| Crucial M225 128GB SATA-II SSD CT128M225 |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Storage | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Written by Olin Coles | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Monday, 17 August 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Crucial M225 SSD ReviewUntil 2009, Solid State Drive (SSD) popularity was only growing in the elite enthusiast circles. Then along comes the Indilinx Barefoot chip, which quickly became the backbone SSD controller for over a dozen different products. Crucial, being The Memory Experts that they are, have returned to the market with their second SSD product. By most accounts, this isn't par for the course when you consider how often the competition reveals a new product line. Equipped with the test-proven Indilinx Barefoot controller and 64MB of DRAM buffer, Crucial is insured that the M225-series will deliver outstanding performance. Benchmark Reviews tests the bandwidth speed and IOPS performance for the Crucial M225 128GB SATA-II SSD CT128M225 against a large contingent of desktop storage products in this article. Anyone familiar with articles published at Benchmark Reviews is very well aware of our obsession with Solid State Drive technology. They're complex, and every SSD is different than the next. Nothing like Hard Disk Drive technology, which improves as spindle speed and cache buffer are increased, SSDs are the future and because of this their internal architecture is constantly evolving. This is why we offer so much coverage on the topic: it's interesting and exciting. Plus, they can turn the average computer system into a roaring beast. It's not marketing hype; for once the truth is stranger than fiction.
Since first making a public debut at the 2007 Consumer Electronics Show, Solid State Drives (SSDs) have been a topic of hot discussion among performance enthusiasts. These nonvolatile flash memory-based drives feature virtually no access time delay and promise a more reliable storage medium with greater performance while operating at a fraction of the power level. Moving into 2008, SSDs became a consumer reality for many performance-minded power users. Now that 2009 has proven how strong the industry support behind Solid State Drive technology is, we should hope that mainstream acceptance moves faster than it did for DDR3 SDRAM. Solid State Drive products are no longer restricted to bleeding edge hardware enthusiasts or wealthy elitists. Heading into 2009, SSD storage devices were available online for nearly $2 per gigabyte of storage capacity while the most popular performance desktop hard drive hovered just above $1/GB. While most consumers are waiting for that day when SSD costs the same as HDD, they seem to be forgetting how Solid State Drives have already surpassed Hard Disk performance in every other regard. Our collection of SSD reviews is a good starting point for comparing the competition. EDITOR'S NOTE: On 13 January 2010 Crucial made available firmware version 1916 for the M225-series SSD on their support forum. Learn more and download the files here: Crucial M225 Firmware 1916 Download. SSD Testing DisclaimerEarly on in our SSD coverage, Benchmark Reviews published an article which detailed Solid State Drive Benchmark Performance Testing. The research and discussion that went into producing that article changed the way we now test SSD products. Our previous perceptions of this technology were lost on one particular difference: the wear leveling algorithm that makes data a moving target. Without conclusive linear bandwidth testing or some other method of total-capacity testing, our previous performance results were rough estimates at best. Our test results were obtained after each SSD had been prepared using DISKPART or Sanitary Erase tools. As a word of caution, applications such as these offer immediate but temporary restoration of original 'pristine' performance levels. In our tests, we discovered that the maximum performance results (charted) would decay as subsequent tests were performed. SSDs attached to TRIM enabled Operating Systems will benefit from continuously refreshed performance, whereas older O/S's will require a garbage collection (GC) tool to avoid 'dirty NAND' performance degradation. It's critically important to understand that no software for the Microsoft Windows platform can accurately measure SSD performance in a comparable fashion. Synthetic benchmark tools such as HD Tach and PCMark are helpful indicators, but should not be considered the ultimate determining factor. That factor should be measured in actual user experience of real-world applications. Benchmark Reviews includes both bandwidth benchmarks and application speed tests to present a conclusive measurement of product performance. About Crucial Technology
Crucial is a key brand in the Lexar Media family of products. As the Memory Experts, we're the only DRAM supplier that's part of a major memory manufacturer. A wholly owned subsidiary of Micron Technology, Inc., Lexar Media, Inc. boasts one of the most comprehensive offerings of memory product lines in the industry. We deliver high-quality, award-winning products in every memory category: USB flash drives, all popular form factors of memory cards and card readers, DRAM computer memory for PCs and Mac systems, and solid state drives (SSD). We back our products with outstanding customer support and industry-leading warranties, and we strive to expand our offerings to meet the ever-changing needs of our customers - customers just like you. The Lexar brand has long been synonymous with reliable, high-performance products, which is reflected in the award-winning memory products and USB flash drives sold under the Lexar name. Our Crucial brand reflects our status as the only consumer memory upgrade supplier that's part of a major DRAM manufacturer. We sell high-quality memory that has been qualified and approved by most major original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). The Crucial.com website features innovative online tools and an intuitive design that makes it easy to find compatible memory and recommended upgrades. And because we carry over 250,000 upgrades for more than 40,000 systems, we've got options for nearly every system out there. Lexar Media has more than 10 years experience in the memory industry. Our strong retail brands, along with our direct online and OEM presence, make Lexar Media a global player in every major customer channel, including value-added resellers, system builders, and e-commerce. And we've built a name synonymous with quality, innovation, and customer service. Crucial M225 SSD Features
A Better Alternative.
