Too bad those devices are soo clumsy - that SM2320 together with one NAND chip in a tiny package would result in an excellent small portable OS drive. Of course there would be thermal throttling, however that plastic case that crucial drive is shipped with doesn't seem to do a lot for thermals either...
The casing of the X9 Pro is anodized aluminum. Thermals are great (refer graphs in the final section). Can't expect anything better for this performance class given the constraints of the SM2320 (DRAM-less / native UFD)
I recently got a Transcend ESD310 and I friggin love it.
It gets a little warm, and it's not the fastest *SSD*, but it looks like a regular little USB flash drive, and it's performance blows away anything else that's a comparable size.
Also, it has a USB-A connector on one end and a USB-C connector on the other, so I can plug it into basically any computer (or recent Android device).
On a MacBook Pro 16 inch M1Pro this drive performs exactly like the X8. The sustained writes are about 300mb/s which is awful. The drive only performs well in benchmarks and it’s an upgrade to the X8. I’m extremely disappointed.
It performs great in regular usage. Most of our 'benchmarks' are real-world use-cases dealing with regular file transfers.
What file system is your X9 Pro formatted in? We tested with exFAT, and it should perform similarly in all OSes.
You should report your findings to Crucial support. Sustained write of 300 MBps for sequential workloads (large-sized file transfers) is not expected from the X9 Pro. Of course, if you are transferring lots of small-sized files (say 4KB to 64KB in size), then all bets are off.
I’m using the 4TB version formatted to APFS. I’m transferring folders with lots of raw camera files. Files range from 20 to 60MB in size and the folders are up to 350GB. I also find it odd that the Crucial software doesn’t support the X9 Pro drive yet. You think my drive is defective? If so I will return it.
20 - 60 MB is pretty large. You should be getting 600 MBps+ for those types of file sizes. I would say that you need to take it up with Crucial support and follow their advice on the return. I assume they will ask you to do some additional tests before branding the drive as defective. Since I don't have any experience with Apple systems, I am not sure where exactly the bottleneck is creeping in, but the support team probably will have more inputs.
Hi MiltzMan and Ganesh - Luke from Crucial/Micron here. I run a Macbook Air M1 myself; and while I am not in a position to really make authoritative comments on how Apple resources their USB/Thunderbolt ports; I can confirm that I personally have seen on my machine some less-than-USB-bus speeds on my M1 Air. Unfortunately I don't have a large enough internal SSD to do a similar comparison to your workload of 350GB large files; but just now I copied three folders each with 10GB of various linux distribution downloads, PSD's, zip files etc and achieved around 32.6GB transferred in 44 seconds; around 740MB/s on an APFS formatted X9 Pro. 300MB/s is abnormal; but as Ganesh alludes to, small files and filesystem overheads often become a large part. Please forgive the question; but are you sure there are no small files (hidden files, etc) that are being copied across that could be contributing to filesystem overhead?
Thank you for follow up Luke. I will need to do more tests to confirm what I’m seeing here. I am sure there are no other files just raw images. I will say that it’s very odd that anandtech didn’t even test this on the MAC which is a prime target for a product like this. Luke, will the X10 Pro run faster than a X9 Pro while being plugged into a MAC? I know it won’t get the 2,000MB/s speeds but I’m talking real world usage. I’m trying to understand if both the X10 and X9 have the same nand, and controller what is exactly the difference between the two drives?
