With improvements in lithography and NAND densities, the SSDs have been getting considerably cheaper in terms of better dollars per GB. For the SSDs available, Crucial has been one of the best options among the manufacturers for the enhanced mid-range performance of your computing requirements. We will compare the best options among the several SSDs brought ahead by Crucial. Yes, we are talking about the Crucial MX500 and Crucial P1. We will compare the two products and explore the functionalities offered by them.
Note: If you buy something from our links, we might earn a commission. See our disclosure statement.
Also Read: Crucial BX500 vs MX500 vs Kingston A400 Specifications Comparison
Before we get into the comparing of P1 vs MX500, let us look at a similar comparison below:
Table of Contents
M.2 2280 SSD
500 GB (SATA, M.2)
1 TB (SATA, M.2)
2 TB (SATA)
350 MB / s (240 GB)
450 MB / s (480 GB, 960 GB)
180 TB (500 GB)
360 TB (1 TB)
700 TB (2 TB)
80 TB (240 GB)
160 TB (480 GB)
300 TB (960 GB)
Crucial P1 is the first NVMe SSD from the brand. However, it is almost equivalent to the functions offered by the rival 64-layer 3D QLC flash and a Silicon Motion NVMe SSD controller. It helps you break the barrier suffered by the slower SATA interface throughput. You should have access to sequential throughput of up to around 2 GB per sec read and 1.7 GB per sec write speed options. Internally, it works almost similar to the SATA SSD offered by Crucial – named MX500.
The pricing should be pretty tricky, and the P1 is pretty competitive and a hard sell in the NVMe market. But, we found the application performance is subpar – especially given the pricing. For the average power consumption, it took around 2.5 W power for the file transfers. In the case of workloads, it should handle an excellent performance at approximately 1.7 GB per sec performance. You should find the transfer options better if you are transferring files from a faster device.
The Crucial NVMe P1 offers you a considerable performance in our read tests if you are looking at the transfer speeds. Of course, the drive may not be the fastest but performs well enough.
The best performance SSD and SATA drive compatibility would make it an excellent option for most of your requirements. Micron’s new 64-layer 3D NAND powers the Crucial MX500.
The drive is made available in four capacities and two different form factors. The model will be launched with a 1 TB capacity. The drive will be made available in the capacity of 250 GB. 500 GB, 1 TB and 2 TB capacities. The Crucial MX500 uses the SMI SM2258 controller. While the controller is older enough, Crucial claims that the Low-Density Parity-Check or LDPC has been capable enough to power 64 layer 3D NAND.
The storage executive software has been updated, and this is one of the improved options you will be observed on the new Crucial MX500. This can help you manage your drive and perform a wide range of security applications like Secure Erase. You will also have access to over-provisioning, which can help you with more space for the background operations.
Having checked out the two capable SSD drives and gone through the concise reviews to understand them, a few features are explained in a side-by-side comparison. This can be pretty helpful if you are checking out the options for enhanced performance and focussing on the specific characteristics –
Crucial P1 NVMe SSD
Check on Amazon – Model: CT500P1SSD8 | CT1000P2SSD8
Crucial MX500 SSD
Check on Amazon (CT500MX500SSD1)
1 GB for 1 TB
2 GB for 2 TB
512 MB for 500 GB
2 GB for 2 TB
2 GB per sec for 1 TB and 2 TB
1.7 GB per sec for 1 TB
1.75 GB per sec for 2 TB
170,000 IOPS for 1 TB
250,000 IOPS for 2 TB
240,000 IOPS for 1 TB
200 TBW for 10 TB
400 TBW for 2 TB
180 TBW for 500 GB
360 TBW for 10 TB
700 TBW for 2 TB
Under standard conditions, the MX500 has been observed to be offering a relatively good performance. In fact, under most of the normal conditions, both the Crucial P1 NVMe and Crucial MX500 were found to provide you access to almost similar experiences with a few minor differentiation.
We could not find a considerable difference between the two competing siblings for most practical purposes. Of course, the NVMe standard has been entirely new and may need a little getting used to. However, from the performance point of view and features thereof, we found them matching one another in most respects.
Of course, The Crucial P1 is comparatively high priced yet does not promise many application performance levels. Thus it may not be a practical option to go with, especially when you choose from Crucial itself in the SATA genre. We may need to wait until Crucial comes with a formidable opportunity for the best NVMe SSD drive.
Comments are closed.