An open community 
of Macintosh users,
for Macintosh users.

FineTunedMac Dashboard widget now available! Download Here

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#52214 - 08/12/19 12:45 PM SSD fails SMART
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
I received a warning from TechTool Protection that one of my clones is failing. It is a 480 GB OWC Mercury Electra. The warranty expired a year ago, unfortunately.

SMART reports that the Relocated Sectors Count is 5 and that the Extended Health is in the middle between Pass and Fail. All other parameters are at the optimum level. Fortunately, I have two more clones (both OWC SSDs) and they are fine.

My question: If I reformat the drive and make a new, pristine clone, will that suffice? Or, should I bite the bullet and simply replace it?
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.6, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#52215 - 08/12/19 02:51 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: jchuzi]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Regardless, whether it is an SSD or HD reformatting can have no positive effect on a drive's SMART values and could possibly have a negative effect. It certainly sounds as if the SSD may be failing or has already failed. 😨 I would not trust anything to that drive I was not willing to lose.

By-the-way, the values reported by your drive reveal that it is an older drive. The newer faster NVMe drives have their own unique SMART values that are different than we are accustomed to. Micromat has a new product out called Drive Scope that is specifically for reporting SMART values whether on an HD, an SSD, or an NVMe. It may end up replacing Techtool Pro in my toolkit.


Edited by joemikeb (08/12/19 03:11 PM)
Edit Reason: By-the-way
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52216 - 08/13/19 12:36 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
You mentioned Drive Scope in another thread, and after looking at it I wrote it off as an awfully pricey - $50 - one trick pony, but a bit of digging revealed that my old TTP 6 serial # enabled me to buy it for ONLY tongue $30, so I reclassified it from written-off to back-burnered, and now Jon's mention of a drive having gone south - the first such mention in a considerable period of time - has got me scratching my head.

While sorting through the dandruff flakes, though, I found DriveDx for $20, but 10 bucks is 10 bucks, and unlike Drive Scope, it offers a free trial, which reported the following partial results (...only an extract, but it seems to be something of a summary. I'll post the entire report if you're interested.):

=== DRIVE HEALTH INDICATORS ===
ID | NAME | TYPE | UPDATE | RAW VALUE | VALUE | THRESHOLD | WORST | LAST MODIFIED | STATUS
1 Raw Read Error Rate Life-span online 0x0 200 0 200 - 100% OK
5 Retired Block Count Pre-fail online 0 100 0 100 - 100% OK
9 Power On Hours Life-span online 28,018 94 0 94 - 94.0% OK
12 Power Cycle Count Life-span online 951 99 0 99 - 99.0% OK
169 Total Bad Block Count Pre-fail online 0x3390A800780 242 10 242 - 100% OK
173 Wear Leveling Count Life-span online 0x800900048 196 100 196 - 96.0% OK
174 Host Reads MiB Life-span online 17,522,525 (16.7 TB) 99 0 99 - 99.0% OK
175 Host Writes MiB Life-span online 13,761,726 (13.1 TB) 99 0 99 - 99.0% OK
192 Unsafe Shutdown Count Life-span online 98 99 0 99 - 99.0% OK
194 Temperature (Celsius) Life-span online 35 65 30 19 - 50.0% OK
197 Current Pending Block Count Life-span online 0 100 0 100 - 100% OK
199 UDMA CRC Error Count Life-span online 0 200 0 200 - 100% OK

Does that ring any kind of bell with you?

I also found SSD reliability in the real world: Google's experience | ZDNet, which is comprehensible, at least to a degree, even by me.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#52217 - 08/13/19 06:46 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
The "Drive Health Indicators" are noting more and nothing less than the specific SMART parameters the manufacturer of the drive chose to have the drive report. The ID number and the parameter name are specified in the SMART standards and as you can see there are at least 199 possible parameters in the standard. Every manufacturer has the latitude to choose which parameters to collect and report and more importantly what the failure level is for each parameter. The problem with that is manufacturers tend to set the limits such that by the time SMART reports a problem the drive has already failed.