For all intensive purposes, to date we have not seen the Crucial X10 Pro perform in a significantly different way over the Crucial X9 platform on Mac platforms. Today, both devices use Micron 176L TLC NAND, both have the same ASIC (SM2320). The Crucial X10 Pro has some additional thermal mass inside the enclosure to help absorb and wick heat away from the ASIC when in 20Gb/s mode (eagle eyes will notice a small weight difference published between X10 Pro and X9 Pro). In theory, this additional thermal mass may help the Crucial X10 Pro perform slightly better when it's being used for long periods of time or in high-ambient temperature environments on a 10Gb/s interface, but those use cases are not often enough to really call out in a major way to the market in my opinion. There are other in-the-ASIC differences relating to firmware that best balance/optimize performance with the physical constraints of the system/enclosure (size/thermals etc) for the USB speed (10Gb/s for X9 Pro, 20Gb/s for X10 Pro) the device can negotiate. There was an interesting thread on Appleinsider which covered USB 20Gb/s on Mac which you may want to investigate; with some claiming they can get USB 20Gb/s negotiating 20Gb/s on select Mac platforms.
We (Micron) think that USB 20Gb/s is a great solution for people that balances performance, power consumption and through ASIC like SM2320 breakthrough form factors as we demonstrated with the Crucial X10 Pro/Crucial X9 Pro. We believe it will be a few years until USB 40Gb/s class drives can hit similar type of value proposition; and until then Micron will advocate for and try our best to work with people like Intel, AMD and others to see more USB 20Gb/s adoption.
I have tested the X9 Pro (2 TB) with exFAT and APFS Encrypted formats on my MacBook Air M2, copying a folder of video files totaling over 700 GB, and I timed them. On exFAT, the speed averaged to about a bit over 950 MB/s, while on encrypted APFS it was slower at around 798 MB/s. Surprised at such high sustained speed for such file size transfer!
I'm having nothing but trouble with the X9 pro 2tb. On my USB 3.0 computers it alternates normal speeds to 40Mb/s speeds. You reboot you get 460Mb/s on my USB3.0 computers, which is fine. You reboot again, it switches to 40Mb/s. Is this a firmware issue? or should I return?
please note I'm using a USB-C to USB-A cable (actually I have two confirmed working with other ssds). I had a CrucialX8 drive that worked flawlessly with either computers and either cables. I'm suspecting either a firmware or hardware fault on the X9 pro.
Ok, I ordered and received a second X9 pro 2tb. It behaves like the first one. It appears on my Dell Z840 that some USB3.0 ports are consistent at 460Mb/s whereas a few others vary between 42/460 when plugging and unplugging the X9 on the same port.
Please note this does not happen with the X8 using the same ports and cables.
Could you kindly point me to the crucial support email address? I'd love to get in touch in the hope to help resolving this. Thanks
Try another cable in another port. Could be dirty contacts, plug has moved too much in socket so contacts don't line up, too much bending of wires in cable/plug so the wires break inside. Check temperatures of your USB drive & available power of port (is the USB port/power being shared by another device in adjacent port? Is there a USB hub in the way? (a note for other users, you said it was a direct connection).
thanks. Upon more testing, it's not the cable, I actually tried two separate cables with multiple devices (2 x X9 pro, X8, various mypassport drives) and the speed cap only happens with the X9 pro devices. And it only happens with the back ports of my Z840 and booting the PC with the X9 plugged in. Other devices are unaffected. Good news is that the front ports always work fine with the X9.
I since moved the X9 to the Pi400 as it was its planned use from the start, and it works beautifully. It even comes with trim enabled.
I still think the speed cap of 40-45Mb/s should be investigated and hopefully resolved in future firmware updates. If there is an email I could write to, I'd love to send Crucial logs and anything useful to help
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
18 Comments
Back to Article
ceisserer - Friday, August 18, 2023 - link
Too bad those devices are soo clumsy - that SM2320 together with one NAND chip in a tiny package would result in an excellent small portable OS drive. Of course there would be thermal throttling, however that plastic case that crucial drive is shipped with doesn't seem to do a lot for thermals either...ganeshts - Friday, August 18, 2023 - link
The casing of the X9 Pro is anodized aluminum. Thermals are great (refer graphs in the final section). Can't expect anything better for this performance class given the constraints of the SM2320 (DRAM-less / native UFD)meacupla - Friday, August 18, 2023 - link
62c after an extended run is pretty good.If it's hitting 80c, then I would start to worry.
dqniel - Friday, August 18, 2023 - link
Are we reading the same review? The thermals look good. Performance doesn't seem to degrade in their extended tests.nfriedly - Friday, August 18, 2023 - link
I recently got a Transcend ESD310 and I friggin love it.It gets a little warm, and it's not the fastest *SSD*, but it looks like a regular little USB flash drive, and it's performance blows away anything else that's a comparable size.
