Re: My new Seagate hard drive

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by impossible, Jun 6, 2008.

  1. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "Nighthawk" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Last night I installed a new Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 160GB IDE hard
    > drive (slave) on my PC. On first bootup I checked it with SpeedFan
    > which gave a 97% for fitness and 98% for performance, same as my
    > 3-year-old Samsung gives now, which was 100%/100% when new. Then I
    > benchmarked it with SiSoft Sandra. It came up a touch faster than the
    > older Samsung, though it does run hotter.
    >
    > Then this evening I checked the drive again with SpeedFan and find
    > that fitness and performance have both dropped to 91%. Did the online
    > evaluation and it said everything was fine. I was somewhat alarmed at
    > the drop in score, must keep my eye on that one for a while. But my
    > respect for the Samsung hard drives goes up.
    >
    > Fortunately, the way it is being used will mean that it will be
    > unplugged a lot of the time.
    >
    >


    Ignore the SpeedFan "fitness and performance" results. They are absolutely
    meaningless. Either your drive gets a SMART "pass or a SMART "fail" --
    that's it. SpeedFan tries to guess what the rest of the SMART numbers mean
    and what they ought to be in a healthy drive. But those numbers are
    manufacturer-specific, model-specific, and even firmware version-specific.
    None are ever published as specifications around which someone could build a
    reliable piece of software around, and the cost of reverse engineering such
    numbers from a representative sample of every drive would be prohibitive.

    Rather than sweat the SpeedFan numbers, you should just be sure that your
    drives never get either too hot or too cold and that you have a data backup
    system in place. Seagate drives comes with a long (5-year) and well-managed
    (i.e, customer friendly) warranty. If your drive fails you for any reason,
    you just return it to Seagate (at their expense) and they'll run the same
    SMART pass-fail test on it that your motherboard is probably equipped to run
    for you. A pass is a pass, a fail is fail (no quibbling over degrees of
    either) and a fail means that Seagate ships you a replacement (again at
    their expense).
    impossible, Jun 6, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. impossible

    ~misfit~ Guest

    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Nighthawk" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Last night I installed a new Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 160GB IDE
    >>> hard drive (slave) on my PC. On first bootup I checked it with
    >>> SpeedFan which gave a 97% for fitness and 98% for performance, same
    >>> as my 3-year-old Samsung gives now, which was 100%/100% when new. Then I
    >>> benchmarked it with SiSoft Sandra. It came up a touch
    >>> faster than the older Samsung, though it does run hotter.
    >>>
    >>> Then this evening I checked the drive again with SpeedFan and find
    >>> that fitness and performance have both dropped to 91%. Did the
    >>> online evaluation and it said everything was fine. I was somewhat
    >>> alarmed at the drop in score, must keep my eye on that one for a
    >>> while. But my respect for the Samsung hard drives goes up.
    >>>
    >>> Fortunately, the way it is being used will mean that it will be
    >>> unplugged a lot of the time.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Ignore the SpeedFan "fitness and performance" results. They are
    >> absolutely meaningless. Either your drive gets a SMART "pass or a
    >> SMART "fail" -- that's it. SpeedFan tries to guess what the rest of
    >> the SMART numbers mean and what they ought to be in a healthy drive.
    >> But those numbers are manufacturer-specific, model-specific, and
    >> even firmware version-specific. None are ever published as
    >> specifications around which someone could build a reliable piece of
    >> software around, and the cost of reverse engineering such numbers
    >> from a representative sample of every drive would be prohibitive. Rather
    >> than sweat the SpeedFan numbers, you should just be sure that
    >> your drives never get either too hot or too cold and that you have a
    >> data backup system in place. Seagate drives comes with a long
    >> (5-year) and well-managed (i.e, customer friendly) warranty. If your
    >> drive fails you for any reason, you just return it to Seagate (at
    >> their expense) and they'll run the same SMART pass-fail test on it
    >> that your motherboard is probably equipped to run for you. A pass is
    >> a pass, a fail is fail (no quibbling over degrees of either) and a
    >> fail means that Seagate ships you a replacement (again at their
    >> expense).


    Interesting that you not only think that, you erroneously speak out as if
    you actually know what you're talking about.

