#DOES CRUCIAL MX100 SSD HEALTH CHECK INSTALL#
#DOES CRUCIAL MX100 SSD HEALTH CHECK VERIFICATION#

First, it has a random allocation pattern - it mixes up your data across random cells and spreads the wear around, so that the first few cells don't get hit with all the write cycles and wear out early. SSD firmware does a couple of things to combat this. As the dies get smaller, that number goes down. If I am understanding of what you said is correct then to get similar endurance you'd have to go higher in storage capacity, so a 20 nm 120 gb drive would last longer than a 16nm 120 gb drive, am I correct? (not taking TLC or MLC into account here, I rather go with proven metrics, IE quality of SSD provider, over theoretical ones)Įach cell has a limited number of write cycles - this is true. Everyone seems to expect that it will be a couple of years before anyone can do this cheaply enough to compete with traditional methods, though the process geometries are much larger to start. Samsung is already shipping NAND flash with cells stacked 32 high, and IMFT and Hynix plan to start production on their own 3D NAND later this year. Ultimately, NAND flash is probably going to go 3D, with many cells stacked on top of each other. Indeed, that's one reason why I've been hesitant to recommend TLC SSDs, recommending MLC alternatives for the same price-even if they happened to be somewhat slower. Furthermore, going from MLC to TLC has a much larger impact on write endurance than a die shrink, so if write endurance becomes a problem, I'd bet on TLC SSDs-such as the Samsung 840 EVO-as being the first place it surfaces.

#DOES CRUCIAL MX100 SSD HEALTH CHECK INSTALL#

You could install and delete a large game every single day, and you'd have several years before you had to worry about wearing the drive out from the writes. Regardless, the amount of writes you can do with one of these drives is still enormous. So on net, the amount of data that you can write before wearing out a drive at a given price tag tends to increase as you go to new process nodes, but just not as fast as the capacity of the drive increases. But the amount of data you can store in a given die space is proportional to 1/x^2-and yes, there are technical reasons for this one. I'm not sure if there is any technical reason for this, but judging by the write endurance numbers that various vendors have claimed, it looks like for an x nm process node, the number of writes you get is proportional to x-so yes, older, larger process nodes get you more writes. The general tendency has been toward fewer write cycles per cell but larger capacities in a given die space. For example, New Egg has a shell shocker deal on the 250 GB drive right now-at $135, or $25 more than the 256 GB Crucial MX100. The TLC NAND certainly puts it in that market, but the price tag really doesn't. Regardless of whether that is the case, the new MX100 is priced to sell an awful lot of NAND.Ī lot of people seem to tout the Samsung 840 EVO as a budget SSD. I sometimes think that Crucial pushes SSDs as a way to sell more NAND, and that the latter is what they're really interested in. That naturally gets them early access to NAND flash, which can help in writing firmware to use the new flash sooner. It's worth noting that Crucial is the consumer brand name for Micron, which owns half of IMFT, one of the major NAND flash producers. For a while, brand new SSD launches tended to have problems, but it's been a while since there was a major flop there. Crucial claims idle power consumption of a mere 0.1 W. The drive fares well in AnandTech's performance consistency measurements that were the last benchmark to find performance problems with a lot of SSDs. That's competitive with the cheapest 240 and 480 GB drives on the market, respectively, and while offering the latest features.ģ) The catch is-well, there isn't one, really.

Here, Crucial is starting at an MSRP of $110 for 256 GB and $225 for 512 GB.

New products often charge a premium price at first, and then the price settles down a ways. Regardless, die shrinks are what drive prices down, and this is the first SSD on the new generation of process nodes.Ģ) The pricing is notably aggressive. There are a lot of process node reasons why the 64% figure could be off, and wafer cost on a new node probably isn't the same.

As compared to previous generation 20 nm chips, a back-of-the-envelope computation is that this takes only 64% of the die space for the same capacity-meaning that if wafer cost is the same, they can pack 56% more capacity into a given cost.

#DOES CRUCIAL MX100 SSD HEALTH CHECK VERIFICATION#

Most SSD launches aren't terribly scintillating the performance numbers basically don't matter past verification that the drive isn't terrible, and Crucial easily met that threshold three generations ago.īut I think this one is notable for several reasons:ġ) It's the first SSD with 16 nm NAND flash. I noted recently on another thread that Crucial and Mushkin are the two SSD vendors that have done the most to push prices down on quality drives.

Does crucial mx100 ssd health check