Also, it has a USB-A connector on one end and a USB-C connector on the other, so I can plug it into basically any computer (or recent Android device).
MiltzMan - Monday, August 21, 2023 - link
On a MacBook Pro 16 inch M1Pro this drive performs exactly like the X8. The sustained writes are about 300mb/s which is awful. The drive only performs well in benchmarks and it’s an upgrade to the X8. I’m extremely disappointed.ganeshts - Monday, August 21, 2023 - link
It performs great in regular usage. Most of our 'benchmarks' are real-world use-cases dealing with regular file transfers.What file system is your X9 Pro formatted in? We tested with exFAT, and it should perform similarly in all OSes.
You should report your findings to Crucial support. Sustained write of 300 MBps for sequential workloads (large-sized file transfers) is not expected from the X9 Pro. Of course, if you are transferring lots of small-sized files (say 4KB to 64KB in size), then all bets are off.
MiltzMan - Monday, August 21, 2023 - link
I’m using the 4TB version formatted to APFS. I’m transferring folders with lots of raw camera files. Files range from 20 to 60MB in size and the folders are up to 350GB. I also find it odd that the Crucial software doesn’t support the X9 Pro drive yet. You think my drive is defective? If so I will return it.ganeshts - Tuesday, August 22, 2023 - link
20 - 60 MB is pretty large. You should be getting 600 MBps+ for those types of file sizes. I would say that you need to take it up with Crucial support and follow their advice on the return. I assume they will ask you to do some additional tests before branding the drive as defective. Since I don't have any experience with Apple systems, I am not sure where exactly the bottleneck is creeping in, but the support team probably will have more inputs.Luke Ottrey - Wednesday, August 23, 2023 - link
Hi MiltzMan and Ganesh - Luke from Crucial/Micron here.I run a Macbook Air M1 myself; and while I am not in a position to really make authoritative comments on how Apple resources their USB/Thunderbolt ports; I can confirm that I personally have seen on my machine some less-than-USB-bus speeds on my M1 Air. Unfortunately I don't have a large enough internal SSD to do a similar comparison to your workload of 350GB large files; but just now I copied three folders each with 10GB of various linux distribution downloads, PSD's, zip files etc and achieved around 32.6GB transferred in 44 seconds; around 740MB/s on an APFS formatted X9 Pro.
300MB/s is abnormal; but as Ganesh alludes to, small files and filesystem overheads often become a large part. Please forgive the question; but are you sure there are no small files (hidden files, etc) that are being copied across that could be contributing to filesystem overhead?
MiltzMan - Thursday, August 24, 2023 - link
Thank you for follow up Luke. I will need to do more tests to confirm what I’m seeing here. I am sure there are no other files just raw images. I will say that it’s very odd that anandtech didn’t even test this on the MAC which is a prime target for a product like this. Luke, will the X10 Pro run faster than a X9 Pro while being plugged into a MAC? I know it won’t get the 2,000MB/s speeds but I’m talking real world usage. I’m trying to understand if both the X10 and X9 have the same nand, and controller what is exactly the difference between the two drives?Luke Ottrey - Friday, August 25, 2023 - link
Hi again MiltzMan,For all intensive purposes, to date we have not seen the Crucial X10 Pro perform in a significantly different way over the Crucial X9 platform on Mac platforms. Today, both devices use Micron 176L TLC NAND, both have the same ASIC (SM2320). The Crucial X10 Pro has some additional thermal mass inside the enclosure to help absorb and wick heat away from the ASIC when in 20Gb/s mode (eagle eyes will notice a small weight difference published between X10 Pro and X9 Pro). In theory, this additional thermal mass may help the Crucial X10 Pro perform slightly better when it's being used for long periods of time or in high-ambient temperature environments on a 10Gb/s interface, but those use cases are not often enough to really call out in a major way to the market in my opinion. There are other in-the-ASIC differences relating to firmware that best balance/optimize performance with the physical constraints of the system/enclosure (size/thermals etc) for the USB speed (10Gb/s for X9 Pro, 20Gb/s for X10 Pro) the device can negotiate. There was an interesting thread on Appleinsider which covered USB 20Gb/s on Mac which you may want to investigate; with some claiming they can get USB 20Gb/s negotiating 20Gb/s on select Mac platforms.
