![]() One of the other problems with these numbers, though, is that there's really no way to tell exactly how the drive firmware is deciding the "quality" of a particular situation. Generally, anything under 100 (particularly on certain metrics which have been shown to be indicators of possible future failure, such as "uncorrectable sector count") could indicate that there's something that you might want to be concerned about. It may mean that the drive hasn't failed yet, but it may in the near future. If "Current" falls below "Threshold", then that is the point at which the manufacturer considers the drive to be "failed" in some way (and can be sent back for warranty return, etc).īut just because the number hasn't fallen below the threshold doesn't necessarily mean that everything's peachy. What you want to pay attention to is how close these numbers are to the "Threshold" number. If it reports less than that, then it's telling you there may be some cause for concern. So if the scale the manufacturer has chosen is 0-100, then if a metric is reported with a "Current" value of 100 (100% healthy), that means the drive is telling you "It's perfectly OK, nothing to worry about here". Usually, most manufacturers seem to use 100 as the top (so the numbers are basically "percent"), but in some cases I've seen 200, or even 253, etc. is that many of these details are not specified in the standard, so what scale a particular manufacturer uses for these values is completely up to that manufacturer. Unfortunately, one of the problems with S.M.A.R.T. With the "Current" and "Worst" numbers, higher is always better, and they are generally normalized to some common scale (such as 0-100). Instead, they are intended to indicate "how good" or "how bad" that metric's value is on a scale. are normalized qualitative values, that is they don't indicate the actual number of sectors, etc. The "Current", "Worst", and "Threshold" values reported by S.M.A.R.T. To clarify (since this is one of the top responses on Google for this question, but doesn't actually answer it very well, IMHO): Value of this attribute indicates the total number of uncorrectable Parameter and indicates the quantity of uncorrectable errors. Samsung, Seagate, IBM (Hitachi), Fujitsu (not all models), Maxtor, Urgent data backup and hardware replacement is recommended. Degradation of this parameter may indicate imminent drive failure. In this particular case, I would keep an eye on the value and if it continues to increase then replace the drive: The raw value of this attribute indicates the total number of uncorrectable errors when reading/writing a sector. You need to look at the raw value ( 8) in this case. Why is Uncorrectable Sector Count being displayed as caution? Why is Uncorrectable Sector Count being displayed as caution if various other stats with the same value and threshold aren't? How can a lower-than-threshold value occur with a zero threshold? Is this a sign of imminent drive failure or is the tool merely miscalibrated?ĮDIT: Seagate's SeaTools utility has reported that SMART is OK, but it didn't say anything else. Additionally, various other stats read that 100 is both their current and worst while not being marked "caution". The value of the Uncorrectable Sector Count is 100, which is also its worst-recorded value, and the stat has a threshold of zero. I know that some of their actual values vary by manufacturer, and I've also read that if a current value is below a threshold, that statistic has failed. I'm not sure what to make of the Current, Worst, and Threshold values. ![]() In short, the Uncorrectable Sector Count count is 100, and this is a "caution"-level problem on the drive. I downloaded CrystalDiskInfo, and the pertinent information is reproduced below: It spends several minutes at 100% usage when I first turn it on since I installed Windows 10, and yesterday it reported a corrupted Recycle Bin. I have a 2TB internal hard drive that might be failing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |