Tuesday, December 17th 2024

Crucial Discontinues the MX500 SATA SSD Line

by
btarunr
 Discuss (58 Comments)
Crucial has reportedly discontinued the MX500 line of SATA SSDs after nearly 7 years of market presence. The MX500 is arguably the most popular line of SATA 6 Gbps SSDs, and comes in both the 2.5-inch and M.2-SATA form-factors. The drive continued its run into 2020s given its extremely low price-per-GB, and reasonable levels of performance to serve as a warm storage solution in client PCs. The market is changing, with the advent of cheap QLC NAND NVMe SSDs, an increase in the number of NVMe slots on today's motherboards, and a reduction in SATA ports, which mean that it is time for Crucial to retire the MX500. The MX500 is still in stock with retailers, and comes in capacities of up to a respectable 4 TB, although at prices similar to NVMe Gen 3 or Gen 4 drives based on QLC NAND, such as Crucial's own P3 Plus. The 4 TB variant of the P3 Plus Gen 4 NVMe SSD in fact costs less than the 4 TB MX500, but with significantly higher performance.
Source: Tom's Hardware

Related News

Add your own comment

58 Comments on Crucial Discontinues the MX500 SATA SSD Line

#51
AusWolf
_roman_Usb 10gps nvme bride is a bit faster. Many mainboards supports USB 20gbps.'

The time impact for offline backups for 70GB is too large from sata to usb 10gbps and sata with sata 2.5" ssds.
Sure but swapping a SATA drive in an external enclosure is much simpler. You can do that with nvme, too, although my experience with USB nvme enclosures hasn't been spotless, not to mention you're still limited to USB speeds.
Posted on Reply
#52
RJARRRPCGP
lexluthermiesterI have been using them in my shop and personally for inexpensive upgrades. For budget SSDs, they compete well. Low defective rates and reasonable performance for dramless drives.
What should make people throw a red flag, is if they start barfing randomly with merely Windows use, including updating Windows and you see an error message about a file being corrupted and/or it randomly becomes extremely slow when using Windows, or Windows loads extremely slowly. Same with bad blocks or other sus SMART stuff with merely OS use.

Another bad SSD symptom: sfc /scannow fails with the following message: Windows Resource Protection found corrupt files but was unable to fix some of them (or similar)
Posted on Reply
#53
_roman_
The differences are ~26-28 Minutes for usb 5gpbs Sata vs ~6 Minutes for USB 10gbps NVME. For several runs over several different drives.
Swapping PCIE 3.0 to a PCIE 4.0 NVME reduces those ~6 Minutes to 5 minutes. The limiting factor is more the SSD drive itself than the usb port in my experience. SATA SSD are just bad. I also installed w10 pro on sata ssd 128gb one in the past and saw the performance impact vs a nvme 1tb one. Maybe the ryzen 5800x and msi b550 gaming plus wifi with windows 10 pro were not the best hardware choice for sata ssd from cruical 4 or 5 years ago.

I do admit you need a proper expensive USB nvme bridge case. I bought a cheap orico with poor build quality and returned it after a few days of use.
Posted on Reply
#54
AusWolf
_roman_The differences are ~26-28 Minutes for usb 5gpbs Sata vs ~6 Minutes for USB 10gbps NVME. For several runs over several different drives.
Swapping PCIE 3.0 to a PCIE 4.0 NVME reduces those ~6 Minutes to 5 minutes. The limiting factor is more the SSD drive itself than the usb port in my experience. SATA SSD are just bad. I also installed w10 pro on sata ssd 128gb one in the past and saw the performance impact vs a nvme 1tb one. Maybe the ryzen 5800x and msi b550 gaming plus wifi with windows 10 pro were not the best hardware choice for sata ssd from cruical 4 or 5 years ago.

I do admit you need a proper expensive USB nvme bridge case. I bought a cheap orico with poor build quality and returned it after a few days of use.
All the USB-nvme adapters I've tried have given up after a couple of days. They're just generally not built well, imo.

I've gone back to my trusty old SATA-USB cable. Works like a charm with both SSDs and laptop HDDs. Never had an issue.
Posted on Reply
#55
remixedcat
AusWolfAll the USB-nvme adapters I've tried have given up after a couple of days. They're just generally not built well, imo.

I've gone back to my trusty old SATA-USB cable. Works like a charm with both SSDs and laptop HDDs. Never had an issue.
I got a ugreen usb-nvme enclosure and it was decent. Clones took 1.5 hours from a 256GB micron 1100 sata to a 500GB nvme using clonezilla.
Posted on Reply
#56
AusWolf
remixedcatI got a ugreen usb-nvme enclosure and it was decent. Clones took 1.5 hours from a 256GB micron 1100 sata to a 500GB nvme using clonezilla.
I haven't tried ugreen, although I love their phone chargers and power banks. Maybe I'll give it a go.

I've tried Sabrent (2 times) and some other brand I can't remember. They were all rubbish.

Although, a 256 GB clone shouldn't last 1.5 hours. Something's fishy there.
Posted on Reply
#57
RJARRRPCGP
My Crucial MX500 was fine, except the lifetime percentage plunged rapidly.
I got suspicious when Crystal Disk Info started alerting me to an attribute change many times.
Posted on Reply
#58
remixedcat
AusWolfI haven't tried ugreen, although I love their phone chargers and power banks. Maybe I'll give it a go.

I've tried Sabrent (2 times) and some other brand I can't remember. They were all rubbish.

Although, a 256 GB clone shouldn't last 1.5 hours. Something's fishy there.
I did an advanced clone (disk to disk and new partition) that's why. I needed a seperate partition for data than my /home one
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 14th, 2026 03:13 CST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts