Crucial M500 SSD Series Now Available

[btarunr]

Crucial started shipping its M500 line of consumer SSDs. Available in 2.5-inch SATA (7 mm-thick), mSATA, and NGFF M.2 form-factors, the drives combine Micron 20 nm MLC NAND flash with a Marvell-made processor. All three form-factors take advantage of 6 Gb/s SATA. The drive is available in 120 GB, 240 GB, and 480 GB capacities for all three form-factors, while the 2.5-inch gets a 960 GB "terabyte-class" capacity option, as well.

Sequential read speeds on all capacities are as high as 500 MB/s, while sequential write speeds cap out at 130 MB/s and 250 MB/s for the 120 GB and 240 GB variants, respectively; and reach 400 MB/s on the 480 GB and 960 GB variants. The drives are backed by 3-year limited warranties, 1.2 million hours MTBF, and 72 TB total bytes written (TBW) write endurance (that's 40 GB per day). TRIM, NCQ, and SMART are standard issue. The 120 GB, 240 GB, 480 GB, and 960 GB variants are priced at US $129.99, $219.99, $399.99, and $599.99, respectively.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Jorge]

The famous "up to xxx speed"... Only in benches, not in real use.

 

[btarunr]

The famous "up to xxx speed"... Only in benches, not in real use.

At least you know they'll never cross those speeds (500 MB/s or 130 MB/s). It's not like they're saying "up to 600 MB/s" (SATA rev. 3 theoretical max).

 

[TheLostSwede]

That's not what expected... why are the 120 and 240GB SKU's so damn slow? Plextor is using the same controller and they get a lot better performance out of it.
Even the old Plextor M3 is faster - http://www.plextor-digital.com/index.php/en/M3/m3.html

 

[Tarkhein]

That's not what expected... why are the 120 and 240GB SKU's so damn slow? Plextor is using the same controller and they get a lot better performance out of it.
Even the old Plextor M3 is faster - http://www.plextor-digital.com/index.php/en/M3/m3.html

It might be because they're using fewer (but higher capacity) NAND inside compared to Plextors' offerings.

 

[RejZoR]

So, what makes these better than "old" M4's ? Their write speeds are still just as rubbish as on old series, so what gives!? They only provide bigger drives. They could just as well do that under the M4 branding...

 

[Ghost]

So, what makes these better than "old" M4's ? Their write speeds are still just as rubbish as on old series, so what gives!? They only provide bigger drives. They could just as well do that under the M4 branding...

That's not what expected... why are the 120 and 240GB SKU's so damn slow? Plextor is using the same controller and they get a lot better performance out of it.
Even the old Plextor M3 is faster - http://www.plextor-digital.com/index.php/en/M3/m3.html

Oh, you already know about their real world performance. Care to share a link to a comprehensive review?

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

There shouldn't still be people falling for that write speed crap. The M4 became the top selling drive not just from reliability but because real world testing showed it was a fast drive.

Most interesting part here is the 960 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148696

Look at that price compared to the 480 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148695

This stuff is just going to get lower and lower.

 

[RejZoR]

It was fast in reads. For writes it was slow. And if you needed sequential writes (writing massive files like videos) it was a no go...

 

[NeoXF]

Wow, the 960GB one is actually sanely priced... up 'till now, every single SSD of beyond 480/512 GB had insanely inflated prices... Heck, even the 480/512 GB ones where more expensive per GB than 240/256 ones... So I'm hoping SSD's are finally seeing the move to 480/512 GB as a sweet spot.

 

[GoldenTiger]

Yeah, the 960gb is actually priced quite reasonably, and sales will make it even better. $570 at amazon http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BQ8RGL6/?tag=tec06d-20 .

 

[RCoon]

Old M4 was better in terms of speeds...

 

[Solidstate89]

Not gonna lie, I want that 960GB SSD.

 

[badtaylorx]

There shouldn't still be people falling for that write speed crap. The M4 became the top selling drive not just from reliability but because real world testing showed it was a fast drive.

Most interesting part here is the 960 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148696

Look at that price compared to the 480 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148695

This stuff is just going to get lower and lower.

even cheaper using this "newzon" thing i got yesterday...

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BQ8RGL6/?tag=tec06d-20

 

[TheLostSwede]

Oh, you already know about their real world performance. Care to share a link to a comprehensive review?

Sure http://www.anandtech.com/show/6884/crucial-micron-m500-review-960gb-480gb-240gb-120gb

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

even cheaper using this "newzon" thing i got yesterday...

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BQ8RGL6/?tag=tec06d-20

I just came back here to report that... [H] just made Newzon a lot more popular.

 

[blibba]

So, what makes these better than "old" M4's ? Their write speeds are still just as rubbish as on old series, so what gives!? They only provide bigger drives. They could just as well do that under the M4 branding...

They're not better than the old M4s. They use new, larger, higher latency chips and real-world performance in similarly sized drives will be similar or worse vs. the M4, outside of a few specific areas that have seen architectural improvements. The main deal with these drives is that they'll bring down the cost of 1TB SSDs by 50% or so.

 

[Jacez]

They're not better than the old M4s. They use new, larger, higher latency chips and real-world performance in similarly sized drives will be similar or worse vs. the M4, outside of a few specific areas that have seen architectural improvements. The main deal with these drives is that they'll bring down the cost of 1TB SSDs by 50% or so.

If they're worse than the M4's.. why are they called M500's?

 

[Nordic]

If they're worse than the M4's.. why are they called M500's?

Higher number does not always need to mean faster. Just a new iteration.

 

[Jacez]

Higher number does not always need to mean faster. Just a new iteration.

But that's misleading, because so far they have been faster.

M4 was a great leap from C300.

Also, the naming scheme is confusing.

Cxxx, then Mx, now Mxxx.

Why!?

 

[Nordic]

But that's misleading, because so far they have been faster.

M4 was a great leap from C300.

Also, the naming scheme is confusing.

Cxxx, then Mx, now Mxxx.

Why!?

You are in the wrong hobby. Amd has a 7870 and a 7870 myst. Very different cards. Nvidea 650ti and 650ti boost, and 560ti and 560ti 448. Those are the only ones I can think of right now.

 

[blibba]

If they're worse than the M4's.. why are they called M500's?

5870 vs. 6870
5970 vs. 6970
8800GTX vs. 9800GTX

etc.

 

[Prima.Vera]

8800GTX vs. 9800GTX

Hmmmmm....

 

[blibba]

Hmmmmm....

http://www.asicentral.com/images/blogs/grumpy-no.jpg

Even in the games where the superior computational performance of the 9800GTX allowed it to pull-ahead, at any reasonable level of resolution and AA, its narrower memory bus left the 8800GTX with superior minimum FPS.

 

[NeoXF]

Well, I'd like to see a internal triple/quad RAID 0 with 960/1024 GB SSDs like these, for something less than 1000 $ in a old-fashioned 3.5" size... on that SATA Express thingy I'm looking forward to for a while... so as to they wouldn't have excuses to why I haven't see benched SSD speeds higher than 565MB/s or so...