With the advent of SSDs that connect to the system and report SMART values through the SATA bus there were additional parameters added that gave a somewhat better picture if SSD health. Newer NVMe (Non-Volatile Memory express) drives appear to have settled on a standardized set of parameters that to seem to me to tell the tale pretty succinctly..

NOTE: Numbered categories are mine and not part of the standard.
  1. Drive Identification
    • PCI Vendor ID
    • Subsystem Vendor ID
    • Controller ID
    • Namespace ID
    • NVMe Interface Revision
  2. Statistics
    • Unsafe Shutdowns
    • Controller Busy Times
    • Max Data Transfer Size
  3. Early warning data
    • % of available spares
    • The available spare threshold β€” set by vendor
    • % used
    • % available
  4. Ultimate lifetime indicators
    • Data Units Read
    • Data Units Written
    • Host read commands
    • Host Write commands
  5. Has the drive failed?
    • Available spare space below threshold: Y/N
    • Over Temperature threshold: Y/N
    • NVM Subsystem Reliability degraded: Y/N
    • Media in Read-Only Mode: Y/N
    • Volatile Memory Backup Device Failure: Y/N
As I see it if any of the last five items is "Y" the drive should be replaced ASAP if not sooner.
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52218 - 08/13/19 07:24 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
Looks like I'll be replacing the drive. Checkmate just notified me that 7 files are corrupted. Aside from OWC, do you have any recommendations for SSD brands?
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.6, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#52219 - 08/13/19 02:14 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: jchuzi]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
I don't know of any studies or statistics on SSD reliability β€” mainly because they are not used in big data centers as HDs are β€” but Crucial comes immediately to mind as a store and a brand.

If I were shopping for brands I would start with (in order)
  1. OWC
  2. Crucial
  3. Samsung
But that is just me and I cannot scientifically justify that list or that order other than by my perceived reputation.
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52230 - 08/15/19 02:32 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
The "Drive Health Indicators" are noting more and nothing less than the specific SMART parameters the manufacturer of the drive chose to have the drive report.

I think that means that the sum total of of DriveDx's report is nothing more than a meaninglessly embellished (I'll spare you from the smoke and mirrors.) Disk Utility S.M.A.R.T. status Pass/Fail report, in which case, paying $20 for it is a colossal waste of money?
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#52233 - 08/15/19 11:48 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Not quite! Disk Utility's, and other apps that report only the consolidated Pass/Fail are limited to reporting the manufacturer's smoke & mirrors as you called it. I have no idea what DriveDX reports, but apps such as Micromat's TechTool Pro and Drive scope that report the ACTUAL attributes and their values provide information that can enable a reasonably informed user to draw their own conclusion.

If I am considering a rotating rust (HD) drive I would look first at…
  • 1. Raw Read Error Rate
  • 3. Spin Up Time
  • 6. Reallocated Sector Count
  • 7. Seek error Rate
  • 10. Spin Retry Count
as leading indicators of impending failure. A non-zero value for any of these is an early warning sign, and the closer it is to the manufacturer's threshold setting the sooner it will need to be replaced. If it is over the Manufacturer's threshold the drive has failed. Most of the other attributes are indicators of age.

I just checked to see what SMART attributes are reported for an OWC SATA attached SSD and there were NO pre-fail attributes reported 😑

If I am looking at a NVMe SSD then the leading indicators are:
  • Available Spares
  • Percentage used
  • Percentage Remaining
Once again if any of the maufacturer's thresholds are exceeded, consider the drive not just toast but burnt toast.

NOTE Although both Micromat's TechTool Pro 11 and Drive Scope 1.1.2 report the full set of SMART attributes reported by a drive, in the course of this thread I have come to realize Drive Scope provides some additional information and even a test that IMHO substantially enhances the my ability to analyze what SMART is really telling me:
  • SMART logs
  • Self Test results
  • the ability to trigger both short and long offline self tests
  • complete analysis of drive capabilities
  • additional information about SMART attributes (pre-fail, old-age)
Given it has been years since I found it necessary to resort to an industrial strength utility for volume repairs, and the limitations of third party apps vis-a-vis. APFS formatted SSDs I would have to say at this point Drive Scope is the more useful app.


