I'll stop doing tests now. Just gonna monitor changes using Sentinel and Event Viewer. Thanks!
Should I be worried with these hard drive test results?
- Thread starter lochmarf
- Start date
Blame it on COVID keeping everybody cooped up with little else to do!
Stay diligent and healthy! Vaccines are coming! :)
I get this on hd sentinel, for my HDD seagate ST500DM002 (october 2012 ? ):
Read More:
Wow 8 years! We almost have the same SMART readings except with the temp (I really should get my laptop cleaned). Do you know if it has bad sectors?
Not sure, I get these values:
177,Wear Leveling Count,0,98,98,OK (Always passing),29
241,Total LBA Written,0,99,99,OK (Always passing),27409282440
No, I don't have bad sectors on the seagate hdd.
You can also compare your values with others if you click the world icon (the eight one, from right and from left).
There's a difference between bad sectors not used (SeaTools repaired) and the same bad sectors which of course still exist.
Quote: I'm not sure if I understand you. Do you mean those bad sectors that chkdsk found have been repaired already by SeaTools? So when I run chkdsk again it won't report anything under bad sectors anymore? Quote
Repaired is not the word. Skipped over purposely is what's happening. Not to get too technical, but there's a reserve of spare sectors. Once that gets used up, you can no longer substitute the good for the skipped. Better than when I started in this business when the repaired were kept as a file and I wasted time looking at a totally unusable string of garbage.
Repaired is not the word. Skipped over purposely is what's happening. Not to get too technical, but there's a reserve of spare sectors. Once that gets used up, you can no longer substitute the good for the skipped. Better than when I started in this business when the repaired were kept as a file and I wasted time looking at a totally unusable string of garbage.
If a sector has some physical flaw, it cannot be repaired. This may be due to an impurity in the materials, or a defect/damage caused during manufacturing. Either way, it is bad and always will be bad.
But a sector can be marked as bad for other reasons. Perhaps there was a formatting error, corrupt data in the file tables, or something else that caused it to be marked as bad in the tables at the factory or some time later.
A hard drive analysis tool like Seatools or Check Disk may analyze the sector again and discover it is good, just incorrectly marked as bad in the tables. It will update the tables to mark that sector available for use again. It did not "repair" the bad sector. It just found it was not bad after all.
But a sector can be marked as bad for other reasons. Perhaps there was a formatting error, corrupt data in the file tables, or something else that caused it to be marked as bad in the tables at the factory or some time later.
A hard drive analysis tool like Seatools or Check Disk may analyze the sector again and discover it is good, just incorrectly marked as bad in the tables. It will update the tables to mark that sector available for use again. It did not "repair" the bad sector. It just found it was not bad after all.
Not just to pile on this is much ado about nothing because we have some indication the drive has some bad sectors checkdisk may have dealt with
(hiding them from Windows basically) but where I stopped was the drive is 5 years old and there is nothing more important than preserving files and data and a 5 year old hard drive is just too old to feel good about regardless of what the tests say. athey are inexpoensive these days so time to move on if for no other reason than a hard drive lasted well for 5 years.
(hiding them from Windows basically) but where I stopped was the drive is 5 years old and there is nothing more important than preserving files and data and a 5 year old hard drive is just too old to feel good about regardless of what the tests say. athey are inexpoensive these days so time to move on if for no other reason than a hard drive lasted well for 5 years.
Hello. I'm back again. I just wanna ask if this is normal. My hard drive has 2 partitions, C and D. C is where Windows is installed. Copying from C to D is very fast. The average is 50 MB/s and it sometimes reaches 200 MB/s. Copying files from C to C is has the same speeds. Now, copying from D to C is extremely slow. It usually starts at 20+ MB/s then it goes down to usually 1 MB/s or slower. Same with copying from D to D. Something that only happens when copying from D to C is if the file is particularly large like 3 GB or bigger then the whole computer slows down. I can't launch applications. And the applications that I use while the transfer is happening lag too. I uninstalled my antivirus but the problem still persists. I'm not sure if this happened before Windows got fixed or when I ran those chkdsk because I don't usually exchange big files between the 2 partitions. I also tested copying a 2 GB file from my external drive to both C and D and the speeds were quite fast, about 50 MB/s to 100 MB/s.
I'm also getting these on Event Viewer. I'm not sure if they're related but they mention disk and C drive
And fortunately, the hard drive is still doing fine so far. No bad block logs on event viewer and no changes in SMART.
I'm also getting these on Event Viewer. I'm not sure if they're related but they mention disk and C drive
And fortunately, the hard drive is still doing fine so far. No bad block logs on event viewer and no changes in SMART.
britechguy
Well-known member
Bad Sectors Explained: Why Hard Drives Get Bad Sectors and What You Can Do About It
“A few bad sectors don’t indicate that a hard drive is about to fail — they can just happen. However, if your hard drive is rapidly developing bad sectors, it may be a sign that your hard drive is failing.”
