Crucial to Fix M4 BSOD Issue in Two Weeks

40 Comments

View All Comments

• Kristian Vättö - Monday, January 9, 2012 - link

  I don't want to sound like a partypooper but it's still missing on-time tests. This Crucial issue isn't about the amount of data that is written, it's purely on-time related (at least according to Crucial).
  
  Also, it would be better that all tests were done on the same machine and the SSDs were brand new. I know I sound boring again but benchmarks and other tests are just nitpicking. You can question all the results if they are not done under the same circumstances. The last thing we want is an egg on our face for reporting questionable results. We don't like rumors and sensationalism like some other sites do. If we aren't sure about something, we prefer leaving it out :-)

• bryanW1995 - Saturday, January 7, 2012 - link

  Well, that statement is "pretty much" right. Intel 320 series had the 8mb bug, sandforce 2200 has had a constant stream of issues, and now crucial m4 as well. The only ones left standing are samsung 830 (only 2 months out so far) and intel 510 series.

• piroroadkill - Sunday, January 8, 2012 - link

  Intel 320 isn't a 6Gbps drive, and since it has no other outstanding issues, and had its warranty upped to 5 years, I would safely bet that Intel 320 is currently the most reliable SSD available.

• TerdFerguson - Saturday, January 7, 2012 - link

  This is good criticism, and I hope the author takes note. Anandtech pushes SSDs /hard/, but I don't remember reading too much about the problems that plagued SF drives or any articles that gave appropriately detailed reports on which drives are known or reported to cause stability issues.

• Kristian Vättö - Saturday, January 7, 2012 - link

  I need to discuss with Anand but I do like the idea of "SSD Buyer's Guide" or something alike. I "run" an SSD sticky over at MacRumors and I've seen what people want is an SSD that won't cause troubles, which sometimes isn't easy due to the dozens of SandForce OEMs and whatnot.

• piroroadkill - Sunday, January 8, 2012 - link

  I don't think are Intel SSDs with Intel controllers at 6Gbps.

• webmastir - Friday, January 6, 2012 - link

  just got done setting up one of these when i read about it yesterday.

• Araemo - Friday, January 6, 2012 - link

  just that.. I almost bought the crucial M4 due to its slightly better price.. but the samsung has a better rep and better performance... so, here's hoping it deserves the rep *Knocks on wood*

• Belegost - Friday, January 6, 2012 - link

  Really think this is on the same level as the Intel 8mb bug, a non-issue unless you're one of the few who is experiencing it. I have a crucial M4, I'll put on the new firmware, and not worry. Good to see a quick effective response on the issue, overall I would prefer knowing that the company will proactively correct issuws .
  
  Looking at the time to fail though, 5200 hours roughly, when multiplied into seconds that's pretty close to 2^24, wonder if a debug counter set to 24bit integer to monitor up time is not being properly disabled...

• damianrobertjones - Friday, January 6, 2012 - link

  When the drive first arrived it suffered from the 'black screen' issue where a laptops/desktops bios initiated too fast for the M4 drive which ended up with a black screen. Soft reset and you could boot. (I experienced this on a HP 8460p).
  
  It took MONTHS for them to fix this issue... but they did in the end.
  
  I'm currently using a 128Gb M4 in my 2560p and NOW this new issue appears. Come on Crucial you're messing with people's DATA!