Crucial MX300 750GB SATA 2.5 Inch Internal Solid State Drive - CT750MX300SSD1 £109.99 @ Amazon [Prime Day] - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
-Sequential reads/writes up to 530 / 510 MB/s and random reads/writes up to 92k / 83k on all file types
-Over 90x more energy efficient than a typical hard drive
-Dynamic Write Acceleration delivers faster saves and file transfers
-More durable than a hard drive – no small moving parts that are prone to failure
-Best-in-class hardware encryption keeps data safe and secure
.
.
.
750GB @ £110 makes it 14.6p per GB if that matters to anyone

7mm thick in case anyone was wondering.
- omgpleasespamme
More From Amazon:
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
duckative Avatar
6m, 6d agoFound 6 months, 6 days ago
Options

All Comments

(33) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
1 Like #1
**** yeah got one this cheap af
1 Like #2
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.
3 Likes #3
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.

???????????????
#4
Accurate benchmarks:
Read: 400MB/s
Write: 450MB/s
#5
JimBobJr
Accurate benchmarks:
Read: 400MB/s
Write: 450MB/s

So still a bargain then. Thanks for that.
#6
Good price.
#7
Will do for me thanks OP
#8
Great deal :)

Edited By: ScoobyZ on Jul 12, 2016 08:25
2 Likes #9
Crucial, the company that took their SSDs and flushed them down the toilet
#10
works out at £35 for 240gb, just to make a comparison. Very cheap and with the advantage of a large ssd all in one. In reality crucial does not make any ssd anymore so no sure about quality but still cheap
1 Like #11
Are there any issues with these when transferring larger files or any other things worth knowing about? thanks.
1 Like #12
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.
Yes, apparently so.... Cheeky, I wonder how many people will buy this thinking it's MLC nand backed rather than the TLC garbage..
1 Like #13
was thinking of getting rid of my mx200 but after some searching my mx200 is still top of the crop

but a very nice price for those looking for a SSD
3 Likes #14
James_cleeve73
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.
Yes, apparently so.... Cheeky, I wonder how many people will buy this thinking it's MLC nand backed rather than the TLC garbage..

I take it you don't want no scrubs? :P
#15
James_cleeve73
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.
Yes, apparently so.... Cheeky, I wonder how many people will buy this thinking it's MLC nand backed rather than the TLC garbage..
Good point. Will skip this.
Trying to make my mind up between the 480GB Ultra II at £77
or the SSD Plus 240GB at 4pm (presumably around £40?)
#16
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.

???? and what is the difference between Mx and Bx????
#17
BigAde
James_cleeve73
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.
Yes, apparently so.... Cheeky, I wonder how many people will buy this thinking it's MLC nand backed rather than the TLC garbage..
Good point. Will skip this.
Trying to make my mind up between the 480GB Ultra II at £77
or the SSD Plus 240GB at 4pm (presumably around £40?)

I'm tempted / wondering too ... but can't help I'm afraid (just gonna watch this in case anyone else can!)
#18
Looks good for the price, review here http://www.anandtech.com/show/10274/the-crucial-mx300-750gb-ssd-review-microns-3d-nand-arrives

"One of the issues that Crucial will face is that despite being plus-one generation above the MX200, The MX300 is slightly slower and only by a small amount. It frequently straddles the dividing line between MLC performance and planar TLC performance."

Edited By: Jordan5963 on Jul 12, 2016 14:09
#19
BigAde
James_cleeve73
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.
Yes, apparently so.... Cheeky, I wonder how many people will buy this thinking it's MLC nand backed rather than the TLC garbage..
Good point. Will skip this.
Trying to make my mind up between the 480GB Ultra II at £77
or the SSD Plus 240GB at 4pm (presumably around £40?)

i use the ultra 2's a lot and they are good solid drives. but no doubt others will think they are crap and fail loads etc etc but my opinion is they are a good value drive.
#20
James_cleeve73
Glix
Don't be fooled by the Mx brand on this, it should be a Bx model.
Yes, apparently so.... Cheeky, I wonder how many people will buy this thinking it's MLC nand backed rather than the TLC garbage..

Probably only those wearing Anoraks
#21
Crucial is owned by a different company now if im right...thats for those being scared by past reputation.
#22
I ordered this just after midnight. I was looking at the 750 Evo or even paying a little more for an 850 Evo. My laptop HDD (1TB) died on Saturday. I couldn't live with 1 500GB drive (the 1TB Samsungs weren't discounted) so went for 750GB Crucial for £100 (I had the £10 Audible voucher from the other day) was too good to pass on.