Edited by joemikeb (08/15/19 12:56 PM)
Edit Reason: hit return too soon
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52236 - 08/15/19 11:46 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Not quite! Disk Utility's, and other apps that report only the consolidated Pass/Fail are limited to reporting the manufacturer's smoke & mirrors as you called it. I have no idea what DriveDX reports....

I'm not sure what "Not quite!" means, but I saved the DriveDX report because I thought it might come to this, particularly as respects "smoke and mirrors," which are not what you took them for, rather they're specifications and other irrelevant info apparently meant to flesh out the report to make it look more substantial and informative than it really is.

### SYSTEM INFORMATION ###
Report Timestamp : August 13, 2019 12:49:40 PM EDT
Report Timestamp (ISO 8601 format) : 2019-08-13T12:49:40

Application Name : DriveDx
Application Version : 1.8.2.610
Application SubBuild : 1
Application Edition : Standalone
Application Website : https://binaryfruit.com/drivedx
DriveDx Knowledge Base Revision : 9/9

Computer Name : Artie’s MacBook Pro
Host Name : Artie's-MacBook-Pro-2
Computer Model : MacBookPro11,4

OS Boot Time : 2019-08-08T02:25:24
Time Since Boot : 5 days 10h 24m 16s
OS Name : macOS
OS Version : 10.14.6
OS Build : 18G87
OS Kernel Version : Darwin 18.7.0

SAT SMART Driver Version : N/A
ATA Command Support Tolerance : verypermissive
N of drives with S.M.A.R.T support : 1



### DRIVE 1 OF 1 ###
Last Checked : August 13, 2019 12:48:46 PM EDT
Last Checked (ISO 8601 format) : 2019-08-13T12:48:46

Advanced SMART Status : OK
Overall Health Rating : GOOD 100%
SSD Lifetime Left Indicator : GOOD 96.0%
Issues found : 0

Serial Number : S29ANYAH406432
WWN Id : 5 002538 900000000
Volumes : HD, HD2, HDx, HDy
Device Path : /dev/disk0
Total Capacity : 500.3 GB (500,277,790,720 Bytes)
Model Family : Apple (Samsung-based) SSDs
Model : APPLE SSD SM0512G
Firmware Version : BXW1SA0Q
Drive Type : SSD

Power On Time : 28,028 hours (38 months 27 days 20 hours)
Power Cycles Count : 951
Current Power Cycle Time : 130.4 hours



=== DEVICE CAPABILITIES ===
S.M.A.R.T. support enabled : yes
DriveDx Active Diagnostic Config : Apple (Samsung-based) g-series SSDs config [ssd.apple.samsung.g]
Sector Logical Size : 512
Sector Physical Size : 4096
Physical Interconnect : PCI
Logical Protocol : SATA
Removable : no
Ejectable : no
ATA Version : ATA8-ACS T13/1699-D revision 4c
SATA Version : SATA 3.0, 6.0 Gb/s (current: 6.0 Gb/s)
I/O Path : IOService:/AppleACPIPlatformExpert/PCI0@0/AppleACPIPCI/PEG0@1/IOPP/SSD0@0/AppleAHCI/PRT0@0/IOAHCIDevice@0/AppleAHCIDiskDriver/IOAHCIBlockStorageDevice
Attributes Data Structure Revision : 1
SMART Command Transport (SCT) flags : 0x0
SCT Status supported : no
SCT Feature Control supported : no
SCT Data Table supported : no
Error logging capabilities : 0x1
Self-tests supported : yes
Offline Data Collection capabilities : 0x53
Offline Data Collection status : 0x0
Auto Offline Data Collection flags : 0x0
[Known device ]: yes
[Drive State Flags ]: 0x0


=== CURRENT POWER CYCLE STATISTICS ===
Data Read : 48.2 GB
Data Written : 38.2 GB
Data Read/Write Ratio : 1.26
Average Throughput (Read) : 60.6 MB/s
Average Throughput (Write) : 77.8 MB/s

