This was posted 1 year 4 months 18 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Crucial MX500 4TB 2.5" SATA SSD $395.82 Delivered @ Amazon US via AU

630
Crucial MX500 4TB 2.5" SATA SSD $395.82 Delivered @ Amazon US via AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
Look Up on 12/12/2022 - 23:07 amazon.com.au (591 clicks)
Last edited 17/12/2022 - 11:49 by 1 other user
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Crucial's Christmas Clearance Continues™
All time low as this includes shipping vs the recent AusPCMarket deal

13/12 price update: slight increase to $395.82 from $391.89.

CT4000MX500SSD1
Controller: SMI SM2258 or SM2259
Memory: Micron 64L or 96L TLC
DRAM Cache: Yes
Sequential Read: 560 MB/s
Sequential Write: 510 MB/s
Random Read: n/a
Random Write: n/a
Endurance (TBW): 1000 TB
Warranty: 5 Years

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Computing 4TB Computer Component Crucial SSD

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace
Amazon Global Store
Amazon Global Store

closed Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 12/12/2022 - 23:24
    +8

    A lot of 1 star review DOA reports on this product, and a teardown showing it's build quality is absolute pants. Shame. The lower cap mx500's were the bargain king.

    • CYMA on 12/12/2022 - 23:32
      +5

      Have a link to the teardown? I am curious

      • [Deactivated] on 13/12/2022 - 01:18

        In the reviews, someone has posted images of the incredibly flimsy connectors. Only apparently supported by the pins/solder to the board.

        • rhangman on 13/12/2022 - 11:44
          -1

          Leaving aside differences in NAND quality, it's exactly the same on lower capacity versions. Looking at the photos I'd suggest they seriously yanked on it. Both plastic tabs pulled through the PCB, all the traces that the pins were soldered to have been torn out, same goes for the spot weld pads. Individually all pretty flimsy, but combined? Just remember if your SATA data connector has a metal clip, release it as you remove the plug.

          • [Deactivated] on 13/12/2022 - 15:02
            -1

            @rhangman: The 2x plastic pins are locational, not securing. Stop making excuses. As far as build quality goes, on a relative scale, this is garbage. Even if it might be "sufficient" if you're "careful". As a relative metric, it is garbage.

            • rhangman on 13/12/2022 - 15:59
              -1

              @[Deactivated]: Come on, the pins tore through the PCB, so whilst their primary purpose might be to line the connector up, previously they were helping to hold it in place. At any rate, as per above, I was curious so opened up an older/lower capacity one I had lying around and it was assembled exactly the same. So if people weren't/aren't having an issue with the connectors on smaller capacity ones, then they shouldn't on this.

              That said, if the PCB is much lower quality, guess that could also explain how the pins ripped through and the spot welding pads and traces came off. If so, then they must have really cheaped out. Even with holes that close to the edge, should take a lot of force to do that.

              • [Deactivated] on 13/12/2022 - 17:13
                -2

                @rhangman: and @nom , Wrong again. Look at the pictures. The pins are surface mount pads, they don't go "through" at all. Neither do the two side lugs obstensibly for mounting. Better designs do indeed have them all in pass through holes for this exact reason, better ones again have physical mounts to the sides.

                • rhangman on 14/12/2022 - 10:39

                  @[Deactivated]: Was not referring to the surface mounted connectors, but the "2x plastic pins" you said were locational. They clearly go through holes on the PCB, which in the photo have been opened up where they pulled through.

                  The side tabs are spot welded to large pads on the PCB, so 100% for mounting and if you've every pulled a spot welded tab from an 18650 cell or the like, they take some force to remove, which would be why, like the SATA pins, the PCB de-laminated rather than the tabs or spot weld breaking.

                  Also, just put a small screwdriver through a hole right on the edge of a cheap Chinese PCB I had made some time ago, applied some serious force to the side (way more than anyone should be applying unplugging a SATA connector) and it held up just fine.

                  Edit: apologies, blurry photo and the colour of the desk being so close to that of the edge of the PCB. The solder mask doesn't cover the outside edge of the hole, so it looked like it had been torn, but hadn't. Based on that, looks like the damage was caused by the connector being bent down rather than yanked out. Should be plenty strong when the plug is pulled straight out, but not handle being bent well. Can see that being an issue where for example a straight plug is used rather than a right angle in a tight space. As long as there isn't tension/pulling on the cables though (especially if things seem OK,but then you squish a side panel on,applying downward force), shouldn't be an issue as long as the plugs are pulled straight out rather than being pushed down. Fact remains though, that the design is exactly the same across the range, both in terms of time and capacity. So all equally as flawed/good.