What Is a bad sector and how can I repair it?
Bad sectors are fairly common with normal computer use and the imperfections of the world we live in . . .
The presence of a few bad sectors is of very little concern. What is of concern is if you have a bad sector count that is not stable and rising rapidly. It is not at all uncommon for a drive to develop a few bad sectors over its service lifetime (which, in my experience, generally exceeds 10 years for most of them) and they are designed to handle that eventuality.
The myth that a drive having developed a couple of bad sectors over time, with no change in count over long periods of time after any count change, being on death's door and in need of immediate replacement needs to die. It will also be interesting to see how this gets carried over to SSDs, as myths often do.
“A few bad sectors don’t indicate that a hard drive is about to fail — they can just happen. However, if your hard drive is rapidly developing bad sectors, it may be a sign that your hard drive is failing.”
What Is a bad sector and how can I repair it?
Bad sectors are fairly common with normal computer use and the imperfections of the world we live in . . .
The presence of a few bad sectors is of very little concern. What is of concern is if you have a bad sector count that is not stable and rising rapidly. It is not at all uncommon for a drive to develop a few bad sectors over its service lifetime (which, in my experience, generally exceeds 10 years for most of them) and they are designed to handle that eventuality.
The myth that a drive having developed a couple of bad sectors over time, with no change in count over long periods of time after any count change, being on death's door and in need of immediate replacement needs to die. It will also be interesting to see how this gets carried over to SSDs, as myths often do.
@britechguy
In my experience with spinners since 1995, you are exactly correct.
As with anything, there is always an exception. Those 2.5'' laptop Seagates are mostly (not all of them) good for about 5-7 years depending on use.
I quit using Seagate years ago based on experience and data. I went through 2 6TB Seagate on my surveillance system in 1.5 years, switched to WD, and haven't had an issue since. I lost a Seagate 8TB in my offsite NAS after 6 months, switched to WD, and haven't had an issue since. All drives mentioned were surveillance or NAS grade.
Then again, I had a 2TB Seagate as a backup drive in an old PC that lasted 10+ years.
Backblaze Hard Drive Stats
This is my 2cents only. I don't want to hijack the thread. :) We'll go to the lounge if more discussion is needed.
In my experience with spinners since 1995, you are exactly correct.
As with anything, there is always an exception. Those 2.5'' laptop Seagates are mostly (not all of them) good for about 5-7 years depending on use.
I quit using Seagate years ago based on experience and data. I went through 2 6TB Seagate on my surveillance system in 1.5 years, switched to WD, and haven't had an issue since. I lost a Seagate 8TB in my offsite NAS after 6 months, switched to WD, and haven't had an issue since. All drives mentioned were surveillance or NAS grade.
Then again, I had a 2TB Seagate as a backup drive in an old PC that lasted 10+ years.
Backblaze Hard Drive Stats
This is my 2cents only. I don't want to hijack the thread. :) We'll go to the lounge if more discussion is needed.
britechguy
Well-known member
Rob,
Well, it's absolutely certain that for all brands, over time, certain models have proven problematic. Some so much so that lawsuits ensued. I just want to make clear that my statements are about the general case. When known "problem children" are involved, one has to view things with a more jaundiced eye.
But the concept that the presence of bad sectors, in and of itself, indicates a drive in imminent or even not-so-imminent failure needed to die years ago. And I am shocked at how frequently it continues to be promulgated to this day. It's the rate of acquisition of bad sectors that is on the increase and over a short period of time that's the red flag. If your bad sector count ticks up by, say, one every couple of years, if that, you don't have a problem.
Well, it's absolutely certain that for all brands, over time, certain models have proven problematic. Some so much so that lawsuits ensued. I just want to make clear that my statements are about the general case. When known "problem children" are involved, one has to view things with a more jaundiced eye.
But the concept that the presence of bad sectors, in and of itself, indicates a drive in imminent or even not-so-imminent failure needed to die years ago. And I am shocked at how frequently it continues to be promulgated to this day. It's the rate of acquisition of bad sectors that is on the increase and over a short period of time that's the red flag. If your bad sector count ticks up by, say, one every couple of years, if that, you don't have a problem.
I think the age of the drive almost means more than the amount of bad sectors and the older the drive the more likely it will continue to produce bad sectors
and since the average used doe not backup anything regularly or even at all I like to use ther age of 5 years as my end of life for most hard drives though my experience to Brian is similar in that WD drives always last longer and again in my experience Seagates seldom make it that long.
and since the average used doe not backup anything regularly or even at all I like to use ther age of 5 years as my end of life for most hard drives though my experience to Brian is similar in that WD drives always last longer and again in my experience Seagates seldom make it that long.
Has Sysnative Forums helped you? Please consider donating to help us support the site!