• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Crucial bx200

Compared to what? If you're using mechanical storage any ssd will improve data transfers in a big way. That is a perfect size for a boot drive but keep in mind as you fill it up the speed is decreased which is why a drive that size is right for the OS and a few programs.
 
Puffnstuff said:
Compared to what? If you're using mechanical storage any ssd will improve data transfers in a big way. That is a perfect size for a boot drive but keep in mind as you fill it up the speed is decreased which is why a drive that size is right for the OS and a few programs.
Click to expand...
Yes still on 7200rpm

Read reviews they bash the large file transfer on these but should be OK as pure OS right
 
Why even toy with the slowest TLC drive to date? Hopefully the successor improves like Samsung did going from the 840 Evo to the 850 Evo but Crucial's first attempt at TLC is a complete turnoff. You'd be better off going for any other TLC for a few dollars more.

Just for fun, we went back to the company's C300, the first SATA 6Gb/s solid-state drive to hit the market, as a comparison point. It surfaced in 2010 and obliterated the BX200 in every test we ran. Even the BX100, the BX200's predecessor, is superior in every way.
Click to expand...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crucial-bx200-ssd,4351-6.html
 
PliotronX said:
Why even toy with the slowest TLC drive to date? Hopefully the successor improves like Samsung did going from the 840 Evo to the 850 Evo but Crucial's first attempt at TLC is a complete turnoff. You'd be better off going for any other TLC for a few dollars more.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crucial-bx200-ssd,4351-6.html
Click to expand...

normally i would disagree saying any SSD, even the slow TLC drives will be a worthwhile upgrade vs mechanical. after putting in a sandisk TLC SSD in a laptop though... while faster than any mechanical still, it just sucks compared to their MLC brethren. go with at least the mx200 or equivalent. TLC is fine for storage though. 😀
 
Last edited:
The price is pretty good for a TLC drive. Looks like they are getting rid of them since the replacement is almost here.
You could use it for the OS drive, it will still be faster than any HD.
 
nanaki333 said:
normally i would disagree saying any SSD, even the slow TLC drives will be a worthwhile upgrade vs mechanical. after putting in a sandisk TLC SSD in a laptop though... while faster than any mechanical still, it just sucks compared to their MLC brethren. go with at least the mx200 or equivalent. TLC is fine for storage though. 😀
Click to expand...
No other TLC posts latency and transfer rates as the BX200 does though. It also has not been out long enough to gauge its longevity. It took me a while to trust the 850 Evo :sneaky:
 
I'd rather have the MX200 for $20 bucks more
the MX300 is coming out in a few days so expect some price cuts for old inventory
 
PliotronX said:
No other TLC posts latency and transfer rates as the BX200 does though. It also has not been out long enough to gauge its longevity. It took me a while to trust the 850 Evo :sneaky:
Click to expand...

I honestly think the 850 EVOs are the exception to the rule. i put a Sandisk Ultra II i think? They have so many names I can't keep up; and the PNY CS1311 I think it is in machines and it was noticeably slower than my HTPC, which is rocking a 240GB Vertex3 (yes, a Vertex 3 that hasn't died!). Both the laptop with the Sanny and desktop with PNY (it was a coworker so I don't care that much, it's faster than his mechanical so he's happy) and they both chugged like shat!

You are 100% right about the BX200. I don't think I would even use that as a storage drive after reading the reviews. I'm surprised it hasn't been fixed by a firmware update or something. The 840 EVO suffered from a similar problem I think? Or maybe that was just performance degredation over time. My 3x1TB 840 EVOs work fabulous as my steam/games array though. 😀

Soulkeeper said:
I'd rather have the MX200 for $20 bucks more
the MX300 is coming out in a few days so expect some price cuts for old inventory
Click to expand...


^^^and THIS^^^
Spend the extra few bucks!
 
I would go with 850 evo or MX200, or MX300 if it is a decent deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top