1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Crucial M500 SSD Series Now Available

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Apr 9, 2013.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    27,676 (11.61/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,416
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    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.

    [​IMG]
  2. Jorge

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    636 (1.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    The famous "up to xxx speed"... Only in benches, not in real use.
  3. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    27,676 (11.61/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,416
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    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).
  4. TheLostSwede

    TheLostSwede

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    909 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    154
  5. Tarkhein

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    44 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    It might be because they're using fewer (but higher capacity) NAND inside compared to Plextors' offerings.
  6. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,292 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    839
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    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...
  7. Ghost

    Ghost

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    272 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    Location:
    Unknown
    Oh, you already know about their real world performance. Care to share a link to a comprehensive review?
  8. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,438 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
  9. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,292 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    839
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    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...
  10. NeoXF

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Messages:
    615 (1.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    80
    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.
  11. GoldenTiger New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Messages:
    35 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
  12. RCoon

    RCoon Forum Gypsy

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    5,323 (7.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,056
    Location:
    Gypsyland
    Old M4 was better in terms of speeds...
  13. Solidstate89

    Solidstate89

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    183 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    Western New York
    Not gonna lie, I want that 960GB SSD.
  14. badtaylorx

    badtaylorx

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    456 (0.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    151

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

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

    TheLostSwede

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    909 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    154
  16. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,438 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
  17. blibba

    blibba

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    815 (0.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Oxford, UK
    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.
  18. Jacez New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    50 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    If they're worse than the M4's.. why are they called M500's?
  19. james888

    james888

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,914 (3.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,115
    Higher number does not always need to mean faster. Just a new iteration.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  20. Jacez New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    50 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    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!?
  21. james888

    james888

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,914 (3.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,115
    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.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  22. blibba

    blibba

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    815 (0.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Oxford, UK
    5870 vs. 6870
    5970 vs. 6970
    8800GTX vs. 9800GTX

    etc.
    james888 says thanks.
  23. Prima.Vera

    Prima.Vera

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,006 (2.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    259
    Hmmmmm....

    [​IMG]
  24. blibba

    blibba

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    815 (0.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Location:
    Oxford, UK
    [​IMG]

    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.
  25. NeoXF

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Messages:
    615 (1.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    80
    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...

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page