Improves Performance.
Memory Experts.
Guaranteed Compatible. CT128M225 Specifications
Crucial SSD Warranty TermsWith respect to internal Solid State Drive products, Crucial warrants to the original end customer of its products specified below that its products are free from defects in material and workmanship affecting form, fit, and function. Any claim must be made within five (5) years from the original date of shipment, and Crucial shall have no liability thereafter. Any claim alleging that any product fails to conform to the foregoing warranty may be made only by the customer who purchased such product and only while such customer owns such product. Crucial, at its option, will repair, replace, or provide a credit or refund of either the original purchase price or fair market value, whichever is lower, of any product that is determined by Crucial to be defective during the warranty period. First Look: Crucial M225When it comes to the appearance of notebook drives, most people forget that the product you've just bought will be hidden away from view and forgotten once it gets installed. Keeping in mind that this product is also of solid state design, and therefore has no moving parts, it takes extra attention to product presentation in order to help keep consumers feeling comfortable with their premium-priced purchase. Crucial might have borrowed the same internals as many others for their M225, but the outside is all new. A brushed aluminum enclosure disassociates itself with so many of the designs we've seen lately, and adds a touch of class to the product line.
Unlike desktop computers which utilize a SATA cable system to connect drive to motherboard, nearly all notebooks are designed to allow the 2.5" drive to slide directly into a connection bay within the system. In addition to notebooks and desktop computer application, this Crucial M225-series MLC Solid State Drive can be utilized for mission-critical backups or high-abuse data systems; but its real focus is on high-performance date transfer speeds. Unfortunately, the Crucial M225 SSD does not offer an integrated High-Speed USB 2.0 Mini-B port such as we've seen on older competitor products.
Unlike the average Hard Disk Drive (HDD) storage product, SSD's are nearly impervious to impact damage and do not require or benefit from any kind of special vibration dampening or shock-proof enclosures. Crucial utilizes a brushed aluminum-looking metal enclosure for their M225 Solid State Drive series, which reveals the internal components after removing just four small counter-sunk Torx screws on the underside.
Standard 2.5" drive bay mounting points are pre-drilled and threaded into the M225 SSD, which allows for quick upgrade or addition into any existing notebook or desktop system. The mounting positions matched up to the drive bracket on my laptop, and after only a few minutes of drive cloning I was quickly loading the Windows O/S. The Crucial M225 does not include a 2.5" to 5.25" converter tray with the kit, as we've seen other manufacturers begin to include, although one is sold separately on the Crucial store website. Now that you're acquainted with the basic exterior features of the Crucial M225 SSD, it's time to peek inside the CT128M225 enclosure and inspect the internal components... M225 Internal ComponentsLexar/Crucial has designed their M225-series Solid State Drive to use the exact same architecture and components as previously exposed in detail with our OCZ Vertex SSD review. NAND flash module brand and custom firmware modifications are the only differences between the two products internally. For the M225 Internal Components section, we have reused the images from our original inspection of the Indilinx Barefoot controller. Intermittent and delayed response cycles (stuttering) from Solid State Drive products is not entirely wide-spread among all MLC SSDs, but it has become a big-enough issue among most affordable SSD products that many are well-aware of the phenomenon. Consumers first experienced the bitter taste of stuttering SSD performance with the OCZ Core Series (v1) SSD, although it has also been reported with the G.Skill MLC SSD and Patriot Warp v2. The phenomenon occurs when the drives buffer is filled faster than it can read or write data, and was prevalent among first-generation JMicron JMF602 SSD controllers. In our OCZ Apex SSD article, Benchmark Reviews detailed how the JMicron JMB390 RAID controller managing a pair of JMF602(B) SSD controllers into a RAID-0 striped array was able to overcome the 'stutter' experienced in MLC drives... at least in read-from functions. OCZ has returned to traditional methods of delivering performance with their latest and greatest Solid State Drive: the OCZ Vertex Turbo. But how will the Vertex Turbo SSD produce read-from and write-to bandwidth on par with the RAID-0 Apex without all the new architecture? The secret lies within a larger buffer, and the retirement of JMicron controllers (at least for this product series) in place of the new Indilinx ARM7 micro-controller.