                  TLDR; don't bend the connector and you'll be fine.

            • Nom on 13/12/2022 - 16:04
              -1

              @[Deactivated]: "Sufficient If Careful" is already a great description of a SATA connector - they're notoriously flimsy.

              There's nothing that looks concerning about those pictures in the Amazon review - yes if you're not gentle with SATA, it's easy to break. This drive broke. Be more gentle next time.

              • [Deactivated] on 13/12/2022 - 17:14
                -1

                @Nom: Wrong again. Look at the pictures. The pins are surface mount pads, they don't go "through" at all. Neither do the two side lugs obstensibly for mounting. Better designs do indeed have them all in pass through holes for this exact reason, better ones again have physical mounts to the sides

                • Nom on 13/12/2022 - 20:38
                  -1

                  @[Deactivated]: Sorry, I didn't say anything contrary to any of those things, are you replying to the wrong post ?

                  I say again :
                  "SATA connector - they're notoriously flimsy.

                  There's nothing that looks concerning about those pictures in the Amazon review - yes if you're not gentle with SATA, it's easy to break"

                  You already expect SATA connectors to be flimsy, so I have no concerns about the ones that actually are flimsy 👍

                  • [Deactivated] on 13/12/2022 - 22:24
                    -3

                    @Nom: "There's nothing that looks concerning about those pictures".

                    I've already explained why you're wrong. In detail. You didn't know that you're wrong, so you've ignored the incredibly clear explanation and chosen instead to double down in order to claim you were actually right. Which seems to be some kind of disease that's infesting modern discourse on the internet.

                    Would you….would you like a diagram?

                    • Nom on 13/12/2022 - 22:50
                      -1

                      @[Deactivated]: Dude, I'm not disputing that this drive is fragile. It absolutely is.

                      But I also have no problem with that 👍
                      I always expect SATA connectors to be fragile, and I wouldn't consider avoiding this drive for that reason - the "build quality" doesn't concern me.

                      • [Deactivated] on 14/12/2022 - 02:09
                        -2

                        @Nom: "There's nothing that looks concerning about those pictures" is literally a dispute over the assessment of the quality of the connector.

                        You're allowed to have your concerns, you're allowed to have a lack of concern.

                        You are absolutely not allowed to opine on the quality of the item and be objectively wrong, then insist your opinion counts for something when it is completely unqualifiied.

                        • Nom on 15/12/2022 - 09:58
                          -1

                          @[Deactivated]: I'm out, this thread is bonkers 😁

                          • [Deactivated] on 15/12/2022 - 12:21
                            -2

                            @Nom: Not an airport mate. No need to announce departures.

    • ShrewdBargin on 12/12/2022 - 23:36
      +1

      I too would like some links to the teardowns

    • Phoebus on 13/12/2022 - 00:14
      +1

      DoA is fine. I'm more concerned about dead one month after warranty

  • someguyjumping on 12/12/2022 - 23:26
    +3

    OP you are on fire with these SSD deals. Plus the tier list in your other M.2 NVME posts. Great stuff.

  • GreenRomeo on 13/12/2022 - 00:17
    +6

    Beware of the MX500. Apparently it’s no longer itself now. Same for Samsung 870 EVO.

    I’d be looking for 970s and 860s (if it’s still available).

    https://reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/whr5ek/crucial_mx500_…

    • whyisave on 13/12/2022 - 00:58
      +1

      What are the tell-tale signs of SSD failing ?

      With the old spin-platter drives, there were diagnostic tests and S.M.A.R.T.,
      but what can we do to inspect our existing SSDs, for 'wear & tear' ?

      • BoundedRationality on 13/12/2022 - 08:17
        +2

        HDD Sentinel (and I assume any program like it) will give you an overall health of your SSD.

      • Nom on 13/12/2022 - 15:56

        Usually when an SSD fails, they fail totally.

        As usual, make sure your backups are in order - it's unlikely you'll be able to pull data from a failing SSD.

        • Jiv on 13/12/2022 - 22:03

          This is true.

          SSD either works, or doesn't, and there's no in-between.
          HDD failure can start with bad sectors, or intermittently fails to spin up, but then you have some time to transition to a new one.

  • CYMA on 13/12/2022 - 00:55
    +2

    FWIW I did have one of these die after just three days in my system. Had only stored a few steam games ~300gb total.
    Currently waiting for replacement from vendor.
    I have another one that is completely full and still fine after ~3 months but reading the linked Reddit thread is making me concerned :/ as I have many mx500 and p1 crucials.

