Crucial MX300: Good Linux Performance, 525GB SSD For $120

[drSeehas]

... Samsung is the only one doing some MLC 3D NAND units.

There are some DC SSDs with MLC 3D NAND from intel too.

Toshiba is doing mainly TLC 3D NAND so far, but, I think their pro models will be using MLC 3D NAND. ...

There are no SSDs with MLC 3D NAND from Toshiba.

[starshipeleven]

Phew, it's a MX100 512GB, bought new, last year, for my laptop (a kinda netbook-ish one with 11'' screen and crappy entry-level APU).
I updated its firmware (with their bootable utility) because with the default one it couldn't do NCQ TRIM or something (the one with default firmware version was in kernel blacklist for that feature).

[oooverclocker]

You make me want to throw away my SSD (a crucial mx100 I think?) with this post...

It's a pretty nice device with planar MLC NAND. As it's planar the cells' capacity is not immensely big in comparison to 3D NAND but as I wrote the distinction between 4 states is not that hard so there is not that much capacity needed to retain the data for a reasonable time. I have an old Crucial m4 512GB that is pretty good in shape as well. But also a newer SM961 which is my main drive.

Even when someone's drive had planar TLC NAND, I wouldn't throw it away as long as it works(OK, I would personally get rid of it on ebay pretty soon ). But I would just not recommend to use these as external backup drive or in a notebook that might be unused for several months. And the firmware should be up to date.

[bug77]

So maybe the current Samsung 3D TLC has. That's why I would consider this one exceptionally. But it all depends on how big your "capacitors" are and the density of the Micron version is much stronger which is cheaper but also more risky.

It's still better than planar TLC and even that seems to be good enough for consumer use (I wouldn't touch it personally, bit other people don't seem to run in trouble with it).

And I fully agree with the rest of your post. I'm always quick to point out how reviewer constantly "forget" to talk about endurance when benchmarking TLC drives. More specifically, they talk about endurance in TB written and avoid talking about p/e cycles. I think it's manufacturers themselves that keep that under the rug, but it's the reviewers' job to go beyond generic PR stuff if they want page hits.

[starshipeleven]

Flash memory is basically implemented with several transistors and a capacitor.
The capacitor has 2 states for SLC, let's say 1V and 0V for the digital values 1 and 0. The Voltage drops gradually which means your data gets lost. But it will take long to drop below 0.5V so the distinction is no big issue for SLC. It's endurable and energy efficient.

For MLC we have 4(2^2) states because it stores 2 bits per cell. This means that we have 0V, 0.33V, 0.66V, 1V. Of course we will get several wrong values that have to be corrected so the effort and power drain to read and write accurately increases while the endurance decreases. Our stored values also get lost quicker. But 4 states are still bearable and we do not have to refresh the data often to keep it.

Now for TLC we have 8 states(3 Bit). The distinction between all these voltages is extremely hard, they shift easily, we get many errors and in order to save our values these voltages have to be refreshed pretty often which stresses the hardware. Many spare cells are necessary to replace defect ones.
If you put such an SSD in your shelf for several months you might lose data as it can't be refreshed in this time and perhaps not be recovered when you power it on. It also get's extremely slow when it has to correct all these read errors.

For SLC vs. MLC vs. TLC the endurance ratio per cell is roughly 100:10:1. It also depends on the density so actual values are about 3:1 for MLC vs. TLC. Which doesn't mean that one whole TLC SSD does automatically not live as long as a MLC SSD. Because with enough spare cells you can repair the most issues.
But it gets still slow and loses your data when it's not powered regularly though. And many cheap TLC SSD currently use their spare cells in an SLC mode as cache to provide a higher peak performance. So these cells get worn out even before they are used to replace defunct ones.


So maybe the current Samsung 3D TLC has. That's why I would consider this one exceptionally. But it all depends on how big your "capacitors" are and the density of the Micron version is much stronger which is cheaper but also more risky.

You make me want to throw away my SSD (a crucial mx100 I think?) with this post...

[oooverclocker]

Flash memory is basically implemented with several transistors and a capacitor.
The capacitor has 2 states for SLC, let's say 1V and 0V for the digital values 1 and 0. The Voltage drops gradually which means your data gets lost. But it will take long to drop below 0.5V so the distinction is no big issue for SLC. It's endurable and energy efficient.

For MLC we have 4(2^2) states because it stores 2 bits per cell. This means that we have 0V, 0.33V, 0.66V, 1V. Of course we will get several wrong values that have to be corrected so the effort and power drain to read and write accurately increases while the endurance decreases. Our stored values also get lost quicker. But 4 states are still bearable and we do not have to refresh the data often to keep it.

Now for TLC we have 8 states(3 Bit). The distinction between all these voltages is extremely hard, they shift easily, we get many errors and in order to save our values these voltages have to be refreshed pretty often which stresses the hardware. Many spare cells are necessary to replace defect ones.
If you put such an SSD in your shelf for several months you might lose data as it can't be refreshed in this time and perhaps not be recovered when you power it on. It also get's extremely slow when it has to correct all these read errors.

For SLC vs. MLC vs. TLC the endurance ratio per cell is roughly 100:10:1. It also depends on the density so actual values are about 3:1 for MLC vs. TLC. Which doesn't mean that one whole TLC SSD does automatically not live as long as a MLC SSD. Because with enough spare cells you can repair the most issues.
But it gets still slow and loses your data when it's not powered regularly though. And many cheap TLC SSD currently use their spare cells in an SLC mode as cache to provide a higher peak performance. So these cells get worn out even before they are used to replace defunct ones.

Afaik, 3D TLC has roughly the same endurance as planar MLC.

So maybe the current Samsung 3D TLC has. That's why I would consider this one exceptionally. But it all depends on how big your "capacitors" are and the density of the Micron version is much stronger which is cheaper but also more risky.

[Passso]

$119.99 with free shipping direct from the source: http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/ct525mx300ssd1

I don't know what your issue is. If you have issues with paying taxes, move to a locality like mine that doesn't have a sales tax. Seems like a pretty silly complaint.

Direct Crucial buy also works for EU countries, thanks

[bug77]

But the density sounds like the persistance is pretty much like for planar TLC.

Afaik, 3D TLC has roughly the same endurance as planar MLC. I really don't see your problem here, but if you don't want this drives nobody's gonna force you to buy it.

[starshipeleven]

Here's hope that all producers will move to a standard UEFI Capsule update method.

No. Many times NO.
Bootable firmware upgrader is 100% fine and does not rely on UEFI features being reliable beyond basic booting something at all.

[vortex]

It's cheap, yeah. But the density sounds like the persistance is pretty much like for planar TLC. Although a good controller could refresh the data when you power the SSD often enough I don't really like the risks of this technique. I would consider current Samsung 3D TLC NAND if one needs to save some money but for everyone else I would suggest MLC 3D NAND.

Problem with that is, Crucial don't make any MLC 3D NAND yet, they are only making TLC variants.
Right now, Samsung is the only one doing some MLC 3D NAND units. Toshiba is doing mainly TLC 3D NAND so far, but, I think their pro models will be using MLC 3D NAND.

Everyone else is still churning out TLC planar NAND, since people buy the cheapest product out there, which is why it is a race to the bottom with pretty much everyone under the sun releasing TLC units.