Search the Community

Hello, I got a Razer Blade 13", i7 8565u and a nVidia MX150, while playing games I noticed that the nvidia graphics cards is not fully working. Its kind of working together with the igpu, why is that? I tried some games, like league of legends and I still get same same results, bad frame rate and only half of the usage. I tried to change the nVidia Control Panel from "Preferred graphics processor: auto-select" to "High-performance nvidia processor" but still nothing. I already update the nvidia drivers and put the pc to best performance. Thanks for the help.

hey guys, I am about to choose between two SSDs arc 100(240GB) and mx100(256BG). Will use it for dual booting so lets assume it will be mostly used for reads. mx100 = £72 Arc 100 = £60 are the 12 pounds worth it for the better performance? I'd really like some opinions(or just the choice)

Hi I've now built my first pc and i've decided to use two 256gb mx100 ssd drives, no HDD, as 512gb is enough for me, at this point atleast. So I would like to ask the best community, which "set up" would be the best when using two 256gb ssd drives. I want the full capacity of my drives - 512gb is enough, but i can't do less. I store all my documents in the sky. So far, i store all my pictures (the ones i got on my phone) in the sky, and my videos (only what i've recorded with my gopro) are always stored on my external hdd. Which raid should i use? Is it better to just use them as two separate drives? I hope you guys got some answers for a noob.

So I just upgraded my laptop (ASUS X550DP-XX048H) with Crucial's latest BX100 and benchmarked it along with my previous HDD. I didn't get the advertised speed but one thing is for sure, best bang for the buck (difference of $20.x+ here in Philippines between the BX100 and MX100). Not even sure how much of a difference 535 MB/s vs 485.752 MB/s would make in real life for casual and student use. Everything went responsive and my CPU (A10-5750M) goes 100% most of the time when doing heavy multitasking compared to my previous experience where the disk is the one having 100% usage while CPU at 50% - 75%. Crucial BX100 250GB (CT250BX100SSD1) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.4 x64 © 2007-2015 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [sATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 485.752 MB/s Sequential Write : 379.049 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 350.688 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 359.840 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 19.542 MB/s [ 4770.9 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 65.667 MB/s [ 16032.0 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 203.564 MB/s [ 49698.2 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 180.382 MB/s [ 44038.6 IOPS] Test : 1000 MB [C: 28.5% (60.4/211.8 GB)] (x5) Date : 2015/04/17 15:55:18 OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) Samsung HDD 750GB (ST750LM022 HN-M750MBB) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.4 x64 © 2007-2015 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [sATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 100.026 MB/s Sequential Write : 98.885 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 27.708 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 28.563 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 0.422 MB/s [ 103.1 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 0.543 MB/s [ 132.5 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 0.561 MB/s [ 137.0 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 0.543 MB/s [ 132.7 IOPS] Test : 1000 MB [D: 10.1% (70.5/698.6 GB)] (x5) Date : 2015/04/17 16:04:20 OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) ============================================ For some unknown reasons, I can't seem to update my firmware to MU02. Anyone else experiencing this? And what could be the possible factors why I didn't get the advertised speed?

okay so like any reasonable person, I want to get the most bang from my (upcoming) system, so in terms of storage solutions here's what I've come up with. I'm gonna get a 512gb MX100 and a WD Green (not sure how many tb yet) what I'll do is that I'll install main (like I'll be using constantly) software stuff in MX100 like OS, video editor, etc. and store games and files like videos and photos in the WD Green, then just temporarily transfer files to the MX100 when I'll be using them (like if I'm gonna play games I'll just transfer them and put them back after playing, and transfer videos or photos for when I'll be editing them. not sure about watching thought, will there be any difference from watching movies from an SSD and an HDD?) so yeah that's basically the plan, hoping to get the most bang for my buck is all it is, would you guys give this a thumbs up? if not what other strategies would you guys recommend?

so I was originally planning on buying an MX100 to start with my new PC, which would mean it will store the OS and whatever other programs I'll be having (like video editors). but I just found out (very lately) about the news of the new MX200 and thought that if I wait until it releases then maybe I can get the MX100 for even cheaper. if that's the case then I'll just buy a Seagate Barracuda first and configure everything to it, and by the time the MX100 gets cheaper I'll buy one and transfer everything I need to transfer there. I just wanna know if this is a difficult thing to do, and also if you guys think the MX100 will drop its prices at least by July?

I've always wanted to upgrade my laptop with an SSD and this seems like a good a time as any. So an online shop in my country is doing a sale on their M550 line, so the M550 256GB costs €99,90 and the MX100 256GB is €99,99(in a different, but also reliable webstore) From what I can find the M550 lineup is a more enthousiast line, but when it comes to real benchmarks, the MX100 is equivalent most of the time. Is there any real advantage to go with the M550 at the same price point? edit: I'm not in a rush, should I wait on a sale on the MX100?

