Crucial MX300 750GB SSD Review

MSI Z170A Gaming M7 – Z170 Chipset
Intel Core i5 6600K (3.5Ghz) Quad Core 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache
Thermaltake Water 2.0 Performer
1x nVidia GTX 980Ti
2x GSKill TridentZ PC4-27700 8GB DDR4 (16-18-18-38)
HP dvd1260i Multiformat 24x Writer
Thermaltake Toughpower Grand 1050 Watt PSU
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit SP1

Storage Tested
Crucial MX300 SATA6 750GB SSD - CT750MX300SSD1

Reference Storage
HyperX Savage SATA6 240GB SSD - SHSS37A/240G

According to all of the documentation I have found 3D NAND is as fast if not faster than standard planar NAND meaning that the results of our benchmarks should be virtually identical to our reference drive.  The reference drive in this review is the HyperX Savage and is notably faster on paper but also quite a bit smaller.

Storage has been a performance bottleneck for years and one of the fastest ways to increase performance was to improve the storage subsystem.  SSDs are a great way to do this and Crucial makes it easy by including some drive imaging software from Acronis.

For the benchmarks I choose to give a mix of synthetic and real world tests that are both repeatable and should provide a good basis for comparison.  The problem is knowing exactly what people are looking for when choosing a storage solution.  While some sites might go into the timing ticks of the individual NAND chips or latency of the controller I find that to be a little too technical.  (says the reviewer who benchmarks CPUs down to the thousands of a second)

Bottom line, the format may change let me know what you would like to see.