I'll buy another external HDD for backups, but I'm happy.
#23
Hoping this will be a decent upgrade on my XBone HDD by using in an external USB3.0 enclosure. Any reason to think otherwise?
1 Like #24
c-traxx
Crucial is owned by a different company now if im right...thats for those being scared by past reputation.

Nope, they are owned by Micron.

Are you thinking of OCZ/Toshiba?
#25
saintee5876
Hoping this will be a decent upgrade on my XBone HDD by using in an external USB3.0 enclosure. Any reason to think otherwise?

I have a Samsung 840 256Gb SSD in an enclosure to use with my Xbox One and most games do get a significant improvement in speed, some load upto 2x faster and some games can see FPS improvements like Fallout 4 due to the large amount of texture streaming.

We could potentially get even better performance but as we can only connect via USB 3.0 and not SATA 3 we are limited to the speed of USB 3.0, but it's still a hell of a lot faster than the internal or external mechanical HDD.

I'm very tempted to buy one of these drives for my Xbox One as it's a pain having to keep moving things back and forth from the SSD to make room.
1 Like #26
Horrorwood
c-traxx
Crucial is owned by a different company now if im right...thats for those being scared by past reputation.

Nope, they are owned by Micron.

Are you thinking of OCZ/Toshiba?


​Sorry my bad ;)
#27
Jordan5963
Looks good for the price, review here http://www.anandtech.com/show/10274/the-crucial-mx300-750gb-ssd-review-microns-3d-nand-arrives
"One of the issues that Crucial will face is that despite being plus-one generation above the MX200, The MX300 is slightly slower and only by a small amount. It frequently straddles the dividing line between MLC performance and planar TLC performance."

Still a bargain then. Thanks for that.
#28
tfish
Jordan5963
Looks good for the price, review here http://www.anandtech.com/show/10274/the-crucial-mx300-750gb-ssd-review-microns-3d-nand-arrives
"One of the issues that Crucial will face is that despite being plus-one generation above the MX200, The MX300 is slightly slower and only by a small amount. It frequently straddles the dividing line between MLC performance and planar TLC performance."
Still a bargain then. Thanks for that.
does this suppose to be a really good one?


Edited By: miaomiaobaubau on Jul 12, 2016 20:12
#29
Was tempted, but after reading reviews and comments, not for me.

This is just one review

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/crucial-mx300-750gb-ssd,review-33577-3.html
1 Like #30
JimBobJr
Accurate benchmarks:
Read: 400MB/s
Write: 450MB/s
So still a bargain then. Thanks for that.

LOL, people, just STOP thinking about SSD using HDD categories. Compare IOPS and not sequential read/writes, which are Windows swap file read/writes practically nowadays. There are thousands of small files, and not one 10 GB file in your system.

400/450 MB/s shows just ONE parameter: how close to SATA-3 saturation the drive is. Closer (better overall quality), or farer (cheaper option), that's all you can read between the lines as sequential RWs do not matter really with SATA simply because all of them are near physical limits.


Edited By: biuro74 on Jul 13, 2016 00:51
#31
biuro74
LOL, people, just STOP thinking about SSD using HDD categories. Compare IOPS and not sequential read/writes, which are Windows swap file read/writes practically nowadays. There are thousands of small files, and not one 10 GB file in your system.
400/450 MB/s shows just ONE parameter: how close to SATA-3 saturation the drive is. Closer (better overall quality), or farer (cheaper option), that's all you can read between the lines as sequential RWs do not matter really with SATA simply because all of them are near physical limits.
All this talk of benchmarks avoids the real question that should be asked - how much difference between an SSD is actually going to make a difference to someone using it?

It's very noticable that reviews never address this properly, but give lots of nice numbers which could mean nothing in the real world.
#32
even the oldest ssd (connected on sata 2 or even 1) would take the same loading times and perform the same on the desktop as the most expensive sata3 ssd in the market on a sata 3 connection. Sequential power is not an issue at all for everyday use and who cares if I need to wait few extra seconds to transfer a large file.
#33
cloned drive to SSD...and boot speed now about 1/3 of old HDD!
using win7

happy days! 8)

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!