    I'll give you a couple examples to show you that your 'pass or fail, no
    quibbling over degrees of either' is patently wrong.

    A good S.M.A.R.T. analysis programme like Hard Disk Sentinel, can give you
    far more than the info *you* think is available (pass/fail).

    Example one: Machine hanging at 'detecting IDE devices', needing reset
    pushed, sometimes several times. I replaced the IDE cable, re-plugged the
    molex (after checking that the PSU was suitable and seemed fine) and
    installed HDS on the machine. I went back to look at it a week or two later
    as the owner reported problem not fixed.

    HDS told me this:

    http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797435.jpg

    amongst other things. Turned out that the lead with the molex on that was
    being used had a dry solder joint in the PSU.

    Case 2. I friend bought me a fairly new locally-built machine (Phenom 9500
    quad, nVidia 9600GT) that kept crashing. On investigation I decided that the
    PSU was underpowered (single 18A 12V rail!) and replaced it with a better
    suited unit. Out of curiousity, and seeing what intermittent power could do
    to a HDD, I installed HDS on it and it came back with this:

    http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797718.jpg

    which confirmed my diagnosis of underspeced PSU and may yet be used as
    evidence in a claim for a replacement drive from the idiots who built and
    sold this machine with a patheticly gutless PSU fitted.

    So.... If HDS isn't getting this info from S.M.A.R.T. then where does it
    come from?
    --
    Shaun.

    DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
    offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
    If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
    me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)
    ~misfit~, Jun 7, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "~misfit~" <> wrote in message
    news:4849d513$...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> "Nighthawk" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Last night I installed a new Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 160GB IDE
    >>>> hard drive (slave) on my PC. On first bootup I checked it with
    >>>> SpeedFan which gave a 97% for fitness and 98% for performance, same
    >>>> as my 3-year-old Samsung gives now, which was 100%/100% when new. Then
    >>>> I benchmarked it with SiSoft Sandra. It came up a touch
    >>>> faster than the older Samsung, though it does run hotter.
    >>>>
    >>>> Then this evening I checked the drive again with SpeedFan and find
    >>>> that fitness and performance have both dropped to 91%. Did the
    >>>> online evaluation and it said everything was fine. I was somewhat
    >>>> alarmed at the drop in score, must keep my eye on that one for a
    >>>> while. But my respect for the Samsung hard drives goes up.
    >>>>
    >>>> Fortunately, the way it is being used will mean that it will be
    >>>> unplugged a lot of the time.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Ignore the SpeedFan "fitness and performance" results. They are
    >>> absolutely meaningless. Either your drive gets a SMART "pass or a
    >>> SMART "fail" -- that's it. SpeedFan tries to guess what the rest of
    >>> the SMART numbers mean and what they ought to be in a healthy drive.
    >>> But those numbers are manufacturer-specific, model-specific, and
    >>> even firmware version-specific. None are ever published as
    >>> specifications around which someone could build a reliable piece of
    >>> software around, and the cost of reverse engineering such numbers
    >>> from a representative sample of every drive would be prohibitive. Rather
    >>> than sweat the SpeedFan numbers, you should just be sure that
    >>> your drives never get either too hot or too cold and that you have a
    >>> data backup system in place. Seagate drives comes with a long
    >>> (5-year) and well-managed (i.e, customer friendly) warranty. If your
    >>> drive fails you for any reason, you just return it to Seagate (at
    >>> their expense) and they'll run the same SMART pass-fail test on it
    >>> that your motherboard is probably equipped to run for you. A pass is
    >>> a pass, a fail is fail (no quibbling over degrees of either) and a
    >>> fail means that Seagate ships you a replacement (again at their
    >>> expense).