To the untrained eye, the Crucial M225 SSD looks like every other Solid State Drive you've probably seen when the internal components have been exposed. There's a collective bank of NAND modules, usually with Samsung markings, followed by the SATA controller chip. Crucial decided relies Indilinx to deliver the SATA controller interface, since their 'Barefoot' chip was production-ready to be paired with a large cache months ago, while JMicron is still a few months away with their successor to the less-impressive JMF602B chip.
The internal DRAM is comprised of Samsung K9HCG08U1M-PCB00 IC parts, which bare the branding mark K9HCG08U1M PCB0. These lead-free RoHS-compliant 48-pin ICs are multi-layer, with one IC directly atop another. Each IC has an operating voltage of 2.7-3.6V, with a 25ns speed rating. The K9HCG08U1M parts offer 64GB in 8x organization.
Indilinx claims that their IDX110M00-FC 'Barefoot' chip offer a maximum read speed 230 MBps and supports the capacity up to 512GB with multi-level cell (MLC) NAND flash. The Indilinx (IDX110) Barefoot SSD controller chip is touted as delivering bandwidth over 200 MBps and random input-output (IO) of 20,000/s into various servers such as on-line transaction processing (OLTP) and streaming server units.
A single Elpida 64MB SDRAM module is marked with S51321CBH-7BTT-F, but the actual Elpida part number is EDS51321CBH, which is a 133MHz (CL3-3-3) mobile RAM component. This 64MB cache buffer helps improve small write-to performance and removes the 'stuttering' effect from the Vertex SSD.
The test sample Benchmark Reviews received for our tests came with Indilinx version 1571 (v1.30) firmware, which adds TRIM support in compatible Operating Systems such as Windows 7. In the next section, Benchmark Reviews begins performance testing the Crucial M225 Solid State Drive, and we determine just how well the new Indilinx Barefoot-based SSD compares to the previous best-performing competition. SSD Testing MethodologySolid State Drives have traveled a long winding course to finally get where they are today. Up to this point in technology, there have been several key differences separating Solid State Drives from magnetic rotational Hard Disk Drives. While the DRAM-based buffer size on desktop HDD's has recently reached 32 MB and is ever-increasing, there is still a hefty delay in the initial response time. This is one key area in which flash-based Solid State Drives continually dominates because they lack moving parts to "get up to speed". However the benefits inherent to SSD's have traditionally fallen off once the throughput begins, even though data reads or writes are executed at a high constant rate whereas the HDD tapers off in performance. This makes the average transaction speed of a SSD comparable to the data burst rate mentioned in HDD tests, albeit usually lower than the HDD's speed. Comparing a Solid State Disk to a standard Hard Disk Drives is always relative; even if you're comparing the fastest rotational spindle speeds. One is going to be many times faster in response (SSD's), while the other is usually going to have higher throughput bandwidth (HDD's). Additionally, there are certain factors which can affect the results of a test which we do our best to avoid. SSD Testing DisclaimerEarly on in our SSD coverage, Benchmark Reviews published an article which detailed Solid State Drive Benchmark Performance Testing. The research and discussion that went into producing that article changed the way we now test SSD products. Our previous perceptions of this technology were lost on one particular difference: the wear leveling algorithm that makes data a moving target. Without conclusive linear bandwidth testing or some other method of total-capacity testing, our previous performance results were rough estimates at best. Our test results were obtained after each SSD had been prepared using DISKPART or Sanitary Erase tools. As a word of caution, applications such as these offer immediate but temporary restoration of original 'pristine' performance levels. In our tests, we discovered that the maximum performance results (charted) would decay as subsequent tests were performed. SSDs attached to TRIM enabled Operating Systems will benefit from continuously refreshed performance, whereas older O/S's will require a garbage collection (GC) tool to avoid 'dirty NAND' performance degradation. It's critically important to understand that no software for the Microsoft Windows platform can accurately measure SSD performance in a comparable fashion. Synthetic benchmark tools such as HD Tach and PCMark are helpful indicators, but should not be considered the ultimate determining factor. That factor should be measured in actual user experience of real-world applications. Benchmark Reviews includes both bandwidth benchmarks and application speed tests to present a conclusive measurement of product performance. Test System
