MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB — Phison E7 MLC NVMe SSD (2026)

Name: MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB
Brand: MyDigitalSSD
SKU: mydigitalssd-bpx-120-gb
Rating: 3 (16 reviews)

Posted on May 17, 2026 by Raymond Chen

The MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB uses Toshiba 15nm MLC NAND — one of the last consumer MLC SSDs — giving it exceptional write endurance for its capacity and a niche following among enthusiasts building high-durability boot drives.

MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB — Phison E7 MLC NVMe SSD

Controller & Memory

The MyDigitalSSD BPX is built on the Phison PS5007-E7, an 8-channel PCIe 3.0 x4 controller that was Phison's first flagship NVMe platform, launched in 2016. What distinguishes the BPX from most consumer SSDs — then and now — is its use of Toshiba 15nm toggle MLC (2-bit-per-cell) NAND rather than the TLC (3-bit) or QLC (4-bit) flash used by the vast majority of consumer drives. MLC NAND offers higher write endurance per cell, better sustained write performance, and lower latency than TLC, at the cost of higher manufacturing cost per gigabyte. The BPX paired this MLC with a Nanya DDR3L DRAM cache, making it a premium-tier drive dressed in a budget brand's clothing.

The 120 GB variant is the entry-level capacity, with MyDigitalSSD also offering 240 GB and 480 GB versions. The smaller capacity uses fewer NAND dies, which reduces peak sequential write performance — the 120 GB model writes at up to 1,300 MB/s, compared to the 480 GB flagship's 1,600 MB/s. Where the 120 GB BPX shines is endurance: rated at 350 TBW, it can absorb an extraordinary amount of writes for a 120 GB drive — roughly 8 full drive writes per day over the 5-year warranty period. This made the BPX 120 GB popular among enthusiasts for use as a high-endurance boot drive or write-cache device in homelab and small-server deployments.

In its era, the BPX competed against early TLC NVMe drives like the Samsung 960 EVO and the Intel 600p. The 960 EVO offered faster sequential speeds and more capacity for the money, but the BPX's MLC NAND meant it sustained writes far better and carried a higher proportional endurance rating. The trade-off was cost per gigabyte — the BPX 120 GB was priced closer to TLC 250 GB drives. In 2026, the BPX 120 GB is a niche curiosity: too small for a primary drive, but its MLC endurance and 5-year warranty make it a sought-after used-market find for specialised small-write-intensive applications.

Storage Comparisons:

Top PCIe 3.0 SSD Drives Best Deal of 1 TB SSDs NVME Top 2 TB SSDs

BPX Performance & Benchmarks

MyDigitalSSD rates the BPX 120 GB at 2,600 MB/s sequential reads and 1,300 MB/s sequential writes. The read speed is competitive with early PCIe 3.0 x4 TLC drives, while the write speed reflects the reduced NAND die count of the 120 GB variant — the 480 GB model reaches 1,600 MB/s writes with more dies in parallel. Random performance is rated at up to 250,000 IOPS read and 210,000 IOPS write, figures that were near the top of the PCIe 3.0 consumer market in 2016–2017 and remain respectable today.

Performance comparison

MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB vs M.2 3.0 x 4 peers

Switch between sequential throughput and random IOPS to see how this drive stacks up against other M.2 3.0 x 4 SSDs in our database. The highlighted bar is the drive on this page — click any other bar to open that drive.

ADATA SX 8800 Pro 512 GB: 3,500 MB/s read, 2,700 MB/s write
ADATA SX 8800 Pro 1 TB: 3,500 MB/s read, 2,700 MB/s write
ADATA XPG Spectrix S40G RGB 256 GB: 3,500 MB/s read, 3,000 MB/s write
ADATA XPG Spectrix S40G RGB 512 GB: 3,500 MB/s read, 3,000 MB/s write
MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB (this drive): 2,600 MB/s read, 1,300 MB/s write