    >
    > Interesting that you not only think that, you erroneously speak out as if
    > you actually know what you're talking about.
    >
    > I'll give you a couple examples to show you that your 'pass or fail, no
    > quibbling over degrees of either' is patently wrong.
    >
    > A good S.M.A.R.T. analysis programme like Hard Disk Sentinel, can give you
    > far more than the info *you* think is available (pass/fail).
    >
    > Example one: Machine hanging at 'detecting IDE devices', needing reset
    > pushed, sometimes several times. I replaced the IDE cable, re-plugged the
    > molex (after checking that the PSU was suitable and seemed fine) and
    > installed HDS on the machine. I went back to look at it a week or two
    > later as the owner reported problem not fixed.
    >
    > HDS told me this:
    >
    > http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797435.jpg
    >
    > amongst other things. Turned out that the lead with the molex on that was
    > being used had a dry solder joint in the PSU.
    >
    > Case 2. I friend bought me a fairly new locally-built machine (Phenom 9500
    > quad, nVidia 9600GT) that kept crashing. On investigation I decided that
    > the PSU was underpowered (single 18A 12V rail!) and replaced it with a
    > better suited unit. Out of curiousity, and seeing what intermittent power
    > could do to a HDD, I installed HDS on it and it came back with this:
    >
    > http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797718.jpg
    >
    > which confirmed my diagnosis of underspeced PSU and may yet be used as
    > evidence in a claim for a replacement drive from the idiots who built and
    > sold this machine with a patheticly gutless PSU fitted.
    >
    > So.... If HDS isn't getting this info from S.M.A.R.T. then where does it
    > come from?
    > --


    HDS greatly exaggerates its ability to interpret SMART data, just as
    Speedfan does. SMART doesn't provide a "Health(%)" measure of any kind, and
    it doesn't guess the "remaining lifetime" of a drive. These are inventions
    of the programs' designers, who are trying to sell you something.

    SMART provide the following information : (1) spin up time (2) start/stop
    count (3) reallocated sector count (4) seek error rate (5) seek time
    performance (6) power-on hours count (7) spin retry count (8) device power
    cycle count (9) power-off retract count. But for purposes of interpretation
    these measures are, as I said, manufacturer-specific, model-specific, and
    even firmware version-specific. Neither HDS nor SpeedFan are privy to this
    information, because the manufacturers never release it. SMART is useful,
    because when it reports a "fail" state then you know that the death of the
    drive is imminent. But no amount of boilerplate "analysis" that a programmer
    hard codes into some app is going to enlighten you one bit more as to when
    that failure is likely to occur.
    impossible, Jun 7, 2008
    #3
  4. impossible

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarweb "Nighthawk" typed:
    > On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 06:18:35 GMT, "impossible" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "~misfit~" <> wrote in message
    >> news:4849d513$...
    >>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>> "Nighthawk" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> Last night I installed a new Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 160GB IDE
    >>>>>> hard drive (slave) on my PC. On first bootup I checked it with
    >>>>>> SpeedFan which gave a 97% for fitness and 98% for performance,
    >>>>>> same as my 3-year-old Samsung gives now, which was 100%/100%
    >>>>>> when new. Then I benchmarked it with SiSoft Sandra. It came up
    >>>>>> a touch
    >>>>>> faster than the older Samsung, though it does run hotter.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Then this evening I checked the drive again with SpeedFan and
    >>>>>> find that fitness and performance have both dropped to 91%. Did
    >>>>>> the online evaluation and it said everything was fine. I was
    >>>>>> somewhat alarmed at the drop in score, must keep my eye on that
    >>>>>> one for a while. But my respect for the Samsung hard drives
    >>>>>> goes up.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Fortunately, the way it is being used will mean that it will be
    >>>>>> unplugged a lot of the time.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Ignore the SpeedFan "fitness and performance" results. They are
    >>>>> absolutely meaningless. Either your drive gets a SMART "pass or a
    >>>>> SMART "fail" -- that's it. SpeedFan tries to guess what the rest
    >>>>> of
    >>>>> the SMART numbers mean and what they ought to be in a healthy
    >>>>> drive. But those numbers are manufacturer-specific,
    >>>>> model-specific, and
    >>>>> even firmware version-specific. None are ever published as
    >>>>> specifications around which someone could build a reliable piece
    >>>>> of software around, and the cost of reverse engineering such
    >>>>> numbers
    >>>>> from a representative sample of every drive would be prohibitive.
    >>>>> Rather than sweat the SpeedFan numbers, you should just be sure
    >>>>> that
    >>>>> your drives never get either too hot or too cold and that you
    >>>>> have a data backup system in place. Seagate drives comes with a
    >>>>> long (5-year) and well-managed (i.e, customer friendly) warranty.
    >>>>> If your drive fails you for any reason, you just return it to
    >>>>> Seagate (at
    >>>>> their expense) and they'll run the same SMART pass-fail test on it
    >>>>> that your motherboard is probably equipped to run for you. A pass
    >>>>> is
    >>>>> a pass, a fail is fail (no quibbling over degrees of either) and a
    >>>>> fail means that Seagate ships you a replacement (again at their
    >>>>> expense).
    >>>
    >>> Interesting that you not only think that, you erroneously speak out
    >>> as if you actually know what you're talking about.
    >>>
    >>> I'll give you a couple examples to show you that your 'pass or
    >>> fail, no quibbling over degrees of either' is patently wrong.
    >>>
    >>> A good S.M.A.R.T. analysis programme like Hard Disk Sentinel, can
    >>> give you far more than the info *you* think is available
    >>> (pass/fail).
    >>>
    >>> Example one: Machine hanging at 'detecting IDE devices', needing
    >>> reset pushed, sometimes several times. I replaced the IDE cable,
    >>> re-plugged the molex (after checking that the PSU was suitable and
    >>> seemed fine) and installed HDS on the machine. I went back to look
    >>> at it a week or two later as the owner reported problem not fixed.
    >>>
    >>> HDS told me this:
    >>>
    >>> http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797435.jpg
    >>>
    >>> amongst other things. Turned out that the lead with the molex on
    >>> that was being used had a dry solder joint in the PSU.
    >>>
    >>> Case 2. I friend bought me a fairly new locally-built machine
    >>> (Phenom 9500 quad, nVidia 9600GT) that kept crashing. On
    >>> investigation I decided that the PSU was underpowered (single 18A
    >>> 12V rail!) and replaced it with a better suited unit. Out of
    >>> curiousity, and seeing what intermittent power could do to a HDD, I
    >>> installed HDS on it and it came back with this:
    >>>
    >>> http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797718.jpg
    >>>
    >>> which confirmed my diagnosis of underspeced PSU and may yet be used
    >>> as evidence in a claim for a replacement drive from the idiots who
    >>> built and sold this machine with a patheticly gutless PSU fitted.
    >>>
    >>> So.... If HDS isn't getting this info from S.M.A.R.T. then where
    >>> does it come from?
    >>> --