We (Micron) think that USB 20Gb/s is a great solution for people that balances performance, power consumption and through ASIC like SM2320 breakthrough form factors as we demonstrated with the Crucial X10 Pro/Crucial X9 Pro. We believe it will be a few years until USB 40Gb/s class drives can hit similar type of value proposition; and until then Micron will advocate for and try our best to work with people like Intel, AMD and others to see more USB 20Gb/s adoption.
honn13 - Sunday, October 29, 2023 - link
I have tested the X9 Pro (2 TB) with exFAT and APFS Encrypted formats on my MacBook Air M2, copying a folder of video files totaling over 700 GB, and I timed them. On exFAT, the speed averaged to about a bit over 950 MB/s, while on encrypted APFS it was slower at around 798 MB/s. Surprised at such high sustained speed for such file size transfer!luckyluca - Tuesday, September 5, 2023 - link
I'm having nothing but trouble with the X9 pro 2tb. On my USB 3.0 computers it alternates normal speeds to 40Mb/s speeds. You reboot you get 460Mb/s on my USB3.0 computers, which is fine. You reboot again, it switches to 40Mb/s. Is this a firmware issue? or should I return?luckyluca - Tuesday, September 5, 2023 - link
please note I'm using a USB-C to USB-A cable (actually I have two confirmed working with other ssds). I had a CrucialX8 drive that worked flawlessly with either computers and either cables.I'm suspecting either a firmware or hardware fault on the X9 pro.
luckyluca - Tuesday, September 5, 2023 - link
Ok, I ordered and received a second X9 pro 2tb. It behaves like the first one. It appears on my Dell Z840 that some USB3.0 ports are consistent at 460Mb/s whereas a few others vary between 42/460 when plugging and unplugging the X9 on the same port.Please note this does not happen with the X8 using the same ports and cables.
Could you kindly point me to the crucial support email address? I'd love to get in touch in the hope to help resolving this.
Thanks
tygrus - Wednesday, September 6, 2023 - link
Try another cable in another port. Could be dirty contacts, plug has moved too much in socket so contacts don't line up, too much bending of wires in cable/plug so the wires break inside.Check temperatures of your USB drive & available power of port (is the USB port/power being shared by another device in adjacent port? Is there a USB hub in the way? (a note for other users, you said it was a direct connection).
luckyluca - Friday, September 8, 2023 - link
thanks.Upon more testing, it's not the cable, I actually tried two separate cables with multiple devices (2 x X9 pro, X8, various mypassport drives) and the speed cap only happens with the X9 pro devices.
And it only happens with the back ports of my Z840 and booting the PC with the X9 plugged in.
Other devices are unaffected.
Good news is that the front ports always work fine with the X9.
I since moved the X9 to the Pi400 as it was its planned use from the start, and it works beautifully.
It even comes with trim enabled.
I still think the speed cap of 40-45Mb/s should be investigated and hopefully resolved in future firmware updates.
If there is an email I could write to, I'd love to send Crucial logs and anything useful to help
Best
Luca