Operations (Read) : 4,967,179
Operations (Write) : 2,275,016
Operations Read/Write Ratio : 2
Throughput per operation (Read) : 10.2 KB/Op
Throughput per operation (Write) : 17.6 KB/Op

Latency Time (Read) : 0 ns
Latency Time (Write) : 0 ns
Retries (Read) : 0
Retries (Write) : 0
Errors (Read) : 0
Errors (Write) : 0


=== PROBLEMS SUMMARY ===
Failed Indicators (life-span / pre-fail) : 0 (0 / 0)
Failing Indicators (life-span / pre-fail) : 0 (0 / 0)
Warnings (life-span / pre-fail) : 0 (0 / 0)
Recently failed Self-tests (Short / Full) : 0 (0 / 0)
I/O Error Count : 0 (0 / 0)


=== IMPORTANT HEALTH INDICATORS ===
ID NAME RAW VALUE STATUS
5 Retired Block Count 0 100% OK
173 Wear Leveling Count 0x800900048 96.0% OK
175 Host Writes MiB 13,764,312 (13.1 TB) 99.0% OK
192 Unsafe Shutdown Count 98 99.0% OK
197 Current Pending Block Count 0 100% OK
199 UDMA CRC Error Count 0 100% OK


=== TEMPERATURE INFORMATION (CELSIUS) ===
Current Temperature : 32
Power Cycle Min Temperature : 32
Power Cycle Max Temperature : 37
Lifetime Min Temperature : 32
Lifetime Max Temperature : 37
Recommended Min Temperature : 5
Recommended Max Temperature : 65
Temperature Min Limit : 5
Temperature Max Limit : 70


=== DRIVE HEALTH INDICATORS ===
ID | NAME | TYPE | UPDATE | RAW VALUE | VALUE | THRESHOLD | WORST | LAST MODIFIED | STATUS
1 Raw Read Error Rate Life-span online 0x0 200 0 200 - 100% OK
5 Retired Block Count Pre-fail online 0 100 0 100 - 100% OK
9 Power On Hours Life-span online 28,028 94 0 94 8/13/19 12:48 PM 94.0% OK
12 Power Cycle Count Life-span online 951 99 0 99 - 99.0% OK
169 Total Bad Block Count Pre-fail online 0x3390A800780 242 10 242 - 100% OK
173 Wear Leveling Count Life-span online 0x800900048 196 100 196 - 96.0% OK
174 Host Reads MiB Life-span online 17,528,594 (16.7 TB) 99 0 99 8/13/19 12:48 PM 99.0% OK
175 Host Writes MiB Life-span online 13,764,312 (13.1 TB) 99 0 99 8/13/19 12:48 PM 99.0% OK
192 Unsafe Shutdown Count Life-span online 98 99 0 99 - 99.0% OK
194 Temperature (Celsius) Life-span online 32 68 30 19 8/13/19 12:48 PM 54.3% OK
197 Current Pending Block Count Life-span online 0 100 0 100 - 100% OK
199 UDMA CRC Error Count Life-span online 0 200 0 200 - 100% OK



=== DRIVE ERROR LOG ===
error log is empty


=== DRIVE SELF-TEST LOG ===
# | LIFETIME (H) | TEST TYPE | PROGRESS | STATUS | LBA of 1st error
1 28018 Short offline 100% Completed without error -
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#52237 - 08/16/19 07:01 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
As I said, "I have no idea what DriveX reports". Thanks for the information.

You and I have different interpretations of what is meant by "smoke and mirrors". To my way of thinking the specifications can be relevant in some situations. A friend wrote his doctoral dissertation on how much information was needed to make a sound decision and his careful research and testing revealed that the best decisions were more often made with minimal information, which would support your definition of "smoke and mirrors". On the other hand his research concluded that more information increased the decision maker's confidence in their decision and increased the likelihood of fully prosecuting any decision.

Disk Utility is an example of minimal information, but only tells you the disk has failed or not. I like seeing the additional parameters because on at least two occasions those have given me advance warning of impending failure. In one case complete failure was three days later and the other never completely failed, but over time its performance degraded to the point it was no longer satisfactorily usable. So in this case I prefer as much information as I can get.