Drive Hardware TestedThe following storage hardware has been used in our benchmark performance testing, and may be included in portions of this article:
Test Tools
System Speed TestI doubt that when DOS was put to rest, Vladimir Afanasiev ever thought he would see his System Speed Test software used again in professional reviews. This program offers comprehensive system information, but it also has a powerful benchmarking tool for memory, processor, and disks. In terms of disk performance, it measures interface and physical transfer rates, seek and access times at the hardware level, and it does so without delay or interference from Operating System software or running processes. This is why Benchmark Reviews will continue to use this test: it polls its results directly from the hardware without the need for Windows! System Speed Test does not require a partition to be present for testing, so all of our Random Access Time benchmarks are completed prior to drive formatting. To detect the Random Access Time, each device runs the full test routine a total of five times. The highest and lowest scores were ignored, and the remainder was averaged. This would be prove pointless however, because the access time benchmark for every single SSD recorded identical test results between runs.
Using the System Speed Test software, the top Random Access Time benchmarks places the OCZ Vertex EX, Mtron Pro 7500, and ACARD ANS-9010 at the very top of our results. The 0.9 ms performers include: MemoRight GT, Intel X25-E Extreme, Mtron Pro 7000, Mtron MOBI 3500, Intel 80GB X25-M, and the OCZ Summit. With a Random Access Time of 10ms, the following SSDs were included: OCZ Vertex Turbo, OCZ Vertex, Patriot Torqx, Super Talent UltraDrive ME, Crucial M225, OCZ Agility, and lastly the Mtron MOBI 3000. With a lightning-fast sub 0.1 ms access time, every other SSD is forced to live in the shadow that these nearly-instant products have just created. Some of the slower Random Access Times include the following SSD products: Kingston SSDNow V+ Series (Samsung PB22-J) with 0.14 ms, The Silicon Power SLC SATA-II SSD SP032GBSSD750S25 with 0.17 ms, the OCZ Apex at 0.18 ms, the Patriot Warp v2 with 0.19 ms, and finally the G.Skill Titan finishing at 0.21 ms. There were slower SSD products, but obsolescence removed them from our results. The DRAM cache buffer is common link between request and response time. Solid State Drive devices have the advantage of a nearly instantaneous NAND storage bank responding to an even faster DRAM buffer. Conversely, Hard Disk Drive products depend on a fast spindle speed to reduce the delay before the buffer transmits data. Although the SSDs at the slower end of our Response Time chart may seem less impressive, in reality you couldn't begin to perceive these subtle differences in real-world applications. Still, the slowest SSD product (0.51ms) is 14x more responsive than the fastest desktop hard drive. Hard Disk Drive alternatives are much slower to react, regardless of spindle speed and cache buffer size. Even the very best of the desktop hard drive products, such as Western Digital's VelociRaptor, only produced a best response time of 7.15 ms. The older Western Digital Raptor took 8.53ms to respond, followed by 12.99ms for the Seagate 7200.11, and 15.39ms for the 7200 RPM Hitachi Travelstar 7K100 notebook drive. The worst performer was the standard 5400 RPM notebook drive (Hitachi Travelstar 5K160 HTS541640J9SA00), which recorded a painfully slow 17.41ms Random Access Time. Drive Hardware
ATTO Disk BenchmarkThe ATTO Disk Benchmark program is free, and offers a comprehensive set of test variables to work with. In terms of disk performance, it measures interface transfer rates at various intervals for a user-specified length and then reports read and write speeds for these spot-tests. There are some minor improvements made to the 2.34 version of the program, but the benchmark is still limited to non-linear samples up to 256MB. ATTO Disk Benchmark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested. While the bandwidth results are not realistic for determining the maximum drive speeds, ATTO Disk Benchmark is still a good tool for illustrating bandwidth using various file size chunks. Please consider the results displayed by this benchmark to be basic bandwidth performance indicators.