    • GreenRomeo on 13/12/2022 - 13:04
      +1

      When did you buy your other MX500s? If it was more than a year ago then hopefully Crucial had not screwed up (or cut corner) the product at that time yet.

      • CYMA on 13/12/2022 - 13:15
        +1

        Yeah here's hoping! The purchase date of the other (non 4tb) mx500s vary and they are all 1tb models, from around 4 years ago to this year (have 3 of them). Only ever had this 4tb model fail which I had just purchased a couple of weeks ago, the other 4tb is still chugging along after 3 months and being fully filled.

  • Phoebus on 13/12/2022 - 01:16
    -5

    Wow. This is the first time I've seen Reddit conspiracy theories freely floated on Ozbargain. This is a great drive with 5 year warranty.
    TBW=1,000TB

    • [Deactivated] on 13/12/2022 - 01:19
      +10

      Its got a near 10 percent 1 star review rate. Seems the 4tb models had a lot of doa's.

      And the below isn't a conspiracy theory.

      Here is a good source of info on the evolution of the MX500:

      https://theoverclockingpage.com/2022/07/27/review-crucial-mx500-1tb-um-dos-melhores-ssds-satas-do-aliexpress-com-dram-cache/

      You can see how Crucial has changed the NAND and controller over the years:

      https://theoverclockingpage.files.wordpress.com/2022/07/variantes.png

      https://theoverclockingpage.files.wordpress.com/2022/07/especificacoes.jpg

      The author claims that there is even a QLC version in the 2TB and 4TB capacities.

      The most recent NANDs are "176-layer Micron FortisFlash B47R Replacement Gate Charge Trap NAND". The marking codes are NY133 and NY135.

      NY135 = MT29F8T08EWLEEM5-QA:E (8 Tbit)

      NY133 = MT29F2T08EMLEEJ4-QA:E (2 Tbit)

      Older MX500 versions had Micron NW925 and NW926 NANDs.

      NW925 = MT29F512G08EECAGJ4-5M:A (512 Gbit)

      NW926 = MT29F1T08EMCAGJ4-5M:A (1 Tbit)

      Micron's FBGA and Component Marking Decoder:

      https://www.micron.com/support/tools-and-utilities/fbga

      FlashMaster's NAND flash part number and ID decoder:

      https://nand.gq/#/decode

      The latest versions have a Silicon Motion SM2259 controller. Earlier versions had an SM2258.

      I have posted info, including hires PCB photos, of my 1TB MX500 here (fw M3CR043):

      https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/crucial-mx500-500gb-sata-ssd-remaining-life-decreasing-fast-despite-few-bytes-being-written.3571220/post-22866935

      • Chandler on 13/12/2022 - 09:13
        +2

        https://theoverclockingpage.files.wordpress.com/2022/07/variantes.png

        English Translation:

        Variants of Crucial MX500

        Property Unit
        Die Maker MICRON MICRON MICRON MICRON MICRON MICRON MICRON MICRON
        Die Model FortisFlash B16A FortisFlash B17A FortisFlash B27A FortisFlash B27B FortisFlash B37R FortisFlash B47R FortisFlash N18A FortisFlash N28A
        Density of Dies Gb 256Gb (32GB) 512Gb (64GB) 512Gb (64GB) 512Gb (64GB) 512Gb (64GB) 512Gb (64GB) 1Tb (128GB) 1Tb (128GB)
        Versions found in templates GB / TB 250GB, 500GB, 1TB 250GB, 500GB, 1TB, 2TB e 4TB 250GB, 500GB, 1TB, 2TB e 4TB 250GB, 500GB, 1TB, 2TB e 4TB 250GB, 500GB, 1TB, 2TB e 4TB 250GB, 500GB, 1TB, 2TB e 4TB 2TB e 4TB 2TB e 4TB
        Cell Type TLC TLC TLC TLC TLC TLC QLC QLC
        Layer # 64 64 96 96 128 176 64 96
        NAND Bus (max) [MT/s] 667 667 800 1200 1200 1600 667 800
        Ver. ONFI 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1
        Topology Floating Gate Floating Gate Floating Gate Floating Gate Floating Gate Replacement Gate Floating Gate Floating Gate
        Die size (mm²) [mm²] 58 108 82 TBD TBD 50 157 115
        Planes / Die # 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
        Decks / Plane # 2 2 2 2 TBD 2 2 2
        Blocks per Plane # 504 504 236 388 745 550 684 492
        Pages per Block 3 2304 2304 5184 3456 1536 2112 3072 4608
        Page Size (+ ECC) KB 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
        Endurance (up to # (PEC)) 1500 3000 2000 3000 5000 5000 1500 TBD
        Programming Throughput MB/s 39 36 80 84 92 130 21 32
        Number of Gates (DWL, SSGs…) # 74 74 TBD TBD TBD 195 74 TBD
      • Chandler on 13/12/2022 - 09:33
        +1

        https://theoverclockingpage.files.wordpress.com/2022/07/especificacoes.jpg

        English translation:

        Specifications

        Property Unit
        Product 250 GB 500 GB 1 TB 2 TB 4 TB
        Price [R$] 173.99 339.99 699.99 1399.99 2999.99
        [AUD] (equiv.) 48.44 94.66 194.89 389.78 835.24
        Capacity [GB / TB] 250GB 500GB 1TB 2TB 4TB
        Form Factor SATA 2.5" SATA 2.5" SATA 2.5" SATA 2.5" SATA 2.5"
        Interface AHCI AHCI AHCI AHCI AHCI
        Controller Var 1: Silicon Motion SM2258 Silicon Motion SM2258 Silicon Motion SM2258 Silicon Motion SM2258 Silicon Motion SM2258
        Var 2: Silicon Motion SM2259 Silicon Motion SM2259 Silicon Motion SM2259 Silicon Motion SM2259 Silicon Motion SM2259
        DRAM/HMB Var 1: 256MB DDR3/DDR3L 512MB DDR3/DDR3L 1GB DDR3/DDR3L 2GB DDR3/DDR3L 512MB DDR3/DDR3L
        Var 2: 512MB DDR3/DDR3L 512MB DDR3/DDR3L
        NAND Var 1: Micron TLC 64-layer B16A 256Gb Micron TLC 64-layer B16A 256Gb Micron TLC 64-layer B16A 256Gb Micron TLC 64-layer B17A 512Gb Micron TLC 64-layer B17A 512Gb
        Var 2: Micron TLC 64-layer B17A 512Gb Micron TLC 64-layer B17A 512Gb Micron TLC 64-layer B17A 512Gb Micron TLC 96-layer B27B 512Gb Micron TLC 96-layer B27B 512Gb
        Var 3: Micron TLC 96-layer B27A 512Gb Micron TLC 96-layer B27A 512Gb Micron TLC 96-layer B27A 512Gb Micron TLC 128-layer B37R 512Gb Micron TLC 128-layer B37R 512Gb
        Var 4: Micron TLC 96-layer B27B 512Gb Micron TLC 96-layer B27B 512Gb Micron TLC 96-layer B27B 512Gb Micron TLC 176-layer B47R 512Gb Micron TLC 176-layer B47R 512Gb
        Var 5: Micron TLC 128-layer B37R 512Gb Micron TLC 128-layer B37R 512Gb Micron TLC 128-layer B37R 512Gb Micron QLC 64-layer N18A 1Tb Micron QLC 64-layer N18A 1Tb
        Var 6: Micron TLC 176-layer B47R 512Gb Micron TLC 176-layer B47R 512Gb Micron TLC 176-layer B47R 512Gb Micron QLC 96-layer N28A 1Tb Micron QLC 96-layer N28A 1Tb
        Sequential Read (up to) [MBps] 560 560 560 560 560
        Sequential Write (up to) [MBps] 510 510 510 510 520
        Random Read (up to) [IOPs] 95000 95000 95000 95000 95000
        Random Write (up to) [IOPs] 90000 90000 90000 90000 90000
        Cryptography 256bit AES, TCG Opal 2.0 256bit AES, TCG Opal 2.0 256bit AES, TCG Opal 2.0 256bit AES, TCG Opal 2.0 256bit AES, TCG Opal 2.0
        Durability (TBW) [TB] 100 180 360 700 1000
        MTBF [million hours] 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8
        Part Number CT250MX500SSD1 CT500MX500SSD1 CT1000MX500SSD1 CT2000MX500SSD1 CT4000MX500SSD1
        Warranty [years] 5 5 5 5 5
      • XZT on 13/12/2022 - 22:24
        +2

        I'm wondering where they found QLC NAND on the MX500 drives, that "theoverclockingpage" review (of the 1TB) seems to be the only(?) primary source. Unfortunately most of the other MX500 4TB reviews are from 2021 and show the NY135 TLC NAND. It would be interesting to see how a "QLC" variant compares.

        https://www.realhardwarereviews.com/crucial-mx500-4tb-review…
        https://www.computerbase.de/2021-10/crucial-mx500-4tb-test/
        https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/artikel/hardware/stora…

        Searching on those FortisFlash N18A and N28A QLC dies leads to the TechPowerUp SSD Database (and this Ozbargain post). Gabriel Ferraz, the same(?) author of the "theoverclockingpage" review, is quoted as the maintainer of the TechPowerUp SSD database. It doesn't show the MX500 as using QLC though.

        https://www.techpowerup.com/ssd-specs/?f&nandDie=Micron+N18A…
        https://www.techpowerup.com/ssd-specs/?f&nandDie=Micron+N28A…
        https://www.techpowerup.com/ssd-specs/#mx500

        Has anyone shown the internals of a MX500 4TB recently?