    >>
    >> HDS greatly exaggerates its ability to interpret SMART data, just as
    >> Speedfan does. SMART doesn't provide a "Health(%)" measure of any
    >> kind, and it doesn't guess the "remaining lifetime" of a drive.
    >> These are inventions of the programs' designers, who are trying to
    >> sell you something.


    No shit Sherlock? That'll be why the help file in HDS explains all that
    then.

    >> SMART provide the following information : (1) spin up time (2)
    >> start/stop count (3) reallocated sector count (4) seek error rate
    >> (5) seek time performance (6) power-on hours count (7) spin retry
    >> count (8) device power cycle count (9) power-off retract count. But
    >> for purposes of interpretation these measures are, as I said,
    >> manufacturer-specific, model-specific, and even firmware
    >> version-specific. Neither HDS nor SpeedFan are privy to this
    >> information, because the manufacturers never release it.


    However, clever programmers might well be able to reverse-engineer it and
    learn how to read those x-specific parameters. Especially if they have a
    large installed user base and ask the users to allow reporting. (Duh.)

    >> SMART is
    >> useful, because when it reports a "fail" state then you know that
    >> the death of the drive is imminent.


    Jesus but you really are full of it aren't you? I have a HDD that's had a
    "fail" state of 17 reallocated sectors that's been fine, in constant use,
    (it houses my bittorrent save folder) for three years. What is your
    definition of imminent?

    >> But no amount of boilerplate
    >> "analysis" that a programmer hard codes into some app is going to
    >> enlighten you one bit more as to when that failure is likely to
    >> occur.


    Yeah, whatever. Any data set logged over time can be extrapolated to give
    likely outcomes.

    (This is why, when I can be bothered. I reply to you through someone else's
    post. You're so arrogant I killfiled you.)

    > Has anyone tried the free DOS and Linux versions of HDS?


    No, I haven't. All my machines run Windows currently so that's the version I
    use. IMO the logging of data over time is one of the most useful aspects of
    HDS. The only times I boot into Linux is via live CD or USB stick. Actually,
    I suppose I could try to install it on the USB version although I'm finding
    it a bit of a challenge as it is. I'm not much of a Linux person I'm afraid.

