[SOLVED] Crucial bx500

[Yousouf750]

Does anyone have crucial bx500 240gb SSD, is it good ?

 

[Lafong]

Lookie here:

https://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Kingston-A400-240GB-vs-Crucial-BX500-240GB/3953vsm578496

Not much difference. I'd say you are OK.

"Reliable"??

Too much luck involved in reliability to get excited about it. I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Lafong]

Crucial is a good brand. The BX line is their lower priced 2.5 inch SATA drive.

Is it "good".................

Compared to what?

What are your expectations and what type of drive will it replace?

It's a major improvement over any spinning drive you may own.

Its benchmark scores may not be as impressive as Crucial's other models such as the MX500. That may not count for much in actual use.

You certainly won't see as much improvement between the BX500 and some other SSD as you would between the BX500 and any spinning drive.

Go ahead with it if it fits your budget. If you are considering some other SSD, tell us what it is.

 

[Yousouf750]

it will replace a faulty hdd
already have a mx500 in my main
compare to any dramless ssd

 

[Lutfij]

Personally I'd avoid SSD's with capacities such as 120, 240, 480 and 960 since they tend to be ones with crippled spec's just to meet a price point for extremely budgeted folks. In retrospect they seem fast at first go but as you work with it over time, they seem to go as slow as a USB2.0 drive. What sort of SSD's do you have access to? As a side note, you're looking for 2.5" drives?

 

[Pimpom]

I've been using the 120GB version as the OS drive in my desktop for about 18 months now. AFAICT performance is on par with other SSDs in its price class. However, its health is dropping rather faster than I expected. After 4TBW and about 6000 power on hours, CDI gives it 91% health.

 

[Lafong]

it will replace a faulty hdd
already have a mx500 in my main
compare to any dramless ssd

Name some other brands and models that you are willing to consider, given your budget and capacity requirements.

Any other Crucials?

Any other brands and models?

Unless you have some unusual use case, you may not notice the difference if it does not fail completely.

 

[Yousouf750]

already bought it should receive this week
its for a pc iam going to sell i want to know if its reliable
for the same price there is kinston a400 and hikvision e100

 

[Lafong]

Lookie here:

https://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Kingston-A400-240GB-vs-Crucial-BX500-240GB/3953vsm578496

Not much difference. I'd say you are OK.

"Reliable"??

Too much luck involved in reliability to get excited about it. I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Pextaxmx]

Personally I'd avoid SSD's with capacities such as 120, 240, 480 and 960 since they tend to be ones with crippled spec's just to meet a price point for extremely budgeted folks. In retrospect they seem fast at first go but as you work with it over time, they seem to go as slow as a USB2.0 drive. What sort of SSD's do you have access to? As a side note, you're looking for 2.5" drives?

smaller usable capacities are because of the pre allocated spaces such as OP. In some sense your assessment makes sense, if the reason is due to inferior controller scheme that needs more OP space to keep up the warranty TBW and speed competition. But some datacenter SSD's offer 480/960/1920 drives and offer twice the TBW numbers than consumer grade SSDs.

Here's an interesting specification for old SM843T data center SSD. It says if you use the full usable space (480/960 which already pre-allocated 8% OP) WPD is 1.8. Then if user increases the OP to 28% based on the usable space, which results in 400/800 usable space, WPD jumps to 5.4. Not sure though if this is true for modern SSDs. Micron 5X00 MAX series data center SSDs allocate something like 80% OP and offer 5 WPD.