Where the BPX 120 GB differentiates itself from TLC contemporaries is sustained write performance. MLC NAND has a higher native write speed than TLC, meaning the drive relies less on SLC caching to maintain throughput. Once the SLC cache fills — which happens more quickly on a 120 GB drive due to the small total capacity — the BPX drops to its MLC native write speed rather than the much slower TLC native speed. The result is a smaller but less severe write cliff. For a boot drive handling OS and application workloads, this characteristic is rarely exercised. For a write-cache or logging drive, it is a meaningful advantage. The 8-channel E7 controller with Nanya DRAM keeps random I/O latency low, though the Phison E7's firmware was less refined than later E12 and E16 controllers — high queue-depth random performance can be inconsistent under sustained load.

MyDigitalSSD BPX vs Competitors

See how the BPX stacks up against other M.2 3.0 x 4 drives in our database:

Compare with rival drives:

ADATA XPG SX8000 128 GB Netac 930E 120 GB HP EX900 120 GB

Endurance, TBW & Warranty

MyDigitalSSD backs the BPX 120 GB with a 5-year limited warranty and rates endurance at 350 TBW — an exceptional figure for a 120 GB drive. To put this in perspective: 350 TBW on a 120 GB capacity means the drive is rated for roughly 2,900 full drive writes over its lifetime, or approximately 160 GB of writes per day over the 5-year warranty period. This is several times the endurance of typical 120–128 GB TLC SSDs from the same era, which often carried 40–80 TBW ratings. The MLC NAND is the enabling factor — MLC cells withstand far more program/erase cycles than TLC. MyDigitalSSD's warranty is US-based; international buyers should confirm coverage through their retailer. For niche applications like boot drives in write-intensive embedded systems or ZFS SLOG devices, the BPX 120 GB's endurance-to-capacity ratio remains compelling even in 2026.

MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB Specifications

Category	Value
Capacity [?]	120 GB
Interface [?]	M.2 3.0 x 4
Controller [?]	Phison 5007-E7
Memory type [?]	SanDisk MLC
DRAM [?]	512MB Nanya 512MB DDR3 1600 DRAM
Read speed (MB/s) [?]	2600
Write speed (MB/s) [?]	1300
Read IOPS [?]	150000
Write IOPS [?]	265000
Endurance (TBW) [?]	350
MTBF (million hours) [?]	2
Warranty (years) [?]	5

Verdict: Is the BPX Worth It in 2026?

The MyDigitalSSD BPX 120 GB is a relic of a brief window when MLC NAND was still viable in consumer SSDs — and that is precisely its appeal to the right buyer. Buy it on the used market if you need a small, high-endurance NVMe drive for a specialised role: a boot drive in a write-heavy embedded system, a cache device in a homelab server, or a collector's piece from the MLC era. The 350 TBW endurance for a 120 GB drive is exceptional, and the 5-year warranty (if still active) backs it up. Skip it for any general-purpose use — 120 GB is impractically small in 2026, the write speed is pedestrian, and a modern 256 GB TLC drive costs very little and offers more capacity. Skip it also if your system supports PCIe 4.0 — the interface gap is too large. For the enthusiast who appreciates what MLC brought to the table, the BPX 120 GB is a charming artifact. For everyone else, it is a historical footnote.

+ Pros

Toshiba 15nm MLC NAND — exceptional endurance for capacity
350 TBW endurance on a 120 GB drive — ~8 DWPD over 5 years
Phison E7 8-channel controller with Nanya DRAM cache
2,600 MB/s reads — competitive with early PCIe 3.0 TLC drives
5-year warranty — among the longest in the consumer market
MLC sustained write performance exceeds TLC alternatives

- Cons

120 GB capacity — impractically small for general use in 2026
1,300 MB/s writes — lower than larger capacities in the lineup
Phison E7 firmware less refined than later E12/E16 controllers
No PCIe 4.0 support — not PS5 compatible
Higher cost per gigabyte compared to TLC alternatives

3 / 5 · 16 votes

Buy this or similar SSD Storage:

Samsung 980 Pro 2 TB

-57% $165
List Price: $379.99

Buy on Amazon

INLAND Performance Plus 1 TB

$79.99

Buy on Amazon

Silicon Power 512GB NVMe SSD

$42.97

Buy on Amazon

Video Review

NVMe vs Sata iii - How much faster is it? - MyDigitalSSD BPX Review

Frequently Asked Questions

MLC (multi-level cell) NAND stores 2 bits per cell, compared to TLC (3 bits) and QLC (4 bits). Storing fewer bits per cell means MLC has higher write endurance, faster native write speeds, and lower latency than TLC or QLC — but at a higher manufacturing cost per gigabyte. The MyDigitalSSD BPX uses Toshiba 15nm toggle MLC, which was among the last consumer MLC NAND products before the industry shifted almost entirely to TLC. In practice, MLC means the BPX 120 GB can sustain writes with less reliance on SLC caching and carries a disproportionately high TBW endurance rating (350 TBW) for its small capacity.

The BPX 120 GB is rated at 350 TBW (terabytes written) — an exceptionally high figure for a 120 GB drive. This translates to roughly 2,900 full drive writes over the drive's lifetime, or approximately 160 GB of writes per day over the 5-year warranty period. For comparison, typical 120–128 GB TLC SSDs from the same era carried 40–80 TBW ratings. The high endurance is a direct benefit of the Toshiba MLC NAND. For write-intensive niche applications — boot drives in embedded systems, ZFS SLOG devices, write caches — the BPX 120 GB remains one of the most durable small-capacity consumer NVMe drives ever made.

It works as a pure OS boot drive in a PCIe 3.0 system, and the MLC NAND and DRAM cache deliver snappy responsiveness for Windows or Linux. However, 120 GB is extremely tight in 2026 — Windows 11 alone can consume 30–40 GB, leaving little room for applications, updates, and temporary files. If your use case is literally "OS only, everything else on a secondary drive," the BPX 120 GB handles it capably. For any scenario where you want to install applications or store files on the boot drive, even a cheap 256 GB TLC NVMe drive is a more practical choice.

No, the 120 GB variant is slower for sequential writes. The 120 GB model writes at up to 1,300 MB/s compared to the 480 GB model's 1,600 MB/s. Sequential read speed is identical at 2,600 MB/s across all capacities. The write speed difference is due to fewer NAND dies operating in parallel on the smaller capacity — a normal characteristic of SSDs. The 120 GB variant also has a smaller SLC cache in absolute terms, though the MLC NAND's higher native write speed means the post-cache write cliff is less severe than on TLC drives.

Yes. The BPX uses Nanya DDR3L DRAM via the Phison E7 controller. The DRAM cache size scales with capacity — the 480 GB variant carries 512 MB, and the 120 GB variant has a proportionally smaller allocation. The DRAM stores the flash translation layer mapping table, reducing random access latency and write amplification. Combined with MLC NAND, the DRAM cache helped the BPX deliver flagship-tier responsiveness for its era, particularly under mixed read/write workloads.

The Samsung 960 EVO was the BPX's primary competitor at launch. The 960 EVO used Samsung's 48-layer TLC V-NAND with a Polaris controller, delivering faster sequential speeds (3,200 MB/s reads, 1,800 MB/s writes) and more capacity for the money. The BPX countered with MLC NAND, which gave it superior sustained write performance after the SLC cache exhausted and a much higher proportional endurance rating (350 TBW for 120 GB vs the 960 EVO 250 GB's 100 TBW). In practice, the 960 EVO was the better all-around drive for most users. The BPX was the specialist's choice — better for write-intensive workloads, worse for capacity-hungry ones.

No, for multiple reasons. The PS5 requires a PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD with a minimum recommended read speed of 5,500 MB/s. The BPX uses PCIe 3.0 x4 and peaks at 2,600 MB/s reads — well below both requirements. Additionally, Sony recommends a minimum capacity of 250 GB for the expansion slot. The BPX 120 GB would be rejected by the console firmware even if the interface were compatible.