• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Samsung 870 EVO - Beware, certain batches prone to failure!

imarti

New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2023
Messages
7 (0.02/day)
Hello everyone on the forum.
I apologize for my poor English.

I would like to ask for advice, I have an 870 EVO 500GB (new-unused one year old), manufactured in Thailand, 2021.05, S62VNZOR.
Does it belong to a problematic series?

I assume that with older firmware, should you install the new firmware before use or leave the old one?
How should I behave with him?
 

unspecified_error

New Member
Joined
May 21, 2022
Messages
10 (0.02/day)
No-one knows whether the newer firmware helps or not. It might only work in Samsung's favour as they don't offer any information as to what's changed about it. If that drive was mine I'd perform a destructive write/read 'surface' test and check the results. If it revealed bad blocks then I'd return it under warranty. If it passed and went into use then I'd at least keep a good eye on it as it does fall within the bad batch period.
 

imarti

New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2023
Messages
7 (0.02/day)
Thanks for the prompt reply,

is the testing done from Samsung Magician ("Diagnostic Scan" or "Performance Benchmark") or through some other program, which one?
Does the SSD have to be loaded with data or should the test be done on an empty SSD?

If it is done through Magician, are you using an older version or the latest?

I also have an 850 EVO, I would like you to tell me the condition of this SSD?
850 EVO.png
 

unspecified_error

New Member
Joined
May 21, 2022
Messages
10 (0.02/day)
At a glance the 850 looks fine. The 'raw values' displayed will make more sense if you switch the "Function > Advanced Feature > Raw Values" to "10 [DEC]"

I can't recommend a particular software for performing the test, but there are plenty to choose from out there. You'll be looking for a software that can write the entire drive and read it back. This would be a 'destructive' test in that it will write over all data on the drive, so it's not to be done on a drive containing any important data (you mentioned it as being "new-unused"). If the drive was in use then you should probably just perform non-destructive read-only testing, or a read/write testing method that doesn't affect existing data. You could just fill the entire drive with data (e.g. duplicate a large file many times) and have some software perform a read test. Personally, I wouldn't trust Samsung Magician as they have a vested interest in the outcome, but each to their own. I would use a third-party software.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2019
Messages
141 (0.09/day)
Location
Romania
System Name HELL->o!
Processor Ryzen 7 5800X3D
Motherboard MSI MEG X570S Ace Max
Cooling be quiet! Pure Loop 120
Memory 2x16GB G.Skill RipjawsV 3600CL14 [14-14-14-34]@1.456V
Video Card(s) 6800 XT Red Devil
Storage 4x M.2; 3x Sata SSD
Display(s) MSI Optix MAG274QRF-QD&Asus VG248QE
Case Fractal Design Torrent
Audio Device(s) JBL 4305p & JBL 4329p | EPOS H3PRO Hybrid
Power Supply Seasonic Prime TX-1000
Mouse ReDragon M711 FPS
Keyboard ReDragon Broadsword
Software Win10 Pro 64
Benchmark Scores No
Mine is made in Korea 17 nov 2021 S6PPNJ0R; i don't see it in that list on page 20 but i still don't trust it. Damned sammy...
 

sekelje

New Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2023
Messages
1 (0.00/day)
I have found a list with the affected drives that should update the firmware immediately! If you do not, you are taking a big risk. But remember it was your decision.
If your drive has this serial number as listed below, your drive will suffer degradation sooner or later if you don't upgrade the firmware.

