.

I know so little about SSD's beyond reading articles and reviews that I still don't feel like I really know much about them, really. I've never had an SSD yet so, I'm totally reliant upon the experiences of others.

Dumb question: If I pass on getting an SSD for now, will it be easy to add one down the road in a year or two? I mean, will it include a lot of work having to re-format my HD as well as the new SSD or will it be as easy as just adding a new SSD with a normal format? What all would be involved?

In a perfect world, I'd wait for a SATA Express 1 terabyte PCIe 3.0 SSD card at 12 to 16g/ps for $199.
 
Last edited:
JoseJones said:
^ Thanks jwcalla.

I know so little about SSD's beyond reading articles and reviews that I still don't feel like I really know much about them, really. I've never had an SSD yet so, I'm totally reliant upon the experiences of others.

Dumb question: If I pass on getting an SSD for now, will it be easy to add one down the road in a year or two? I mean, will it include a lot of work having to re-format my HD as well as the new SSD or will it be as easy as just adding a new SSD with a normal format? What all would be involved?

In a perfect world, I'd wait for a SATA Express 1 terabyte PCIe 3.0 SSD card at 12 to 16g/ps for $199.
Click to expand...

I had to amend by previous post as I made a typo: "However, if you're looking to maximize sustained write speeds and have a lot of incompressible data, you might want to check the benchmarks for other SSDs and see if something fits your needs better. "

Most people are able to convert their systems from HDD to SSD rather trivially... they just clone the partition using software such as CloneZilla or Acronis True Image. If the source partition is larger than the destination SSD, then sometimes there is some trickery required.

PCIe SSDs are sometimes difficult to deal with, but that might be an option some day too.
 
You would have to be insane to not pay $15 to go from a 120GB Chronos MX to a 240GB Chronos DX in my opinion. It is one of the fastest SSDs available.

The SF 2281 issues have been resolved for almost a year now (I have had no issues, been running since early Feb).

If you are used to a hard drive, the difference in speed will be astounding no matter what drive you choose.

Regarding adding other SSDs down the road, SSD and HDD behaves identically from the setup point of view, it's just like adding/removing a hard drive.
 
I've decided to go with the killer Mushkin 240g DX. I hope the DX version was worth the extra cashola.

Here's the new system build:

CPU: Ivy Bridge i7 3770
HSF: CM 212 Evo
MB: Gigabyte z77 UD5
RAM: Mushkin 8g DDR3 1600
SSD: Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe - DX 240g
HD: WD Black 1T 64mb cache
PSU: Seasonic X-750w
Case: Antec One Illusion (w/4 fans)
OS: Windows 7 Pro, 64-bit
 
grambo said:
You would have to be insane to not pay $15 to go from a 120GB Chronos MX to a 240GB Chronos DX in my opinion. It is one of the fastest SSDs available.
Click to expand...
grambo, that $15 difference was between the $185 120g DX (not the MX) and the $199 240g DX.

I also for got to mention a GPU - I was eying the NVidia 660TI but, it isn't out yet.

I just noticed the Samsung 830 Series 128g is on sale for $90.

Mushkin 240g DX
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/hdd.php?hdd=MKNSSDCR240GB-DX

Samnsung 830 128g
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/hdd.php?hdd=SAMSUNG+SSD+830+Series

Which SSD is best between the Samsung & the Mushkin?
 
Last edited:
JoseJones said:
grambo, that $15 difference was between the $185 120g DX (not the MX) and the $199 240g DX.

I also for got to mention a GPU - I was eying the NVidia 660TI but, it isn't out yet.

I just noticed the Samsung 830 Series 128g is on sale for $90.

Mushkin 240g DX
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/hdd.php?hdd=MKNSSDCR240GB-DX

Samnsung 830 128g
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/hdd.php?hdd=SAMSUNG+SSD+830+Series

Which SSD is best between the Samsung & the Mushkin?
Click to expand...

They trade blows according to the AnandTech review (actual workloads not just synthetics), with the Samsung having faster writes and the Mushkin having faster reads (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4863/the-samsung-ssd-830-review/4 substitute the Vert 3 MAX IOPS for the Mushkin, basically the same drive, both use Toggle NAND and SF-2281). That article is from September 2011, and the Mushkin has had 2 firmware updates since which boost performance.

Not sure why you are comparing 128GB vs. 240GB though? If you only need 128GB, get the 830. Personally, I think 128GB are too small.
 
Fair enough, I probably should've compared it to the Mushkin 120g MX &/or DX. The Samsung 128g went on sale for cheap at $90 - with the Newegg code.

I was just curious about the Samsung 830 since they make it all in house; their own controller, software etc. So, I was just curious which was the better SSD.
 
Yep, I understand that the Samsung just went on sale but, that's not my question, I was asking which SSD was better.
 
JoseJones said:
Yep, I understand that the Samsung just went on sale but, that's not my question, I was asking which SSD was better.
Click to expand...

In terms of benchmarks, the Samsung will be better at some things and the Mushkin will be better at other things, as each employs different strategies that make different trade-offs. You can always check the AnandTech benchmarks: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/533?vs=389

Of course... "In real life usage" you won't notice any real performance difference, unless you have your stopwatch out.

So then it comes down to reliability, warranty, brand name and performance over the long haul. And even here it seems that all of the latest-gen SSDs are pretty equal.

So then it comes down to price. :)
 
JoseJones said:
Humm, they don't have a single Mushkin SSD in the list to compare it to.

So, the Samsung 830 256g is $300 and that's down from $390.

The Mushkin 240g is $199
Click to expand...

The Mushkin DX uses the same NAND and controller as the Vertex 3 Max IOPS... so performance will be near identical to that drive.

SSDs when on sale are going for less than $1 / GB these days. So if there's a particular drive you're after you can always wait for the next sale.
 
Just sign up for the newegg daily e-mail sale flyers, and check Slickdeals every day and you'll see tons of good SSD sales.

E.g., the 240 GB SanDisk Extreme -- which should be comparable to the Mushkin DX -- was recently on sale for $170 + free shipping.
 
JoseJones said:
Humm, they don't have a single Mushkin SSD in the list to compare it to.

So, the Samsung 830 256g is $300 and that's down from $390.

The Mushkin 240g is $199
Click to expand...

As said above, all the SF-2281 controller based SSDs, assuming the same NAND type, are more or less the same performance. So when you say "better", you have to factor in warranty, firmware support (not an issue with SF-2281, it is mature now, all vendors are fine).

My advice: If you want 240GB, buy a Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB when you can get it for $199 or less (should go on sale for $179-189 most of the time). The Samsung 830 is an awesome drive, but it is not worth 50% more for the same size. If 128GB is enough, get the 830 for under $100.
 
^ I've pretty much already bought the Mushkin DX 240g. The Samsung 830 128g just happened to go on sale for $90 the next day, but I'm with you and feel that 120g/128g is cutting it too close IMO.
 
JoseJones said:
Here's the new system build:

CPU: Ivy Bridge i7 3770
HSF: CM 212 Evo
MB: Gigabyte z77 UD5
RAM: Mushkin 8g DDR3 1600
SSD: Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe - DX 240g
HD: WD Black 1T 64mb cache
PSU: Seasonic X-750w
Case: Antec One Illusion (w/4 fans)
OS: Windows 7 Pro, 64-bit
Click to expand...

If you're using Photoshop and Premiere go with 16 or 32 gigs of RAM.
 
^ Seriously? I originally planned on 16g but, a buddy who works with graphics told me that 8g should be enough.

Well, the cool thing is that I can always add more RAM. RAM is about the easiest thing to add.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top