Our basic I/O bandwidth tests begin with the Crucial M225 SSD connected to the integrated Intel ICH10R Southbridge chip, as the ATTO Disk Benchmark tools performs file transfers ranging from 0.5 KB to 8192 KB. The 128GB SATA-II SSD CT128M225 model reveals a 259 MBps read plateau from 128-8192 KB file chunks, while the 176 MBps write performance plateaus from 128-8192 KB. Generally speaking, hard drive products such as the WD VelociRaptor reach their performance plateau 'earlier' around the 16-32KB chunk range, however SSD products pick-up performance around the 64-128KB file chunk range. Drive HardwareIn our next section, Benchmark Reviews compares random access IOPS performance among high-end storage devices using HD Tune Pro... HD Tune Pro BenchmarksIn the past, Benchmark Reviews has avoided HD Tune benchmarks because the software was so similar to others already being used in our articles. However, EFD Software has released several versions of this program, which now adds functionality and features not available in previous revisions. The latest edition of HD Tune Pro allows random access read and write testing, a feature not available to other similar software benchmark tools. HD Tune is a low-level test that will not operate on a drive which contains a partition, so Benchmark Reviews uses DISKPART to prepare hardware and remove any partitions before conducting these tests. Random Access tests are divided into 512b, 4KB, 64KB, 1MB and random size test files sizes. The Random Access test measures the performance of random read or write operations. The amount of data which will be read varies from 512 bytes to 1 MB. Performance is reported in operations per second (IOPS), average access time, and average speed. Because it is our intent to compare one product against another, Benchmark Reviews has focused on random transfer size IOPS performance.
Benchmark Reviews has tested the Crucial M225 against a collection of top-performing desktop storage drives for our random IOPS benchmarks. The 4 KB random IOPS performance in HD Tune measured 7054 for read IO, and an outstanding 16265 for write.
The tight range of IO is an indicator of operational bottlenecks. For example, the WD VelociRaptor WD3000HLFS SATA Hard Disk Drive indicates a read-IOPS range of 10-150 whereas the average SSD might offer 200-1,000. As a direct result, in most cases SSDs will offer a much higher IO over their hard disk counterparts.
Charted above, the OCZ Vertex EX (firmware 1.20) enjoys the benefit of SLC construction that delivers traditionally better IOPS performance than MLC counterparts, and also offers the best measured random IOPS performance of the group with 384 read and 477 write IOPS. The OCZ Vertex Turbo (MLC) leads the pack of Indilinx-based SSDs which follow behind (Vertex, CT128M225, Torqx, UltraDrive ME, Agility) and performs at near-SLC levels with 327 read and 429 write IOPS. The Intel X25-E Extreme SSD performed well, and produced 337 random read IOPS, and 394 write. Our test results were obtained after each SSD had been prepared using the DISKPART program, and in the case of products using the Indilinx Barefoot controller they were further prepared with the Sanitary Erase application. In our tests, we discovered that the maximum performance results (charted) would decay as subsequent tests were performed. As a word of caution, applications such as Sanitary Erase (SE) and Wiper offer immediate but temporary restoration of original 'pristine' performance levels. Drive Hardware
Benchmark Reviews measures I/O Response Time and IOPS performance using the Iometer tool in our next section...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Manufacturer | Indilinx | Intel | JMicron | JMicron | Samsung | Toshiba | SandForce | Marvell |
| Controller | IDX110M00-FC 'Barefoot' | PC29AS21AA0 | JMF602 | JMF612 | S3C29RBB01-YK40 | T6UG1XBG | SF1500 | 88SS8014-BHP2 |
| Max Cache | 64MB | 16MB | Proprietary | 128KB+256MB | 128MB | 128MB | Proprietary | 128MB |
| Max Capacity | 256GB | 160GB | 256GB | 256GB | 256GB | 512GB | 512GB | 256GB |
| Read/Write Speed | 230/170 MBps | 250/70 MBps | 170/135 MBps (SLC) | 250/200 MBps | 220/200 MBps | 230/180 MBps | 280/270 MBps | Proprietary |
| Interface | SATA-II 3-Gbps | SATA-II 3-Gbps | SATA-II 3-Gbps | SATA-II 3-Gbps | SATA-II 3-Gbps | SATA-II 3-Gbps | SATA-II 3-Gbps | SATA-III 6-Gbps |
