Internals, Testing Methodology and System Setup
Internals:
These are lower cost enclosures and feature a snap together design:
Contrary to what you might think, lack of screws does not mean flimsy construction or lots of rattles. These are quite solid when assembled, and a bit difficult to get apart.
At the front we see the typical Silicon Motion reference PCB layout. The counts per package remain constant while capacity scales by simply increasing the number of packages installed on the PCB. This is great for producing a low cost device as Micron can just crank out large batches of the same exact 64GB flash part.
The rear of these sample PCBs is empty (but would be populated with additional flash and DRAM on the 1TB model).
Testing Methodology
Our tests are a mix of synthetic and real-world benchmarks. PCMark, IOMeter, HDTach, HDTune, Yapt and our custom File Copy test round out the selection to cover just about all bases. If you have any questions about our tests just drop into the Storage Forum and we'll help you out!
Test System Setup
We currently employ a pair of testbeds. A newer ASUS P8Z77-V Pro/Thunderbolt and an ASUS Z87-PRO. Variance between both boards has been deemed negligible.
PC Perspective would like to thank ASUS, Corsair, and Kingston for supplying some of the components of our test rigs.
| Hard Drive Test System Setup | |
| CPU | Intel Core i7-4770K |
| Motherboard | ASUS P8Z77-V Pro/TB / ASUS Z87-PRO |
| Memory | Kingston HyperX 4GB DDR3-2133 CL9 |
| Hard Drive | G.Skill 32GB SLC SSD |
| Sound Card | N/A |
| Video Card | Intel® HD Graphics 4600 |
| Video Drivers | Intel |
| Power Supply | Corsair CMPSU-650TX |
| DirectX Version | DX9.0c |
| Operating System | Windows 8.1 X64 |
- PCPer File Copy Test
- HDTach
- HDTune
- IOMeter
- YAPT
It’s a sad day when $0.36/GB
It’s a sad day when $0.36/GB (on a budget drive, even) is considered “impressively low”. Six years ago, those prices were already completely unacceptable. HDD manufacturers really need to step it up, because SSD manufacturers certainly aren’t doing it.
Fact the C300 launch price
Fact the C300 launch price was $800 for 256 gig ssd 5 years ago that’s more than $3.7 per gig it quickly fell to $650 around this time 5 years ago via sales though the price drop is more than 10 times lower per gig for the bx100, and just like the conclusion states this will likely cause a ssd price war. But I believe we will start seeing even more dense ssd for them to make up for the revenue loss.
It’s a sad day when $0.36/GB
$0.36/GB _is_ impressively low for an SSD. NAND flash is just a more expensive technology than magnetic spinning disks right now. If you don’t like it, too bad.
They’re trying their best, and doing a good job I might add. I don’t see you helping. Anyone can be a critic…
Allyn, I am always curious
Allyn, I am always curious to know if tools like the Crucial Storage Executive function the same when multiple SSDs are members of a RAID array wired to a third-party controller.
Popular websites like http://www.pcper.com could help end users by urging third-party RAID controller vendors to support TRIM at a minimum. Intel’s RST has supported TRIM for some time now.
Perhaps the industry in general should confront what needs to happen to standardize SSD maintenance tasks, so as to inter-operate across platforms, motherboards, chipsets and add-on controllers.
Plug-and-Play for SSDs!
Thanks again for another good review.
MRFS (not just dreamin’ this time 🙂
TRIM through a RAID is still
TRIM through a RAID is still a tricky thing. It took Intel some time even despite my repeated urging to do so. It's also does not work on parity arrays (RAID-5/6).
Accessing SMART and other management through third party RAID is tricky. Areca actually does it, but you must use their API to request SMART data from their cards.
Wake me up when a “512GB of
Wake me up when a “512GB of quality SSD-space for ~92$” would become a mainstream thing. That’s how much I’ve paid for my 512GB MX100 when it just came out, so…
Isn’t the MX100 a better SSD?
Isn’t the MX100 a better SSD? Reason I ask because there is only a $10 to $20 difference depending on where you purchase.
BX100 gets faster write
BX100 gets faster write speeds at smaller capcities when compared to the MX100. Once you hit 500+GB everything evens out. The SM controller in the BX100 is also a bit faster than the MX100 in the seqential reads.
Long story short, it's a newer generation controller driving faster flash than the MX100, so the BX100 is better, which is why Micron is replacing the MX100 with the BX100 and introducing an MX200 (which works differently).