Newegg Shellshocker - Crucial MX100 128GB $59.99 FS

DejaWiz

DejaWiz

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
21,715
Newegg has the Crucial MX100 128GB on a flash sale right now for $60 shipped. Anyone needed a good quality, good performing SSD with OPAL 2.0, Microsoft eDrive, and IEE-1667 compliance. Makes for a great work or home SSD for those using BitLocker or other form of data encryption.
 
How does this compare with the Samsung EVO 430? This appears to be a pretty good deal.
 
XViper said:
How does this compare with the Samsung EVO 430? This appears to be a pretty good deal.
Click to expand...

Did you mean the 840 Evo?
If so, then both are rated at 1.5M hours MTBF, both have a 3yr warranty, but the MX100 uses better (imo) MLC rather than TLC NAND.

Honestly, can't go wrong with either for home use, and it should come down to a lower raw price tag as the deciding factor at the time of purchase. Personally, I would never incorporate a TLC NAND-based SSD into a business computer, but that is purely another one of my opinions about TLC NAND.

I've got the MX100 256GB running in my work system with Windows 7's BLE, and it really breathed some life into this Phenom II N620 powered laptop.
 
Yes i meant the 840 Evo. I think I need a slightly bigger size though.

DejaWiz said:
Did you mean the 840 Evo?
If so, then both are rated at 1.5M hours MTBF, both have a 3yr warranty, but the MX100 uses better (imo) MLC rather than TLC NAND.

Honestly, can't go wrong with either for home use, and it should come down to a lower raw price tag as the deciding factor at the time of purchase. Personally, I would never incorporate a TLC NAND-based SSD into a business computer, but that is purely another one of my opinions about TLC NAND.

I've got the MX100 256GB running in my work system with Windows 7's BLE, and it really breathed some life into this Phenom II N620 powered laptop.
Click to expand...
 
XViper said:
How does this compare with the Samsung EVO 430? This appears to be a pretty good deal.
Click to expand...

Very favorably if you're talking about the 256gb variant of the MX100 (not the 128gb). The 840 Evo is definitely a little bit quicker, but it's nothing you'll notice and certainly not worth the price premium it commands.

I've seen plenty of reviews were the 128gb MX100 is a bit slower than some of the other SSDs you can get at this price point. $60 bucks for 128gb is nice and all, but $110 for 256gb is even better :)
 
atp1916 said:
Very favorably if you're talking about the 256gb variant of the MX100 (not the 128gb). The 840 Evo is definitely a little bit quicker, but it's nothing you'll notice and certainly not worth the price premium it commands.

I've seen plenty of reviews were the 128gb MX100 is a bit slower than some of the other SSDs you can get at this price point. $60 bucks for 128gb is nice and all, but $110 for 256gb is even better :)
Click to expand...

I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here...
Any modern SSD (SATA3 capable with a decent controller and synchronous NAND) will perform quite nicely, realistically. The sheer speed that an SSD offers over an old-fashioned spindle HDD is so dramatic that the differences between decent SSD's themselves are really not going to be noticed outside of meaningless synthetic benchmarks.

Short version: SSDs are so fast, that anyone would be hard-pressed to successfully tell the difference between decent SSDs in a "blind taste test" during real world use, such as boot times, application/game load times, etc, so it's certainly not fair to throw the 128GB variant of the MX100 into the fire pit.
 
DejaWiz said:
I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here...
Any modern SSD (SATA3 capable with a decent controller and synchronous NAND) will perform quite nicely, realistically. The sheer speed that an SSD offers over an old-fashioned spindle HDD is so dramatic that the differences between decent SSD's themselves are really not going to be noticed outside of meaningless synthetic benchmarks.

Short version: SSDs are so fast, that anyone would be hard-pressed to successfully tell the difference between decent SSDs in a "blind taste test" during real world use, such as boot times, application/game load times, etc, so it's certainly not fair to throw the 128GB variant of the MX100 into the fire pit.
Click to expand...

True. But this is the [H]... :D
 
If you are on the fence always wait out for the 256GB drives. IME there is just such a huge difference between 128gb class and the 256gb, 256 will handle with spare space the vast majority of users needs including a number of large modern games and all the productivity applications you could install. Most likely you wont have to manage space or make compromises. 128 is sort of just at the edge where you have to think about it a lot more. With a 128GB drive you might have to stick to playing 1 or 2 games or offloading them onto a storage drive. You might have to go deleting maps and mods etc....
 
rudy said:
If you are on the fence always wait out for the 256GB drives. IME there is just such a huge difference between 128gb class and the 256gb, 256 will handle with spare space the vast majority of users needs including a number of large modern games and all the productivity applications you could install. Most likely you wont have to manage space or make compromises. 128 is sort of just at the edge where you have to think about it a lot more. With a 128GB drive you might have to stick to playing 1 or 2 games or offloading them onto a storage drive. You might have to go deleting maps and mods etc....
Click to expand...

I agree. I've had a 120GB Intel 320 for a while and I've regretted buying such a small drive the entire time. I've made it work but it has involved installing a lot of programs/games on spinning disks.

240GB is the absolute minimum to consider.
 
For home users that don't have a lot of large apps or many games, 120-128GB would be fine for a desktop or laptop, imo. Or as a dedicated OS drive with a larger SSD or HDD to house everything else.

Most work users can get away easily with 120-128GB SSD, as well. The only reason why I decided on the larger 256GB MX100 for my work laptop was because I use my laptop to store company OS images, application install packages, diagnostics programs, and users backup data during hardware or software migrations. It's not uncommon for me to have 10-20 backups on my laptop with some weighing up to 8GB (rare), but some are a smaller 500MB-1.5GB each, and even those are considered large.
 
I use 128 boot drives and additional 256 or 500 drives dedicated to games. Make weekly images of the boot drive to a NAS using Macrium Reflect. If a game drive shits the bed, it's easy to rebuild without a backup. A 128 boot drive keeps the backup time and file size down. The drive sizes don't really matter but it pays to separate games from programs if you make regular backups.
 
WetMacula said:
I use 128 boot drives and additional 256 or 500 drives dedicated to games.
Click to expand...

Holy shit. What kind of data rates are you getting with 128 drives to boot from and 256-500 drives for games? How many games do you have? Like, all of them? :eek:


:p
 
Last edited:
DejaWiz said:
Holy shit. What kind of data rates are you getting with 128 drives to boot from and 256-500 drives for games? How many games do you have? Like, all of them? :eek:


:p
Click to expand...

I think he meant he uses 128GB capacity drives for boot and additional 256/500 GB capacity drives as necessary...
 
dandragonrage said:
MX100: MLC
840 EVO: TLC

MX100 automatically wins.
Click to expand...

As long as you do not have a 990FX chipset. The Crucial MX100 and M500 drives have issues with the 990FX chipsets. :( On the other hand, they are good drives otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top