Samsung 870 EVOS5Y2NJ0N / S5Y2NJ0R / S5Y3NF0R / S5Y3NG0R / S621NG0R / S625NJ0R / S626NF0R / S626NJ0R / S62BNJ0R / S62CNF0R / S62CNJ0R / S6BANJ0R / S6BBNG0R / S6BCNG0R / S6BCNJ0R / S6PTNZ0R / S6PUNF0R
Samsung 970 EVOS464NB0K / S465NF0K / S466NF0K / S466NX0K / S466NX0M / S5H7NS0N / S5H9NS0N / 3B2QEXM7
Samsung 970 EVO PLUSS6P7NG0R / S6P7NF0T / 2B2QEXM7 / 4B2QEXM7
Samsung 980S649NF0R / S649NF1R / S649NG0R / S649NJ0R / S649NX0R / S64ANG0R / S64DNF0R
Samsung 980 PROS5GXNF0R / S5GXNF0T / S5GXNG0N / S5GYNX0R / S69ENF0R / S69ENG0R / S6B0NG0R / 3B2QGXA7
Samsung 990 PRO0B2QJXD7

So you see, i was right. All drives made after 12/2020 are garbage...

That list is definitely incomplete, I have S626NX0R 1 TB drive, manufacture date 2021.10, which also started developing problems, although it was on old firmware. Updating firmware did stop the degradation (for now).
 

Attachments

  • 870evo1tb.jpg
    870evo1tb.jpg
    158.6 KB · Views: 261

kevin335200

New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2022
Messages
19 (0.03/day)
That list is definitely incomplete, I have S626NX0R 1 TB drive, manufacture date 2021.10, which also started developing problems, although it was on old firmware. Updating firmware did stop the degradation (for now).
Thanks for your contribution, added to the list in Chiphell. I don't have contact information with NASCompare author, so I can't guarantee that that article will be updated and corrected...
Created an account to add to this one of my drives that was affected by this... 66 Bad Sectors and 126901 CRC Errors, Caught before I lost any data on drive and updated to newest FW. But I immediately cloned to another SSD and pulled it

It was a 500GB 870 EVO with serial number S6PXNJ0R from 2021.05 and drive had 5.27 TBW
Also thanks for providing the infos, have you got any CDI screenshot before pulling it out? I've added it as well
 

vortexiur

New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2023
Messages
5 (0.01/day)
I want to buy the samsung 2TB 870 evo as it is in sale on amazon currently, am i safe if i buy it now?
I remember to have read somewhere that the manufacters models after novemeber are all safe since samsung revisited them, is it true?
So if i get one with for example made in dec 2022 i'm safe? if not and it's older then should i RMA instantly?
Thanks for the replys.

btw i have a 980 pro with manufacter date 2021 10, having only 8tb writtend and no issues at all, i do check it every 2 weeks and no bad blocks, but sadly my serial is listened in those who failed, i don't know if i should rma even if it's going good and no issues.
But sadly already wrote important data.
So i just bought on amazon and it came with manufacter date from 2023, hope this have no problems.
If any i will tell you later.
Serial is: S6PPNX0W from China. (It's not listened in those who failed)
 

imarti

New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2023
Messages
7 (0.02/day)
At a glance the 850 looks fine. The 'raw values' displayed will make more sense if you switch the "Function > Advanced Feature > Raw Values" to "10 [DEC]"

I can't recommend a particular software for performing the test, but there are plenty to choose from out there. You'll be looking for a software that can write the entire drive and read it back. This would be a 'destructive' test in that it will write over all data on the drive, so it's not to be done on a drive containing any important data (you mentioned it as being "new-unused"). If the drive was in use then you should probably just perform non-destructive read-only testing, or a read/write testing method that doesn't affect existing data. You could just fill the entire drive with data (e.g. duplicate a large file many times) and have some software perform a read test. Personally, I wouldn't trust Samsung Magician as they have a vested interest in the outcome, but each to their own. I would use a third-party software.
Yes, the SSD is new.

Did I understand you correctly, to test the SSD with the old firmware (do not update to the new one), is that what you thought?

Is it good to do testing with this program and with the option in the rubric, "Test type:" ?
2023-03-09 21_26_06-.png


If there are bad blocks you say to advertise it, how bad does it have to be for me to hope for a positive warranty solution from Samsung?

If it passes the test properly, should I then update the firmware to a new one and use it like that or use an SSD with the old firmware?