    I daresay that the DOS version would still report "found faults" such as
    reallocated sectors..

    It's free, why don't you give it a whirl and let us know. <g>

    Cheers,
    --
    Shaun.

    DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
    offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
    If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
    me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)
    ~misfit~, Jun 7, 2008
    #4
  5. impossible

    impossible Guest

    "~misfit~" <> wrote in message
    news:484a8480$...
    > Somewhere on teh intarweb "Nighthawk" typed:
    >> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 06:18:35 GMT, "impossible" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "~misfit~" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:4849d513$...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>> "Nighthawk" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> Last night I installed a new Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 160GB IDE
    >>>>>>> hard drive (slave) on my PC. On first bootup I checked it with
    >>>>>>> SpeedFan which gave a 97% for fitness and 98% for performance,
    >>>>>>> same as my 3-year-old Samsung gives now, which was 100%/100%
    >>>>>>> when new. Then I benchmarked it with SiSoft Sandra. It came up
    >>>>>>> a touch
    >>>>>>> faster than the older Samsung, though it does run hotter.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Then this evening I checked the drive again with SpeedFan and
    >>>>>>> find that fitness and performance have both dropped to 91%. Did
    >>>>>>> the online evaluation and it said everything was fine. I was
    >>>>>>> somewhat alarmed at the drop in score, must keep my eye on that
    >>>>>>> one for a while. But my respect for the Samsung hard drives
    >>>>>>> goes up.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Fortunately, the way it is being used will mean that it will be
    >>>>>>> unplugged a lot of the time.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Ignore the SpeedFan "fitness and performance" results. They are
    >>>>>> absolutely meaningless. Either your drive gets a SMART "pass or a
    >>>>>> SMART "fail" -- that's it. SpeedFan tries to guess what the rest
    >>>>>> of
    >>>>>> the SMART numbers mean and what they ought to be in a healthy
    >>>>>> drive. But those numbers are manufacturer-specific,
    >>>>>> model-specific, and
    >>>>>> even firmware version-specific. None are ever published as
    >>>>>> specifications around which someone could build a reliable piece
    >>>>>> of software around, and the cost of reverse engineering such
    >>>>>> numbers
    >>>>>> from a representative sample of every drive would be prohibitive.
    >>>>>> Rather than sweat the SpeedFan numbers, you should just be sure
    >>>>>> that
    >>>>>> your drives never get either too hot or too cold and that you
    >>>>>> have a data backup system in place. Seagate drives comes with a
    >>>>>> long (5-year) and well-managed (i.e, customer friendly) warranty.
    >>>>>> If your drive fails you for any reason, you just return it to
    >>>>>> Seagate (at
    >>>>>> their expense) and they'll run the same SMART pass-fail test on it
    >>>>>> that your motherboard is probably equipped to run for you. A pass
    >>>>>> is
    >>>>>> a pass, a fail is fail (no quibbling over degrees of either) and a
    >>>>>> fail means that Seagate ships you a replacement (again at their
    >>>>>> expense).
    >>>>
    >>>> Interesting that you not only think that, you erroneously speak out
    >>>> as if you actually know what you're talking about.
    >>>>
    >>>> I'll give you a couple examples to show you that your 'pass or
    >>>> fail, no quibbling over degrees of either' is patently wrong.
    >>>>
    >>>> A good S.M.A.R.T. analysis programme like Hard Disk Sentinel, can
    >>>> give you far more than the info *you* think is available
    >>>> (pass/fail).
    >>>>
    >>>> Example one: Machine hanging at 'detecting IDE devices', needing
    >>>> reset pushed, sometimes several times. I replaced the IDE cable,
    >>>> re-plugged the molex (after checking that the PSU was suitable and
    >>>> seemed fine) and installed HDS on the machine. I went back to look
    >>>> at it a week or two later as the owner reported problem not fixed.
    >>>>
    >>>> HDS told me this:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797435.jpg
    >>>>
    >>>> amongst other things. Turned out that the lead with the molex on
    >>>> that was being used had a dry solder joint in the PSU.
    >>>>
    >>>> Case 2. I friend bought me a fairly new locally-built machine
    >>>> (Phenom 9500 quad, nVidia 9600GT) that kept crashing. On
    >>>> investigation I decided that the PSU was underpowered (single 18A
    >>>> 12V rail!) and replaced it with a better suited unit. Out of
    >>>> curiousity, and seeing what intermittent power could do to a HDD, I
    >>>> installed HDS on it and it came back with this:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://test.internet-webmaster.de/upload/1212797718.jpg
    >>>>
    >>>> which confirmed my diagnosis of underspeced PSU and may yet be used
    >>>> as evidence in a claim for a replacement drive from the idiots who
    >>>> built and sold this machine with a patheticly gutless PSU fitted.
    >>>>
    >>>> So.... If HDS isn't getting this info from S.M.A.R.T. then where
    >>>> does it come from?
    >>>> --
    >>>
    >>> HDS greatly exaggerates its ability to interpret SMART data, just as
    >>> Speedfan does. SMART doesn't provide a "Health(%)" measure of any
    >>> kind, and it doesn't guess the "remaining lifetime" of a drive.
    >>> These are inventions of the programs' designers, who are trying to
    >>> sell you something.

