Crucial BX100 (120GB, 250GB, 500GB & 1TB) SSD Review
by Kristian Vättö on April 10, 2015 1:20 PM EST- Posted in
- Storage
- SSDs
- Crucial
- Micron
- Silicon Motion
- BX100
- SM2246EN
- Micron 16nm
Final Words
The MX100 was a revolutionary product in many ways. It was the first drive to move to sub-19nm NAND, which brought cost savings along with it. The combination of price and performance made the MX100 arguably one of the most cost efficient drives on the market. The BX100 is more of an evolutionary step from the MX100 as it uses the same 16nm MLC as its foundation, but the switch from a Marvell to a Silicon Motion controller has allowed Crucial to cut the costs by another few percent, while still retaining high performance in typical client workloads.
Talking about performance, the BX100 is a great all-around performer. It performs well regardless of the workload and despite not being designed for IO intensive workloads such as The Destroyer benchmark, the higher capacities (500GB & 1TB) manage to be very close to the higher-end drives. It actually begs a question of whether it's worth it to pay the premium for a high-end drive because in reality you will only be gaining about 10-15% higher performance, whereas the cost premium is much more than that. For professionals who truly need the best IO performance, the premium can be worth it (although you should really be looking at PCIe SSDs already), but for enthusiasts it's safe to say that the BX100 delivers far more bang for the buck than a high-end SSD does (unless you're looking for a 256GB drive or smaller).
Furthermore, the BX100 is extremely power efficient and without a doubt the best drive in terms of power consumption that we have tested. For desktop users that isn't a big deal (unless you pay very close attention to your power bill), but for laptop users I would argue that power consumption is just as important as performance is (if not even more important) because increased battery life is something concrete and easily noticeable.
My only criticism is the fact that Crucial decided not to include TCG Opal and eDrive encryption in the BX100. Like I mentioned on the first page, I understand that the reason behind the move is to differentiate the BX100 and MX200, but it's still a feature that we got accustomed to in Crucial SSDs. I can't say this is a major issue because hardware encryption in the client space is still in its infancy and the software support is poor, but nevertheless it's a feature that I would have liked to see included.
| Amazon Price Comparison (4/10/2015) | ||||
| 120/128GB | 240/250/256GB | 480/500/512GB | 960GB/1TB | |
| Crucial BX100 | $68 | $99 | $185 | $375 |
| Crucial MX200 | - | $110 | $200 | $430 |
| OCZ ARC 100 | $60 | $105 | $170 | - |
| Crucial MX100 | $72 | $110 | $210 | - |
| Intel SSD 530 | $89 | $133 | $245 | - |
| Mushkin Reactor | - | - | - | $371 |
| Samsung SSD 850 EVO | $65 | $107 | $190 | $380 |
| Samsung SSD 850 Pro | $100 | $155 | $290 | $500 |
| SanDisk Ultra II | $70 | $95 | $180 | $360 |
| SanDisk Extreme Pro | - | $146 | $285 | $475 |
| Transcend SSD370 | $58 | $99 | $176 | $360 |
Given that the MX100 was already driving prices down, it comes as no surprise that the BX100 is very competitive in price. The Ultra II and SSD370 are slightly cheaper, but neither of them can provide the same combination of performance and power efficiency as the BX100 does. On that basis I would pick the BX100 over the two since the price delta is rather insignificant anyway (and obviously, pricing fluctuates on a daily and retailer basis). The 850 EVO is also very close in price and offers a little higher performance, but it can't challenge the BX100 in power efficiency, so for mobile users my recommendation would be the BX100, whereas the 850 EVO does offer marginally better value for desktop users.
In a nutshell, I have nothing but positive things to say about the BX100 for its price point, especially when it comes to the higher capacities. The performance is good for all workloads, the power efficiency is top of the class and most importantly, the overall value you get is simply outstanding. If you are on the market for an SSD right now, especially for laptop, I would highly recommend the BX100 even if your workload happens to be heavier than average.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
67 Comments
View All Comments
Vepsa - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
I wonder how two of these would do in RAID1 attached to a HP P410/256 controller. My poor little HP N40L could stand a capacity boost (2x250GB HDDs for booting) as well as a performance boost.owbert - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
Performance besides power consumption is so close to the mx100.Current prices have both bx100 and mx100 around the same price. Would it be a smarter buy to pick the mx100 because it offers a few gigs more storage at each tier?
CaedenV - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
If I were purchasing today I would spend the extra $5 for a 1TB EVO. However, the EVO isn't likely to see many more price drops over it's life span, while the BX drives are brand new and will probably see a few price drops after the initial release. 6mo from now it might be substantially cheaper than the EVO and be a true budget drive (granted sub $400 for a 1TB SSD is not a bad price at all!).For my next build I think I am going to stick with m.2 for the added throughput and ability to have less stuff cluttering my box (looking at ITX next time). I wonder if there will be a 'budget' M.2 drive available by then that will offer better performance than SATA3 or SATA Express options.
MrCommunistGen - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
Due to the different controller in the 1TB 850 EVO (and the generally lower performance profile it offers compared to the 500GB model) I'd personally skip the 1TB EVO...Then again I'm not really in the market for a new SATA SSD at the moment either. My 500GB 840 EVO is *good enough* until I can get some future, shiny PCI-E, NVMe, 3D NAND SSD. Of course I'll need a new machine too since Z77 isn't going to know how to boot a NVMe SSD...
Margalus - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
the performance difference between the 500GB and the 1TB is negligible. Plus the 500GB is too small. I just bought the 1TB evo a couple weeks ago for $350. I wish they had a 2TB...bunsenbunner - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
Nothing like ordering two of these last night (based on other reviews thus far) for a video editing setup only to see this review drop the next day. No stress at all reading through this to verify I made the right purchase! :-)Samsung's handling of the 840 EVO issues had me hesitant to go with the 850 EVO (even though I know the 3D NAND in the 850 EVO is a different beast from the TLC electrical drift issues in the 840 EVO). Samsung has had some stellar drives in recent years, but they've also not had any after-the-fact issues to really deal with. A "fix" followed by a second "fix" didn't give me a lot of confidence in Samsung's ability to truly resolve the issue. And this is from a current owner of two 840 EVOs.
I of course wanted to hold out for the Intel 750 Series, but it skews a little far on the performance vs. value per GB for my needs.
Elixer - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
Storage Executive installs JAVA, that is why it is so huge.In theory, using JAVA means that this app could be ported to linux or Macs fairly easily.
Personally, I rather not install anything that has to do with JAVA, they should have went with C# or C++ like the other OEMs are using.
Mr Perfect - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link
Oh. Java? I've actually removed that from my systems. Nothing I have uses it, and it's got as many security flaws as Flash.I'm also a little disappointed that this isn't a standalone application, but then I have all of these horrible flashbacks of Internet Explorer updates hopelessly breaking browser-based applications. *IE6 flashback*
dave_the_nerd - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
Bought one of these (500GB) the other day for a family member's build. I thought I had read a review on AT already, but I probably got it mixed up with the MX100.Nevertheless, I was impressed with the performance, especially for the price. (I guess I lucked out.) Seems like the arguments in favor of the BX100 come down to:
1) Cheap
2) Fast enough
3) Crucial
I'm okay with that.
Also, I ordered a V4 once upon a time, then read some reviews of it and cancelled the order. So I guess that's twice I've lucked out.
jabber - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link
Bought one of the 250GB ones a few weeks ago.My review - Works just as well as any other SSD I've bought over the past two years. No disappointment.
Erm that's about as much as you need to know.