Crucial BX 200 480 GB

[W1zzard]

Crucial's BX200 SSD comes at an incredible price point Micron's new triple-layer-cell (TLC) flash chips make possible. In our testing, the drive delivers decent performance, which, combined with pricing, results in a leading price/performance position for the BX200.

Show full review

 

[Ferrum Master]

The price says it all... very interesting placed drive in the current market.

 

[Legacy-ZA]

I still say; these budget capacity SSD's are still too expensive, it's about time we start seeing them around the $80 mark. So tired of being ripped off.

 

[thebluebumblebee]

I still say; these budget capacity SSD's are still too expensive, it's about time we start seeing them around the $80 mark. So tired of being ripped off.

I remember the prices of HDD's before they hit 1GB and I am stunned at how people view the prices of SSD's today.

 

[chlamchowder]

It would be nice to see a couple of HDDs in the charts, just to put things in perspective. Including one 7200 RPM model to represent a typical desktop hard drive, and one 5400 RPM to represent what would be in a typical laptop would be nice.

For example, for the ISO copy, it'd be interesting to see how a modern HDD stacks up against the BX200. Other sites noted that sequential transfer speeds dropped to something like 60 MB/s after running out of cache, and modern HDDs can often do sequential transfers faster than that (100 MB/s or so).

 

[newtekie1]

I remember the prices of HDD's before they hit 1GB and I am stunned at how people view the prices of SSD's today.

Even after 1GB, I remember paying over $300 for a 120GB HDD in the early 2000s.

Paying a little over 4x the $/GB for an SSD is decent, IMO.

It would be nice to see a couple of HDDs in the charts, just to put things in perspective. Including one 7200 RPM model to represent a typical desktop hard drive, and one 5400 RPM to represent what would be in a typical laptop would be nice.

For example, for the ISO copy, it'd be interesting to see how a modern HDD stacks up against the BX200. Other sites noted that sequential transfer speeds dropped to something like 60 MB/s after running out of cache, and modern HDDs can often do sequential transfers faster than that (100 MB/s or so).

I'd just like to see a larger file transfer test. One ISO is ok, but a lot of times I'm copying 3 or 4, or 5-6 HD movies. I'd like to see a sequential copy test in the 10-15GB range.

 

[qubit]

@W1zzard Great review as usual, but small typo in your conclusion: "The BX100, which is a bit more faster".

About the drive, it looks like a good buy for a cheap drive, but I prefer to spend more and get something like a Samsung 850 Pro or 850 Evo.

It's not clear what its endurance is like, but I suspect it will be decent.

 

[djisas]

Great review, but as stated before, a couple mechanical HDD would be great for comparison...

 

[xorbe]

What happened in WinRar that the 840 Pro would score so badly.

 

[hojnikb]

• The Silicon Motion SM2256 controller is the same as on the previous BX100 model. It is a more cost effective controller than the Marvell chips used on Crucial's higher-end SSDs.

actually, bx100 uses sm2246en, basically 2256 without ldpc.

Personally, i would stay clear of any 2d tlc drive, especially this one. endurance will be poor (a few 100 p/e at best), writes are crap and data retention will suffer (membered 840evo read bug ? yeah, bx200 will be susceptible to this even more)[/FONT]

 

[AsRock]

The price says it all... very interesting placed drive in the current market.

Not really extra $20( just got another EVO for $142 ) get you a Samsung 850 EVO with a 5 year warranty, any reason this said drive was MIA ?.

 

[newtekie1]

Not really extra $20( just got another EVO for $142 ) get you a Samsung 850 EVO with a 5 year warranty, any reason this said drive was MIA ?.

I have to agree, if the difference is only $20, get the 850 Evo. And right now, the BX100 is $129.99 and the 850 Evo is $149.99. However, I've noticed that the "value" drives tend to go on special more than the Samsung drives. So it wouldn't surprise me if we start to see shellshockers and promo codes that bring the BX200 down into the $99-109 range.

For example, earlier in Feb. the BX200 240GB was on sale for $60. The 850 Evo 240GB is $87. A $27 savings on the 240GB model makes the MX200 worth looking at. If that price/GB applied to the 480GB, and the 480GB BX200 was $50 cheaper than the 850 Evo, I'd definitely consider the BX200.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Not really extra $20( just got another EVO for $142 ) get you a Samsung 850 EVO with a 5 year warranty, any reason this said drive was MIA ?.

20$ are 20$. On the percent the difference is large. Especially for a non pro user, why pay more if you get the same, you can spend it on some other parts in the setup.

 

[AsRock]

I have to agree, if the difference is only $20, get the 850 Evo. And right now, the BX100 is $129.99 and the 850 Evo is $149.99. However, I've noticed that the "value" drives tend to go on special more than the Samsung drives. So it wouldn't surprise me if we start to see shellshockers and promo codes that bring the BX200 down into the $99-109 range.