I changed the values as you said to 850 EVO, how is the health now?


Sorry for the direct questions.
 

Attachments

  • CrystalDiskInfo_20230309215722.png
    CrystalDiskInfo_20230309215722.png
    54.8 KB · Views: 125

unspecified_error

New Member
Joined
May 21, 2022
Messages
10 (0.02/day)
I did say "if that drive was mine I'd..." and do something along the lines of what I said without updating its firmware, but I cannot recommend that you do the same. For all that is known to-date, the updated firmware may actually cure the 870 EVO issues, as it may be software caused/related. No-one appears to know just what the updated firmware does as Samsung seemingly don't make that information public. When my own 870 got the measles and lost my data I wasn't particularly interested in potentially fixing it after the fact by updating the firmware, so I simply opted to return it back to the store it was purchased from for exchange under warranty as my confidence in the drive was lost at that point. I wouldn't want to store data on it again even if it appeared OK after the update. Would I recommened you do the same? I cannot make that decision for you, though I would probably think it better that you did follow the Samsung advice to update the firmware, then run the drive tests to verify that it at least seems OK. It's difficult to say what the better path is here.

Your 850 EVO should not be affected by the problems 870 EVOs are seeing and, given that the 850 EVO appears to be in use, should definately NOT be doing any destructive write tests on that drive if you value the data on it. I would only recommend the destructive test for the "new-unused" 870 EVO as a way of determining up-front whether or not the drive appears capable of reading and writing data OK without corruption. Note the HD Sentinel warning for the chosen Test type: Data impact [is] DESTRUCTIVE - all [existing data on the drive] will be removed[!]

If you did encounter errors then I'd hope that Samsung would be understanding, even if only a few bad blocks, given that the drive is new and it's known (or should be) that drives from this manufacturing period have been experiencing problems. It's really up to Samsung though. If it did see bad blocks then I'd probably recommend performing the tests offered in Samsung Magician to verify the faults, and use that data as evidence (though I personally wouldn't let it try to fix anything, as mentioned above, but that's me). The problems should reveal themselves as above-zero values for: Reallocated sector count, Used reserve block count, Runtime bad blocks, Uncorrectable errors, and ECC error rate. Take screenshots for evidence as you go.

The 850 EVO looks fine to me, and is the kind of reliability you should be expecting from the 870 EVO, in my opinion.
 

Transmission

New Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2023
Messages
1 (0.00/day)
Hi,

I've read all of this thread, which I discovered by accident.

A bit of background:

My Lenovo ThinkPad X201 (a refurbished device when I got it in mid-to-late 2015) has mostly happily chugged away with the Seagate 160GB drive it was supplied with. I did get get some bad blocks on that drive a while back and it had very occasionally been making worrying louder-than-usual clicking sounds of the kind you don't want to hear from a spinning drive! I'd been wanting to change it since the bad blocks as it was obviously on its way out, but had not had the opportunity until more recently, when it coincidentally started clicking a bit more frequently and so it became even more urgent to change it.

I got a USB <> SATA adapter to enable cloning the old drive to the new 870 EVO 250GB. Initially I got confused when I saw that fdisk and parted both showed a strange device ID and wondered if I'd bought a fake drive. I then searched to find info on this, but realised that what I was seeing was of course just the ID from the adapter, not the drive - doh! Checking with smartctl via the USB adapter revealed what I expected to see. In the process above, I came across this thread.

At this point I had not written anything at all to the drive, not even a partition table. Here's the drive info as it arrived:

Code:
Device Model:     Samsung SSD 870 EVO 250GB
Serial Number:    S61WNX0RA10063L
Firmware Version: SVT01B6Q
Made In:          China
Production Date:  2021 10 16

The interesting thing is that I ordered this on 2023-03-05 and got a drive made all the way back in late 2021! I ordered it via a seller on Amazon UK though, so perhaps it's just that they've not sold their lower capacity stock because more folks are opting for the higher capacities? It's not like a 500GB or 1TB device is that expensive in real terms, plus the cost per GB goes down as the capacity gets larger, so maybe that could explain why the seller still has such old stock. Anyway, I opted for the 250GB because it offered more storage than I had before and I don't require a lot of storage on the laptop.