    >
    > No shit Sherlock? That'll be why the help file in HDS explains all that
    > then.
    >


    Explains what? That the programmer's have invented their "Health(%)"
    measure? That they're simply guessing about how long the drive wil last?
    That none of that information comes from SMART? Then what's your point?

    >>> SMART provide the following information : (1) spin up time (2)
    >>> start/stop count (3) reallocated sector count (4) seek error rate
    >>> (5) seek time performance (6) power-on hours count (7) spin retry
    >>> count (8) device power cycle count (9) power-off retract count. But
    >>> for purposes of interpretation these measures are, as I said,
    >>> manufacturer-specific, model-specific, and even firmware
    >>> version-specific. Neither HDS nor SpeedFan are privy to this
    >>> information, because the manufacturers never release it.

    >
    > However, clever programmers might well be able to reverse-engineer it and
    > learn how to read those x-specific parameters. Especially if they have a
    > large installed user base and ask the users to allow reporting. (Duh.)
    >


    That's the claim, yes. But have you seen any actual data to back this claim
    up? How many users running Speedfan or HDS have gotten a better prediction
    of drive failure from these products than from the SMART installed on their
    motherboard? How many users have ditched perfectly good drives because HDS
    misinterpreted one parameter and raised a failure flag when there was never
    actually any problem? How many users have lost valued time (or data) because
    they ignored a SMART warning of imminent failure and trusted HDS to see them
    through for each and every one of the "47 days" they were told the drive
    would live at precisely "56%" of health ?

    >>> SMART is
    >>> useful, because when it reports a "fail" state then you know that
    >>> the death of the drive is imminent.

    >
    > Jesus but you really are full of it aren't you? I have a HDD that's had a
    > "fail" state of 17 reallocated sectors that's been fine, in constant use,
    > (it houses my bittorrent save folder) for three years. What is your
    > definition of imminent?
    >


    Did SMART actually fail the drive and issue a warning? Or was that you --
    or SpeedFan or HDS -- (mis) interpreting the sector reallocation count in
    and of itself as a "fail" condition?

    >>> But no amount of boilerplate
    >>> "analysis" that a programmer hard codes into some app is going to
    >>> enlighten you one bit more as to when that failure is likely to
    >>> occur.

    >
    > Yeah, whatever. Any data set logged over time can be extrapolated to give
    > likely outcomes.
    >


    And you've seen the data set? And you're familiar with the methodology used
    to handle the extrapolation? No, I didn't think so.

    > (This is why, when I can be bothered. I reply to you through someone
    > else's post. You're so arrogant I killfiled you.)
    >


    Plonkers like you always return. Sad to say, you still argue by way of
    personal anecdote rather than reason.
    impossible, Jun 7, 2008
    #5
  6. impossible

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarweb "Max Burke" typed:
    > I thought I'd give HDS a spin....
    > Downloaded and installed it.
    >
    > First problem. It cant read/identify/test any of the 5 external
    > Seagate drives I have hooked up through USB2 ports.


    AFAIK there aren't any monitoring apps that can read S.M.A.R.T. data over
    USB. Did Seatools work on these drives?

