Crucials New 960GB M500 SSD

vbimport

#1

Okay here is one of the newest SSD that has come to market in the past year. For consumer SSDs its also the largest (in Gbs) . Here are some very interesting stats.

Capacity 960GB Interface SATA 6Gb/s (SATA 3GB/s compatible) Sustained Sequential Read up to (128k transfer) 500MB/s Sustained Sequential Write up to (128k transfer) 400MB/s Random Read IOPS (4K) 80,000 IOPS Random Write IOPS B 80,000 IOPS[/B] Form Factor 2.5" NAND 20nm Micron MLC NND MTBF 1.2 million hours Endurance 72TB total bytes written (TBW)
Equal to 40GB per day for 5 years Operating Temperature 32 to 158°F / 0 to 70°C Compliance RoHS, CE, FCC, UL, BSMI, C-TICK, KCC RRL, W.E.E.E., TUV VCCI, IC Firmware Field upgradable firmware Product Health Monitoring Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology (SMART) commands

I want you all to notice the Endurance Stats. Most other SSDs that give a 5 year warranty are gauging that you will only write an average of 20gbs a day for 5 years. Crucial has now doubled that. Their warranty has included 40 gbs a day for 5 years, to me that is crucial (pun intended). :wink: Maybe when our review team can verify this we can consider this SSD one of the top tier SSDs on the market. A lot of people already do.


#2

I’m not impressed with the endurance number. Assuming a half-filled drive it’s only 150 times the (half-filled) capacity or 75 times full capacity.

After 10 months of use my 120 GB SSD is on 134 times half-filled capacity or 67 times full capacity.


#3

[QUOTE=DrageMester;2686069]I’m not impressed with the endurance number. Assuming a half-filled drive it’s only 150 times the (half-filled) capacity or 75 times full capacity.

After 10 months of use my 120 GB SSD is on 134 times half-filled capacity or 67 times full capacity.[/QUOTE]
If that Endurance number doesn’t impress you , what does the endurance numbers from Samsung and OCZ do? They are 20 gbs a day for 5 years. That’s how they come to their 5 year warrantee figure.:wink:


#4

[QUOTE=alan1476;2686070]If that Endurance number doesn’t impress you , what does the endurance numbers from Samsung and OCZ do? They are 20 gbs a day for 5 years. That’s how they come to their 5 year warrantee figure.;)[/QUOTE] If a drive (960 GB) has 5 times more flash than another drive (180 GB), I expect it to be able to handle 5 times more writes over it’s lifetime. :wink:


#5

The price is impressive - $600 for a 900Gb SSD. That’s relatively impressive.

We’re reaching a point where Large Storage Capacity begs for A Lot Of Data - it’s no longer just a Boot Drive Plus \Program Files. But obviously still not much volatile data. I could rip 10 DVDs a day onto it, use DVD SHRINK on those and easily surpass the Endurance Target.

However…

The target use for this larger capacity begs interest. I am loathe to consider RAID0 for anything - until now.

Have a smaller SSD for a boot-drive and Program Files…

Then create some RAID0 Volume out of 2-or-more of these for my Work-Data. This should split the endurance demands for any one drive across two or more.

I’d still need Real Storage somewhere in that system to do long-term SAVEs, but, so? That’s why God invented 4Tb RAID5s (I understand Gore and Boenhead stopped arguing about THAT).

By having these 1Tb SSDs consuming replaceable data constantly, then their volatility (IF they are indeed less reliable) is minimized. “Drive D no longer available? Oh well - here’s a couple of more to start a new workday.”

I think the uses for these drives is now changing with capacity increases. Avoid anything that might be semi-permanent storage - no programs to reload, no settings to maintain - just temp files, page files and every file I edit repeatedly, then save those off to a Master Storage Drive.