| Garbage Collection | GC/TRIM | None | None | None | GC/TRIM | GC/TRIM | GC/TRIM | GC/TRIM |
|
Chart Data By: |
BmR |
Garbage Collection (GC) is the current solution for keeping flash NAND in 'clean' condition, while maintaining optimal performance. Windows 7 offers native TRIM support, and most retail SSDs also include this special GC function or at least offer a firmware update that brings the drive up-to-date. For anyone using an Operating System or SSD that does not offer Garbage Collection functionality, you'll be using 'dirty' flash NAND modules and suffering sub-optimal performance for each write-to request. A few SSD manufacturers offers free tools to help restore peak-level performance by scheduling GC to 'clean' used NAND sectors, but these tools add excessive wear to the NAND the same way disk defragmenting tools would. SLC flash modules may resist wear much better than MLC counterparts, but come at the expense of increased production cost. The best solution is a more durable NAND module that offers long-lasting SLC benefits at the cost of MLC construction. Adoption is further stalled because keen consumers aware of this dilemma further continue their delay into the SSD market.
Getting back to price, the changes in cost per gigabyte have come as often as changes to the technology itself. At their inception, high-performance models such the 32GB MemoRight GT cost $33 per gigabyte while the entry-level 32GB Mtron MOBI 3000 sold for $14 per gigabyte. While an enjoyable decline in NAND costs forced consumer SSD prices lower in 2009, the price of solid state components has been on the rise during 2010. Nevertheless, SSDs continue to fill store shelves despite price or capacity, and there are a few Solid State Drive products now costing only $2.33 per gigabyte. Although the performance may justify the price, which is getting dangerously close to the $1.13 per gigabyte WD VelociRaptor hard drive, costs may still close some buyers out of the market. Price notwithstanding, the future is in SSD technology and the day when HDDs are obsolete is nearing; but there are still a few bumps in the road to navigate.
Crucial M225 Conclusion
Benchmark Reviews begins each conclusion with a short summary for each of the areas we rate. The first is product presentation, which takes packaging into consideration to the extent that it provides adequate packing material and delivers important consumer information for an informed purchase. Since the national economy in the midst of an economic recession, manufacturers are using some creative ideas to help lure consumers to their product. SSD technology already carries a premium price tag over the alternative, which is why product presentation becomes so important. Crucial keeps to company color's with their M225-series SSD packaging, using a crisp blue and white color scheme that still finds room to feature basic product information and general features. The limited detail is likely due to Crucial's product delivery: online retailers and direct e-commerce, which enable a web page to deliver the data that their packaging does not.
Solid State Drives are low-visibility products: you see them just long enough to install and then they're forgotten. Despite this, Crucial has taken the added step of upgrading the SSD enclosure from the standard black painted chassis used on nearly all other SSD products (as well as their own first SSD product), and uses a brushed aluminum style finish. This is more than what's expected from the appearance of Solid State Drives, because like their Hard Disk Drive counterpart they are meant to place function before fashion. To this end I still wish manufacturers would return to using sealed plastic enclosures (such as the MOBI 3000) to prevent moisture or electrical shock damage, though the trend doesn't seem likely.
Construction is probably the strongest feature credited to the entire SSD product segment, and Crucial products have never been an exception. Solid State Drives are by nature immune to most abuses, but add to this a hard metal shell and you have to wonder what it would take to make this drive fail. If a Crucial M225-series SSD product fails during the limited 5-year warranty period, end-users can contact Lexar/Crucial via the company website or SSD support forum. Fortunately, there's also a toll-free telephone number for support or customer service questions (800-336-8915).