    > Interesting results on the two internal 80GB Seagate drives (both of
    > the same type, and with the same firmware)...
    >
    > I have speed fan as well, and it's Smart report says there's nothing
    > wrong with these drives on this computer.
    >
    > So I let HDS do it's thing.
    > It says the primary drive is *perfect,* 100%, no failed sectors, no
    > moved/replaced sectors, there cant possibly be anything at all wrong
    > with this drive!
    >
    > Then it 'tests' the secondary drive.
    > WOW!!!!!! Alarm bells, red flashing lights, this drive is REALLY up
    > S**T CREEK.....
    >
    > It says it's 'health' is only at 16%, that hundreds of sectors have
    > been moved/replaced, and I REALLY should monitor this drive, back it
    > up YESTERDAY, and be ready to replace it!!!!


    The readme with HDS does say that it works best when it's had some time to
    monitor a drive. It'd be interesting to see what it says over time, if more
    sectors are reported reallocated.

    > But hang on a minute, Speed fan says it's OK.
    > I run a Windows ChkDsk /F and the file system comes up clean.
    >
    > So I decide it's time for a second/third opinion.
    >
    > I fire up Seatools Seagate's own hard drive testing tool (available
    > here: http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/support/downloads/seatools/)
    >
    > I run the short test on this drive that is supposedly about to fail
    > according to HDS.
    >
    > Funny, Seatools gives it a pass.
    >
    > So I run the Long Test.
    >
    > Funny again, Seatools again gives it a pass.
    >
    > So I get serious with it: I back up the drive, and start the advanced
    > tests and and when they have finally finished, I check the results.
    >
    > Again I get a pass. There appears to be nothing wrong with this drive
    > at all according to Seatools.
    >
    > So What test results do I believe?????
    >
    > Me, I'm going with Seagate Seatools, as it is the only testing
    > programme that is specifically designed to test Seagate drives, and
    > the drive is not displaying any symptoms of pending drive failure in
    > day to day use...


    I am of the opinion that Seatools is primarilly designed to discourage
    people from sending their HDDs back for warranty claims. I have tested every
    Seagate HDD that I have with it and it gives them all the thumbs-up. The
    thing is, some of them are failing badly and are essentially unusable.

    I have had HDS tell me that a (Seagate) drive has x number of reallocated
    sectors. I've then run the whole gamut of Seatools options on it, only to
    find that Seatools thinks that the drive is just fine, thankyouverymuch.

    Wanting a third opinion I then ran SpinRite 6.0 from a boot floppy and, you
    guessed it, mant hours later, it agreed with HDS.

    IMO Seatools sucks.

    > Scrap HDS as a reliable 'tool' for my 'toolbox.'


    Methinks that you may be being a bit hasty. Sure, HDS 'interprets'
    S.M.A.R.T. data and some may not agree with it's conclusions. It very much
    errs on the side of safety. However, I'm yet to see anything with it that
    makes me doubt it. If you've been following this thread you'll remember my
    friend's PC that was crashing due to an underpowered PSU? HDS confirmed that
    the PSU was probably underpowered and had caused a reallocated sector.
    That's magic IMO, if I hadn't already trouble-shooted (shot?) the PC and
    rectified the problem that info would have been a big clue. Seatools said
    the drive was A-OK BTW.

    I humbly suggest that you give HDS a longer trial.

    Cheers,
    --
    Shaun.

    DISCLAIMER: If you find a posting or message from me
    offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
    If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
    me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate... ;-)
    ~misfit~, Jun 8, 2008
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    Seagate 5GB Pocket Hard Drive @ Viperlair

    Silverstrand, Jul 1, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,049
    unholy
    Jul 5, 2005
  2. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,022
    Silverstrand
    Jul 21, 2005
  3. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    675
    Silverstrand
    Oct 17, 2005
  4. Silverstrand

    160GB Seagate Momentus 5400.3 2.5" Hard Drive

    Silverstrand, Jan 31, 2006, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    701
    Silverstrand
    Jan 31, 2006
  5. FuSchnickens

    Strange New Seagate 750GB hard drive issues

    FuSchnickens, May 2, 2008, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    582
    FuSchnickens
    May 2, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page