Question Several Problems with new Crucial MX500

May 3, 2022
4
0
10
Hi Guys,

I recently purchased a new Crucial MX500 from Amazon to replace the HDD in my laptop, immediately after installing the new SSD, my laptop face severe lag, I did some Crystal Mark tests and they looked incorrect. So I went ahead and installed Crucial's Storage Executive software.

That particular software seems to be showing something is wrong with the firmware in my drive and reports on the presence of the drive inconsistently, i.e. sometimes it is present and sometimes it is not.

After restarting windows several times, the problems seem to be fixed, can anyone advise if it will safe to keep the drive? Or should I request a replacement?

Edit: I am on the firmware revision M3CR043.
 
b0i4Tjx.png


Here is the CrystalDiskMark post restarts, before this the write was much lower while the read was fine.
 
Hi Guys,

I recently purchased a new Crucial MX500 from Amazon to replace the HDD in my laptop, immediately after installing the new SSD, my laptop face severe lag, I did some Crystal Mark tests and they looked incorrect. So I went ahead and installed Crucial's Storage Executive software.

That particular software seems to be showing something is wrong with the firmware in my drive and reports on the presence of the drive inconsistently, i.e. sometimes it is present and sometimes it is not.

After restarting windows several times, the problems seem to be fixed, can anyone advise if it will safe to keep the drive? Or should I request a replacement?

Edit: I am on the firmware revision M3CR043.
Hi Peppe, I just got this drive (2TB) and have the exact same issue you described in that the firmware version is unknown... both via Storage Exective and msecli -F in command prompt. Restarted a few times and no luck so far, will keep trying. Has been ok for you since your message and does Storage Executive work ok with it now?
 
Update.. after another restart I was able to determine via command prompt that it is running M3CR043. But then Storage Executive still had the same problem, and the command started returning the error too.