Crucial announced their new MX200 and BX100 SSDs on CES 2015 The MX200 is built for performance on a SATA 6Gbps interface, and as such, these drives boast sequential reads and writes of up to 555MB/s and 500MB/s, respectively, as well as random reads of up to 100,000 IOPS and random writes of up to 87,000 IOPS. MX200 drives can last for up to 320 TBW (total bytes written) on the 1TB model, offering up to five times more endurance than a typical SSD. AES 256-bit encryption is also part of the package, along with something Crucial calls Data Defense to guard against corrupt files, adaptive thermal protection to keep systems cool, and power loss protection to negate the need to blurt out expletives when the power goes out -- your data should still be intact. As for the BX100 line, these drives come in 120GB, 250GB, 500GB, and 1TB capacities and offer sequential read and write performance of up to 535MB/s and 450MB/s, respectively. They're also the first drives to include the Silicon Motion SM2246EN controller. It has high-performance and low power consumption SM2246EN controller combined with leading-edge Micron NAND helps make the BX100 fast, energy efficient, and affordable. MX200 specs: BX100 Specs: Pricing: Both lines will be available in the first quarter of this year, with MX200 drives priced at $140 for 250GB, $250 for 500GB, and $470 for 1TB, and the the BX100 line priced at $70 for 120GB, $110 for 250GB, $200 for 500GB, and $400 for 1TB. Source: LegitReviews

I have kind of a noob question, but i'm not sure about this. I have Samsung 840 EVO 120GB as my boot drive and i want to buy a second SSD fo storage etc. Is it ok to buy Crucial MX100 256GB? I heard that eg. Sandforce and Marvell can't run together in the same system. So is there any problem running Samsung MEX and Marvell controllers together?

Hello, LTT forum. I was in the market for SSD's and today at Microcenter I bought a Crucial MX100 512GB SSD for $199.99. The only other one I was looking at was the Samsung 850 PRO 512GB for $369.99, Question is did I make a good choice. I have a Samsung 830 256GB for my boot drive. I mainly got this because it was cheap and it will be used for games. Mainly larger file games that are over 20GBs. I'm not really that knowledgeable on SSD's so any answer would help. If the Samsung is like 80% better then I guess I made a bad choice but I'm pretty sure I made a good choice. - Grim

Which is better. One Samsung 840 EVO Series 250GB or two Samsung 840 EVO Series 120GB (I was also thinking Crucial MX100 128GB) in RAID 0? Performance wise the Two in RAID 0 would win. Stability wise the Single 840 would win. Which would you choose?

I'm upgrading alot of stuff at the moment and wanted to get an SSD along with it. I've never bought an SSD before so I'm not very well informed on the various technical aspects that distinguish them. I've read that the 840 Pro is the better of the two but the MX100 is better value. I would like to know if this is correct and that I haven't been misinformed. I am more concerned about performance than value and if you have any other recommendations that perform better than the 840 Pro please let me know. Edit: Just realised there is a newer edition of the 840 Pro, the 850 Pro.

Hey! I'm going to build this rig in the coming weeks:http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Arttuli99/saved/JfYmP6 I decided to go with 1TB of WD Blue as mass storage. I'd like an best bang for the buck SSD (around 250GB)as a boot drive and it will have my most used/most important files and programs.What SSDs would you guys suggest.? I have my eye on the Samsung 840 EVO and the Crucial MX100.

Hello everybody! I recently bought a new laptop (N551JK from Asus) and am now going to buy an SSD to go with it. But i have a dilemma; Where I live (Europe) the price of the Samsung 850 pro 256GB is almost the same as a Crucial MX100 512GB drive. If i go with the 850 pro i will have to have a seperate HDD in my laptop as it is probably not big enough to fit all of my data. Although with the 512 gigs available on the MX100 i will be able to have everything on the ssd. (Movies, torrents and music will all be stored on my Windows home server) Which one do you think will FEEL faster (If there is going to be any noticeable difference at all)? The 850 pro with faster transfer rates and higher iops or the MX100 where all the files, not just the programs will be on the ssd. Thank you for all of the answers in advance! P.S.: I could probably live with just the 256gb, as i currently dont have a lot of files, but that might change soon as i am going to be using the laptop for college. You can also recommend me different drives in the same or lower price range.

I had bought a Kingston 120gb ssdnow v300 and that was a HUGE mistake. Apparently Kingston put asynchronous nands in the consumer drives and synchronous nands in the reviewer drives. Inevitably the drive died and I lost all my data. So now I am looking to get a new drive, size is not the matter here but reliability and cost is. I am looking for a reliable drive under $250. I was looking at the Samsung evo 840's and the crucial mx100's. The evos apparently have a problem with slowing at a fast rate unless you defrag almost weekely. The mx100's are plagued with blue screening because of the pre installed software. So if anyone could help me decide or find a better drive (I am open minded about this) that would be great. Thanks for taking the time to read. - LkMMoDC

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=20-148-820&nm_mc=EMC-GD090814&cm_mmc=EMC-GD090814-_-index-_-Item-_-20-148-820 It's not anything crazy when it comes to the $/GB ratio but it's still a decent deal for anyone looking for a decently sized ssd for a laptop or something along those lines. Promo Code: EMCPAPB223 Unboxing and overview from Eds drafts':

Hello! Having finally decided to upgrade to an ssd, I came accross some nice offers on amazon uk (http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=ssd&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Assd).%C2'> I was looking to get a 250gb drive, and as the title suggests the 840 evo and Crucial mx100 have a good reputation, my qustion is is there one that is clearly better to get then the other? I know very little about ssd's and only do gaming, nothing much else. Thanks in advance.