Talking of capacities, I note that this thread mainly deals with 1TB+ drives. I think there are one or two people who have mentioned 500GB drives here, but I don't recall seeing anything about the 250GB drives. I'm wondering if that's not because these drives don't suffer the problem discussed here, rather it's just a reflection of the folks who comment here, i.e. enthusiasts who are more likely to buy higher capacity drives?

So, after reading this thread and before having written anything at all to the drive, the first thing I did was to upgrade the firmware from SVT01B6Q to SVT02B6Q. I then cloned the old Seagate drive to the 870 EVO, with adjustments as necessary to utilise the entire capacity of the EVO.

Here's the output from smartctl as it is right now:

Code:
SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 1
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE      UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   010    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
  9 Power_On_Hours          0x0032   099   099   000    Old_age   Always       -       67
 12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   099   099   000    Old_age   Always       -       15
177 Wear_Leveling_Count     0x0013   099   099   000    Pre-fail  Always       -       1
179 Used_Rsvd_Blk_Cnt_Tot   0x0013   100   100   010    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
181 Program_Fail_Cnt_Total  0x0032   100   100   010    Old_age   Always       -       0
182 Erase_Fail_Count_Total  0x0032   100   100   010    Old_age   Always       -       0
183 Runtime_Bad_Block       0x0013   100   100   010    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
187 Reported_Uncorrect      0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0032   065   050   000    Old_age   Always       -       35
195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered  0x001a   200   200   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count    0x003e   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
235 Unknown_Attribute       0x0012   099   099   000    Old_age   Always       -       5
241 Total_LBAs_Written      0x0032   099   099   000    Old_age   Always       -       670119772
252 Unknown_Attribute       0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0

SMART Error Log Version: 1
No Errors Logged

SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
Num  Test_Description    Status                  Remaining  LifeTime(hours)  LBA_of_first_error
# 1  Extended offline    Completed without error       00%         9         -

As you can see, I've run one extended test on the drive so far and it completed without error.

So, it will be interesting to see if this drive develops any premature faults in the future, especially given that the firmware was updated before any data was written to it. I will be keeping an eye on the SMART data and will come back to this thread with an update if it starts to indicate any problems.

Cheers.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,288 (0.22/day)
System Name Firebird
Processor Intel i7 2600K @5.0'ish 24/7 stock core Voltage {5.2 w/102 bCLK}
Motherboard Intel Extreme DZ68BC SkullTrail Z68 Cougerpoint, Excellent MCH !
Cooling Scythe NINJA PLUS Rev.B[skt478] Modded to 1155 Scythe SH12 fan
Memory Samsung 32nm 16Gb 4x4 (@19xxmhz} low profile[ better than 2133 banwidth]
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Aurosus 1080Ti
Storage Intel 512 SSD,Samsung 9701Tb, Toshiba 3Tbx2,Hitachi 320,1TBx2,'Cuda 400 7200.10, WD1TBUSB,to SATA
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440 27" WQHD, Samsung 226W, Vizio M60C3 4K 60",Vizio XVT3D554SV
Case CoolerMaster HAF 932
Audio Device(s) Intel 10ch[9+1] HD Audio X540> Pioneer VSX39TX[copper chasis,Rosewood sides 5x6LCD remote
Power Supply Seasonic X750 @ 24/7
Mouse Logictech G300s
Keyboard Saitek Cyborg v7
Software Windows 7 ROG E3 X64 by Neuropass/tweakscene
Benchmark Scores 4642@665/1600 220/GAT F1 4544 220/667strap 2.5/3/2/6 Bliss 650/1500 6490 Q6700 Bliss 690/1500
:eek: Oh Crap ......
My system just started coming up "Unable to boot to windows, Insert Disc, or choose another media.
Then I seen it was defaulting to my 870 EVO 1 Tb {bios has/had it as boot #2]

Thing is, I loaded a fresh copy of Win on it a good year or2 ago, But never use it, booted to it less than 5 times
I just peeked in Intel SSDbox and it says
Total LBA's written 7,580,387.13 GB
Seven MILLION ? Really and Never use it ?
Do these just crap out doing Nothing ?
 

