SSDBoss Review Our evaluation of MX200 vs M500

read performance

How quickly data is read from the drive

4K Random Read, 4K Random Read Access Time and 512K Sequential Read

write performance

How quickly data is written to the drive

4K Random Write, 4K Random Write Access Time and 512K Sequential Write

real world benchmarks

How well the drive performs common tasks

Photoshop Lens Filter and AS SSD ISO Copy

Benchmarks

How well the drive performs on common benchmarks

PCMark Vantage and AS SSD Score

No winner declared

Too close to call

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Crucial MX200

Reasons to consider the
Crucial MX200

Report a correction
Faster 4k random read 169.96 MB/s vs 126.46 MB/s Around 35% faster 4k random read
Higher PCMark vantage score 30,457 pts vs 24,678 pts Around 25% higher PCMark vantage score
Faster 512K sequential write 482.13 MB/s vs 413.32 MB/s More than 15% faster 512K sequential write
Faster photoshop lens filter 53.9 s vs 57.4 s More than 5% faster photoshop lens filter
Faster AS SSD ISO copy 488.87 MB/s vs 306.5 MB/s Around 60% faster AS SSD ISO copy
Lighter 51 g vs 64 g More than 20% lighter
Lower 4k random read access time 1.47 ms vs 1.98 ms More than 25% lower 4k random read access time
Higher MTBF 1,500,000 hours vs 1,200,000 hours 25% higher MTBF
Front view of Crucial M500

Reasons to consider the
Crucial M500

Report a correction
Significantly higher capacity 960 GB vs 500 GB More than 90% higher capacity

Benchmarks Real world tests of MX200 vs M500

4K Random Read

MX200
169.96 MB/s
Crucial M500
126.46 MB/s

4K Random Write

MX200
71.58 MB/s
Crucial M500
66.2 MB/s

Avg. Power Consumption

MX200
2.03 Watts
Crucial M500
2.13 Watts

4K Random Read Access Time

MX200
3.49 ms
Crucial M500
3.78 ms

4K Random Write Access Time

MX200
1.47 ms
Crucial M500
1.98 ms

Comments

comments powered by Disqus