ssds What is the difference in life cycle or erase cycle of MX500 and BX500 crucial sata ssd's?

[Datahoarder202]

After reading few tech blogs I've come to understand that MX500 is slightly better than BX500 but in any of those site's the difference of expected life or erase cycle of these drive was not mentioned it was just stated that MX500 has more life expectancy than BX500, but how much more?, does the price difference of these two drives justifies the expected life difference of these drives?

[BondiBlue]

The MX500 is a better drive than the BX500. The BX500 is a budget drive, and it doesn't have a DRAM cache. It's still a decent SSD, but I'd personally choose the better MX500 if it's available. According to Crucial the TBW rating is pretty similar for both drives, but that's not much of a concern compared to the actual performance of the drive. 

[Jurrunio]

I'm sure Crucial lists the TBWs for their drives somewhere. The thing is most drives get retired before they hit TBW either due to controller failure (I don't expect this from MX500 or BX500) or because they became too slow. It's not a useful metric unless you write to it really frequently and in large amounts (say, scratch disks).

 

I'd just look at the DRAM and say MX500 is better because of it, it helps with response times without taking system RAM. But then that's not a huge advantage either, if you're not going to frequently access those data maybe price is a bigger factor.

[OhYou_]

Life expectancy on paper has to do with nand flash ratings and grade. 
Both ssds probably contain the exact same nand modules but the BX may receive lower grade chips that pass qc tests but are on the lower spectrum.
the BX will also as stated not have a dram cache and as such might have a lower quality controller which could potentially have a lower realistical life expectancy.

 

in any case if it is used for a OS, get one with a dram cache. If it is used for general storage, you can get a cheaper one probably.
Drive failures shouldnt matter either way, if it is early in life then rma it, if it is late in life then you probably are due for an upgrade anyway. In either case, just restore the full disk backup onto the new one and you're good to go.

[Middcore]

The MX series drives have endurances ranging from 100 to 1000 TBW according to the specs (the bigger drives having greater endurance). The BX drives have endurance from 80 to 720 TBW. 

 

In reality, any of them probably will last longer than their rated TBW endurance, those numbers are just what Crucial is saying they should at least get to. It's also pretty unlikely I think that you would ever get anywhere near those TBW numbers in normal use. BUT specs saying a part should have a certain lifespan doesn't rule out the possibility of random defects making them fail way before that.

 

In short, I wouldn't let the difference in endurance rating alone make you buy one over the other. 

[worstalentscout]

where i'm from, the price difference between MX and BX is so small......i wonder why Crucial bother to make the BX series...........