Benchmark Reviews has tested the stylish Crucial M225-series, and the performance results place this SSD among the fastest we've tested. Based on the results of several benchmark tests, the M225-series delivers a noteworthy 0.10 ms response time assure a nearly-instant reaction, and the Crucial CT128M225 model showed absolutely no sign of data read/write stuttering during our tests. ATTO Disk Benchmark tool reported an impressive 259 MBps maximum read bandwidth in our tests and 177 MBps maximum write, both of which are dead-on with the Crucial maximum speed specifications. EVEREST's linear full-sector bandwidth performance was a steady 246 MBps read-from, and an impressive 217 MBps write-to speed. While all of these benchmarks indicate the general bandwidth 'speed' was the highest among MLC SSDs available, which is to be expected from the Indilinx Barefoot controller. Input/Output performance results were also very high compared to ultra-premium SLC SSDs. Iometer tests produced a random read and write IOPS of 1695, which is well above most other MLC products tested.
As of August 2009, the Crucial M225-series of Solid State Drives is sold at NewEgg in several capacities. The 64GB CT64M225 model is listed for $155, while the 128GB version Benchmark Reviews tested for this article, model CT128M225, is available for $295. Crucial is one of the few companies to sell the larger 256GB version of the M225, model CT256M225, for the princely sum of $535. Compared against the original OCZ Vertex series SSD which is sold for $221 (60GB), $369 (120GB), and $705 (250GB), the Crucial M225 series looks to offer matching performance at a much better price point.
The bottom line is simple: since so many SSD products now share identical Indilinx underpinnings, the decision comes down to price, performance, and support. The Crucial M225-series is among the most affordable SSDs using the Barefoot SATA controller, which certainly helps, but it might be too little too late. Crucial is a relative late-comer in terms of directing their focus towards SSD products, even if they were one of the very first companies to offer product back in early 2008. As it stands right now, companies like OCZ, Intel, Patriot, and Super Talent all have a leg up on The Memory Experts in regard to enthusiast following. Taking that statement one step further, OCZ has practically set the bar for SSD enthusiast resources on the topic and also offer frequently updated custom-tweaked firmware. Crucial doesn't offer firmware updates, and they keep to the official Indilinx firmware on their M225 product line. Performance speed is all very similar among the myriad of Indilinx-based SSD products, so in the end it's going to be a consumer decision pitching value against product. The Crucial M225-series SSD is a high-performance Solid State Drive product recommended to enthusiasts wanting high performance at an attractive price.
EDITOR'S NOTE: On 13 January 2010 Crucial made available firmware version 1916 for the M225-series SSD on their support forum. Learn more and download the files here: Crucial M225 Firmware 1916 Download.
Pros:
+ Impressive 246 MBps read and 217 write bandwidth with EVEREST
+ 64MB Cache buffer overcomes 'stuttering' data problem
+ Extremely low 0.10 ms random access time
+ Lightweight compact storage solution
+ Resistant to extreme shock impact
+ Up to 256 GB of SSD capacity
+ 5-Year Crucial product warranty with free support forum
+ Low power consumption may extend battery life
Cons:
- Metal case is heavier and less durable than plastic
- Lacks integrated USB 2.0 Mini-B data connection
- Expensive enthusiast-level product
- No public firmware updates available
Ratings:
-
Presentation: 8.00
-
Appearance: 9.25
-
Construction: 9.75
-
Functionality: 9.75
-
Value: 8.25
Final Score: 9.0 out of 10.
Excellence Achievement: Benchmark Reviews Golden Tachometer Award.
Questions? Comments? Benchmark Reviews really wants your feedback. We invite you to leave your remarks in our Discussion Forum.
Related Articles:
- ACARD ANS-9010 DDR2 SATA RAM-Drive
- MemoRight GT MR25.2-064S 2.5-Inch 64GB SATA SSD
- OCZ Vector Solid State Drive
- Seagate Interview: SSD and Enterprise Storage
- Corsair X256 CMFSSD-256D1 MLC SSD
- 120GB OCZ Vertex 3.20 Solid State Drive
- Patriot Pyro SE Solid State Drive
- Intel SSD 520 Series Solid State Drive
- Marvell 88SS9174-BJP2 SSD Processor
- OCZ Vertex Turbo MLC SATA SSD OCZSSD2-1VTXT120G