E.S

Joined
Sep 22, 2022
Messages
51 (0.10/day)
Talking of capacities, I note that this thread mainly deals with 1TB+ drives. I think there are one or two people who have mentioned 500GB drives here, but I don't recall seeing anything about the 250GB drives.

This page collects many S.M.A.R.T data.


Days - avg. days per sample, Err - avg. errors per sample, MTBF - avg. MTBF in years per sample.
MFGModelSizeSamplesDaysErrMTBF
SamsungSSD 870 EVO250 GB905810.15
SamsungSSD 870 EVO500 GB17374190.12
SamsungSSD 870 EVO1 TB195105620.16
SamsungSSD 870 EVO2 TB331411030.14
SamsungSSD 870 EVO4 TB1359640.12
 

E.S

Joined
Sep 22, 2022
Messages
51 (0.10/day)
250GB has a very low error rate.
Does it have something to do with NAND density?
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2020
Messages
1,755 (1.49/day)
@revin
Total LBA's written 7,580,387.13 GB
7 petabytes of data have been written to that SSD. Are you sure that's correct?
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,288 (0.22/day)
System Name Firebird
Processor Intel i7 2600K @5.0'ish 24/7 stock core Voltage {5.2 w/102 bCLK}
Motherboard Intel Extreme DZ68BC SkullTrail Z68 Cougerpoint, Excellent MCH !
Cooling Scythe NINJA PLUS Rev.B[skt478] Modded to 1155 Scythe SH12 fan
Memory Samsung 32nm 16Gb 4x4 (@19xxmhz} low profile[ better than 2133 banwidth]
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Aurosus 1080Ti
Storage Intel 512 SSD,Samsung 9701Tb, Toshiba 3Tbx2,Hitachi 320,1TBx2,'Cuda 400 7200.10, WD1TBUSB,to SATA
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440 27" WQHD, Samsung 226W, Vizio M60C3 4K 60",Vizio XVT3D554SV
Case CoolerMaster HAF 932
Audio Device(s) Intel 10ch[9+1] HD Audio X540> Pioneer VSX39TX[copper chasis,Rosewood sides 5x6LCD remote
Power Supply Seasonic X750 @ 24/7
Mouse Logictech G300s
Keyboard Saitek Cyborg v7
Software Windows 7 ROG E3 X64 by Neuropass/tweakscene
Benchmark Scores 4642@665/1600 220/GAT F1 4544 220/667strap 2.5/3/2/6 Bliss 650/1500 6490 Q6700 Bliss 690/1500
@80251 7 petabytes of data have been written to that SSD. Are you sure that's correct? :eek:

: Ordered on April 20, 2021

1678919616695.png


Also I have No clue if it's "still" good, but it say's Zero for RAW UEC count

I have not yet figured out how to read "SMART" data stuff o_O

14k power on hrs, and again I have used that drive Less that 5 hours total and only have 38Gb of data that sit's there
FW is SVT101B6Q as shipped

2017 545s

1678920780182.png
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 18, 2009
Messages
387 (0.07/day)
Processor i7 8700K
Motherboard MSI Z370 Gaming Plus
Cooling Noctua NH-D15S + NF-A12x25 PWM + 4xNF-A14 PWM
Memory 16 GB Adata XPG Dazzle DDR4 3000 MHz CL16
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 1070 Ti Gaming 8G
Storage Samsung 970 EVO Plus, Samsung 850 Evo
Display(s) Samsung C24FG73 144Hz 1080p
Case Fractal Design Meshify C
Audio Device(s) Steelseries Arctis 3
Power Supply Superflower Leadex II Gold 650W
Mouse Steelseries Rival 600
Keyboard Steelseries Apex 7
Software Windows 11 Pro
I have found a list with the affected drives that should update the firmware immediately! If you do not, you are taking a big risk. But remember it was your decision.
If your drive has this serial number as listed below, your drive will suffer degradation sooner or later if you don't upgrade the firmware.