For example, earlier in Feb. the BX200 240GB was on sale for $60. The 850 Evo 240GB is $87. A $27 savings on the 240GB model makes the MX200 worth looking at. If that price/GB applied to the 480GB, and the 480GB BX200 was $50 cheaper than the 850 Evo, I'd definitely consider the BX200.

Maybe, they needed a sale last week and i might of got one. I just picked up another Samsung as it was only $12 more.




Not the same you get a 5 year warranty with the samsung were as it's only 3 with Crucial and to that's worth 20$.

 

[Frick]

I'm just sad they discontinued the BX100 so quickly. And replaced it with this.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Not the same you get a 5 year warranty with the samsung were as it's only 3 with Crucial and to that's worth 20$.

Regular user doesn't really care for that. For system builders cheaper is better. Then the final price adds from these 20$ bits and in the end a hundred emerges. So the price difference is a good choice for crucial imho.

Take samsung regional warranties with a pinch of salt... only from certain sellers with valid POP. And dont even dare to throw out the box in five years(it is written so in the manual, you have to keep the package).

I'm just sad they discontinued the BX100 so quickly. And replaced it with this.

I bet they just ran out of spare parts... either memory or controller.

 

[AsRock]

Regular user doesn't really care for that. For system builders cheaper is better. Then the final price adds from these 20$ bits and in the end a hundred emerges. So the price difference is a good choice for crucial imho.

Take samsung regional warranties with a pinch of salt... only from certain sellers with valid POP. And dont even dare to throw out the box in five years(it is written so in the manual, you have to keep the package).



I bet they just ran out of spare parts... either memory or controller.

Such items as SSD's\HDD's should be left to the customer by simply asking them if it's within budget, i will always do this it's good business.

As for the boxes i am that bad i have ever single box i have, and if you doubt that call my bluff , how ever you might have to give me a little time to find i t .

 

[newtekie1]

Not the same you get a 5 year warranty with the samsung were as it's only 3 with Crucial and to that's worth 20$.

That same argument used to be made about HDDs when they were expensive too. But the reality is by the time that extra 2 years pays off(3 years from now) SSDs will be so cheap most would rather just replace it with something new and bigger than bother RMAing the old one.

 

[AsRock]

That same argument used to be made about HDDs when they were expensive too. But the reality is by the time that extra 2 years pays off(3 years from now) SSDs will be so cheap most would rather just replace it with something new and bigger than bother RMAing the old one.

Yeah well not everyone has the money right then when a issue pops up, but i do see your point.

 

[Jism]

It is a miss for that SSD to not have power-caps installed on them. A power cap (such as intel does) ensures that the SSD is able to write all the info in memory / controller on chips, and makes sure that the drive shuts off 'correctly' without leading to datacorruption. If you where an OC'er, or have an unstable power-source, or a tornado just tosses you upside down, this is not the most reliable SSD.

 

[Scrizz]

It is a miss for that SSD to not have power-caps installed on them. A power cap (such as intel does) ensures that the SSD is able to write all the info in memory / controller on chips, and makes sure that the drive shuts off 'correctly' without leading to datacorruption. If you where an OC'er, or have an unstable power-source, or a tornado just tosses you upside down, this is not the most reliable SSD.

that's why it's one of Crucial's low end offerings

 

[Basard]

Great review, but as stated before, a couple mechanical HDD would be great for comparison...

Yeah.... But imagine how long it would take to bench them

 

[newtekie1]

It is a miss for that SSD to not have power-caps installed on them. A power cap (such as intel does) ensures that the SSD is able to write all the info in memory / controller on chips, and makes sure that the drive shuts off 'correctly' without leading to datacorruption. If you where an OC'er, or have an unstable power-source, or a tornado just tosses you upside down, this is not the most reliable SSD.

If you are an OCer, meaning the machine is unstable and crashes, then the drive would still write the data in the cache to the flash memory because the drive would still be powered.

As for the unstable power source, I'd rather have a UPS to protect everything in my system than just have power caps in the SSD. IMO, power caps in the SSD are more a gimmick than anything else. If you properly setup your computer you don't need them.

 

[deemon]

meanwhile in europe:
OCZ Trion 150 480GB: 126€ = 0.26€/GB
Crucial BX200 480GB: 133€ = 0.28€/GB
Crucial MX200 500GB: 162€ = 0.32€/GB


you really should do more reviews of 480/500/512GB and 1TB and 2TB SSD-s.

240/250/256GB drives GB/price is just bad. And you can't even put anything to one... only like OS + 3-5 games ... and that's it.

 

[Eric_Cartman]

You play more than 3-5 Games at a time?