    • havebeerbelywillsumo on 13/12/2022 - 01:29
      +1

      @Phoebus: Everyone is posting proofs that Crucial have sneakily shifted the goalposts….where is your proof that this (as of "now") is still good?

    • Yve on 13/12/2022 - 04:31
      +4

      This ain’t a conspiracy
      Aside from the evidence, storage manufacturers also historically swapped components out of the same product where older versions are better than their newly made counterparts. It’s not their first rodeo
      Ignorance is not a shield

    • GreenRomeo on 13/12/2022 - 18:04

      Reddit is like a mini internet where each subreddit is kind of in its own world, so I'm not sure how one can group them all together like that. To me, saying "Reddit conspiracy theories" is no different to "Facebook conspiracy theories" or "Internet conspiracy theories", although from my experience Facebook is much less trustworthy than Reddit. In fact when it comes to troubleshooting or reviewing stuff, particularly tech stuff like this SSD drive, in addition to the reputable sites, I usually found more accurate and reliable info from Reddit than the SEO-optimised pages in the top results from Google.

  • dfg555 on 16/12/2022 - 13:49

    what a shame i was going to buy it, i checked my 2tb and 4tb mx500 and phew they are tlc of the newer variant. so no qlc garbage.

  • jabbathepom on 16/12/2022 - 19:14
    +1

    I know this is anecdotal at best, been working for a very large org who have been retrofitting pcs with both MX and BX series drives through the pandemic on their public cluster pcs in 256gb and 512gb sizes for both MX and then as supplies ran out BX, the failure rates on BX have been unsurprising but the its also happening on the MX drives. Losing drives generally after 9 months to 12 months use. Would never touch these drives again. Wasn't my choice, just dealing with the fallout. We have NVME drive based tier 1 oem pcs with the same corporate image with "normal" failure rates.

    • Look Up on 17/12/2022 - 19:39

      Good real world feedback

      There's a distinct feeling that all mainstream Crucial QLC NAND products (P2, P3, P3 Plus, BX and now MX) have recently experienced some hidden downgrades ie. crapflation

      Just checked some old BX boxes and the older 240GB was made in Thailand and the newer 1TB is made in Mexico

      Jumping to conclusions = manufacturing in North/South America is much more expensive than SE Asia, therefore Micron cut some corners on the product quality to maintain and even reduce the end price

      • jabbathepom on 18/12/2022 - 00:57

        The insanity of it all was I asked the team that made these decisions why they chose the drives they did, and their answer was they were the only ones they could.purchase in bulk that were in stock, my reply what why do you think these were the only models left in stock during the pandemic, and could that indicate an issue? FML.

      • rhangman on 18/12/2022 - 11:12

        I have a MX500 250GB bought in 2018 and it was assembled in Mexico. Given the launch date was apparently Jan that year, would suggest that they've always been assembled there. Also no idea what they mean by assembled either. Flash likely came from Asia. The PCB might have been assembled there to, although given that is done by robots, shouldn't really make much difference in terms of quality or price. The metal case could have been pressed elsewhere to, with just the heat pads applied and the thing screwed together in Mexico.

      • Agret on 03/01/2023 - 23:43

        I upgrade roughly 10 PCs every 2 months from HDDs to MX500 500GB ssd and haven't had any failures over the past 3yrs. They're very good fast reliable drives. The BX500 are crap though, avoid BX line. If I can't get stock of MX500 I buy the WD Blue which is a pretty similar drive, little bit slower but not noticeably unless doing i/o intense stuff like Windows cumulative updates.

  • jaydee4 on 21/12/2022 - 21:24
    +1

    Please double check the item you get from Amazon Au, I just realised the MX500 1tb I got from the August deal actually says BX500 on the item. I double checked everything on my Amazon Au order and yes, I did order a MX500 1tb. Yes, shipped and sold from Amazon Au.

    edit: the barcode tag says mx500, the box itself says bx500. lol

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join