Samsung 870 EVOS5Y2NJ0N / S5Y2NJ0R / S5Y3NF0R / S5Y3NG0R / S621NG0R / S625NJ0R / S626NF0R / S626NJ0R / S62BNJ0R / S62CNF0R / S62CNJ0R / S6BANJ0R / S6BBNG0R / S6BCNG0R / S6BCNJ0R / S6PTNZ0R / S6PUNF0R
Samsung 970 EVOS464NB0K / S465NF0K / S466NF0K / S466NX0K / S466NX0M / S5H7NS0N / S5H9NS0N / 3B2QEXM7
Samsung 970 EVO PLUSS6P7NG0R / S6P7NF0T / 2B2QEXM7 / 4B2QEXM7
Samsung 980S649NF0R / S649NF1R / S649NG0R / S649NJ0R / S649NX0R / S64ANG0R / S64DNF0R
Samsung 980 PROS5GXNF0R / S5GXNF0T / S5GXNG0N / S5GYNX0R / S69ENF0R / S69ENG0R / S6B0NG0R / 3B2QGXA7
Samsung 990 PRO0B2QJXD7

So you see, i was right. All drives made after 12/2020 are garbage...
Unsure why there are firmware numbers mixed with the serials for 970 Evo+. Also 2B2QEXM7 is the latest for my 970 Evo+, so there's nothing to upgrade to.
That being said, the 2 Samsung SSDs I own, a 850 Evo and 970 Evo+ are fine and exhibiting no errors, thankfully. They went through 4-5 years of thousands of boots and hours, and each has around 20TB writes.
 

kevin335200

New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2022
Messages
19 (0.03/day)
Unsure why there are firmware numbers mixed with the serials for 970 Evo+. Also 2B2QEXM7 is the latest for my 970 Evo+, so there's nothing to upgrade to.
That being said, the 2 Samsung SSDs I own, a 850 Evo and 970 Evo+ are fine and exhibiting no errors, thankfully. They went through 4-5 years of thousands of boots and hours, and each has around 20TB writes.
Why mixed: no idea :confused: Ask the NASCompares author
There're two revisions of 970 EVO Plus: with Phoenix Controller or with Elpis Controller. If yours is with Phoenix Controller, 2B2QEXM7 is the latest firmware and basically good to go, I did not collect the affected SN of this revision yet. I also have one and have no problem for now.
 

E.S

Joined
Sep 22, 2022
Messages
51 (0.10/day)
There have been a lot of irrelevant posts on this forum lately. I suspect that you want to hijack the important topic with an unrelated topic.
are they getting paid?
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,288 (0.22/day)
System Name Firebird
Processor Intel i7 2600K @5.0'ish 24/7 stock core Voltage {5.2 w/102 bCLK}
Motherboard Intel Extreme DZ68BC SkullTrail Z68 Cougerpoint, Excellent MCH !
Cooling Scythe NINJA PLUS Rev.B[skt478] Modded to 1155 Scythe SH12 fan
Memory Samsung 32nm 16Gb 4x4 (@19xxmhz} low profile[ better than 2133 banwidth]
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Aurosus 1080Ti
Storage Intel 512 SSD,Samsung 9701Tb, Toshiba 3Tbx2,Hitachi 320,1TBx2,'Cuda 400 7200.10, WD1TBUSB,to SATA
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440 27" WQHD, Samsung 226W, Vizio M60C3 4K 60",Vizio XVT3D554SV
Case CoolerMaster HAF 932
Audio Device(s) Intel 10ch[9+1] HD Audio X540> Pioneer VSX39TX[copper chasis,Rosewood sides 5x6LCD remote
Power Supply Seasonic X750 @ 24/7
Mouse Logictech G300s
Keyboard Saitek Cyborg v7
Software Windows 7 ROG E3 X64 by Neuropass/tweakscene
Benchmark Scores 4642@665/1600 220/GAT F1 4544 220/667strap 2.5/3/2/6 Bliss 650/1500 6490 Q6700 Bliss 690/1500
There have been a lot of irrelevant posts on this forum lately
Like how ? Seems like the post are on topic queries and a few are awaiting response's
I suspect that you want to hijack the important topic with an unrelated topic
Where and whom do you think that is in postings ?
 

E.S

Joined
Sep 22, 2022
Messages
51 (0.10/day)
@80251 7 petabytes of data have been written to that SSD. Are you sure that's correct? :eek:
You could have guessed that it wasn't correct and that it was probably just a display issue.
You have been using PCs for a long time and are familiar with hardware.
 

imarti

New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2023
Messages
7 (0.02/day)
If I put the 870 EVO in the DVD drive (SATA300) instead of the DVDRW on the laptop, would there be any problems when testing?

If I run a test through Magician, should I use older versions of Magician or the latest version?
Samsung Magician >"Diagnostic scan", is that option unavailable for 850 EVO?
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2020
Messages
1,755 (1.49/day)
@imarti
The Samsung Magician diagnostics take a long, long time to run. It took nearly ten hours to scan my 870QVO 4 TiB, but your EVO is much faster so it probably wouldn't be that bad.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,288 (0.22/day)
System Name Firebird
Processor Intel i7 2600K @5.0'ish 24/7 stock core Voltage {5.2 w/102 bCLK}
Motherboard Intel Extreme DZ68BC SkullTrail Z68 Cougerpoint, Excellent MCH !
Cooling Scythe NINJA PLUS Rev.B[skt478] Modded to 1155 Scythe SH12 fan
Memory Samsung 32nm 16Gb 4x4 (@19xxmhz} low profile[ better than 2133 banwidth]
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Aurosus 1080Ti
Storage Intel 512 SSD,Samsung 9701Tb, Toshiba 3Tbx2,Hitachi 320,1TBx2,'Cuda 400 7200.10, WD1TBUSB,to SATA
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440 27" WQHD, Samsung 226W, Vizio M60C3 4K 60",Vizio XVT3D554SV
Case CoolerMaster HAF 932
Audio Device(s) Intel 10ch[9+1] HD Audio X540> Pioneer VSX39TX[copper chasis,Rosewood sides 5x6LCD remote
Power Supply Seasonic X750 @ 24/7
Mouse Logictech G300s
Keyboard Saitek Cyborg v7
Software Windows 7 ROG E3 X64 by Neuropass/tweakscene
Benchmark Scores 4642@665/1600 220/GAT F1 4544 220/667strap 2.5/3/2/6 Bliss 650/1500 6490 Q6700 Bliss 690/1500
You could have guessed that it wasn't correct and that it was probably just a display issue.
You have been using PCs for a long time and are familiar with hardware.
So I get notice that that drive will NOT Boot, and then look at a tool that show's "something " is not right, and state I don't know how to read those "SMART Values"
and then see a posting on TPU that My drive has known "Dying" issues And see that it's Firmware is part of the known issues,
What praytell am I supposed to think.

Still the drive is unbootable, cause unknown and yes I was/am panicked it may be dying.

Also still not a response as to "what" my values indicate whether it is "dying",

BUT this is a "Thing and it's NOT just a display issue

1679084772838.png


So yea, "Seems" that there is an issue with the drive
And it's not the HGST spinner it's going to, it's working all good.
 
Top