I would like a SMART utility that automatically collected periodic SMART data and would notify the user when those values reached a user defined level or the rate of change increased. But AFIK that does not exist.


Edited by joemikeb (08/16/19 07:07 AM)
Edit Reason: add requirement
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52239 - 08/16/19 10:06 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
I would like a SMART utility that automatically collected periodic SMART data and would notify the user when those values reached a user defined level or the rate of change increased.

That would be a blessing!

The real question here, though, is in your expert - and I'm not using the word at all facetiously - opinion, does the extra info in the DriveDx report contribute anything useful or is it just smoke and mirrors as I"ve labeled it?

Even after having read all your posts on the subject of disk failure, I'm still at a loss.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#52240 - 08/16/19 12:15 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Useful or "Smoke and Mirrors" is a matter of environment. Just taking the DriveX major categories:
  • System Information β€” for an individual relatively pointless, but in a corporate or academic environment where there are lots of different machines this could be invaluable for record keeping purposes.
  • ### DRIVE 1 OF 1 ### β€” In either the individual or organizational situation the identification section is at least interesting and contains data that can be difficult to ferret out
  • === DEVICE CAPABILITIES === β€” not particularly useful to most users
  • === CURRENT POWER CYCLE STATISTICS === β€” an indicator of age but without MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) data not particularly informative, but as long as the data is collected it doesn't hurt to report it.
  • === PROBLEMS SUMMARY === β€” ie. is the drive well on its way to failure or has it already failed.
  • === IMPORTANT HEALTH INDICATORS === β€” pre-failure indicators
  • === TEMPERATURE INFORMATION (CELSIUS) === β€” Heat was once thought to be a major factor in hard drive failure, but the famous Google study pretty well discounted that theory. I have no idea if there is even any data for SSDs. I wouldn't pay too much attention to this unless you were seeing consistently high temperatures which could be an indicator of ventilation problems in the device, fan failure, bearing failure in a rotating rust drive, or a replacement drive that is not properly sized for the computer.
  • === DRIVE HEALTH INDICATORS === β€” at least half of this information has already been directly reported previously and the rest at least alluded to in the Problems Summary
  • === DRIVE ERROR LOG === β€” Details of previously reported numbers
  • === DRIVE SELF-TEST LOG === β€” Could be useful
CONCLUSION: For the individual user the meat of this report is contained in Problems Summary and Important Health Indicators which are repeated in Drive Health Indicators. The rest might be useful to some people in specific situations or would fit into the nice to know category.

I admit to being prejudiced, but I find Drive Scope's display significantly clearer and more understandable for the mythical average user. But that may be because I am used to it and originally got it to beta test.
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52241 - 08/17/19 12:43 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
CONCLUSION: For the individual user the meat of this report is contained in Problems Summary and Important Health Indicators which are repeated in Drive Health Indicators. The rest might be useful to some people in specific situations or would fit into the nice to know category.

I admit to being prejudiced, but I find Drive Scope's display significantly clearer and more understandable for the mythical average user. But that may be because I am used to it and originally got it to beta test.

Or to put it less politely, the report contains a lot of irrelevant information that pretends to give it weight that it hasn't got, i.e. "smoke and mirrors," and its "meat" isn't much, if anything, more than the details of the Pass/Fail we get from Disk Utility.

And beyond the clarity of its reporting, DriveScope displays critical info that Drive Dx doesn't - more likely can't - reach.

CONCLUSION: If you're going to spend money on a S.M.A.R.T. monitor, DriveScope is your only REAL option, but whether it's worth $50 or even $30...?
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#52242 - 08/17/19 08:08 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: artie505
And beyond the clarity of its reporting, DriveScope displays critical info that Drive Dx doesn't - more likely can't - reach.

CONCLUSION: If you're going to spend money on a S.M.A.R.T. monitor, DriveScope is your only REAL option, but whether it's worth $50 or even $30...?

Actually the critical information DOES appear in DriveDX but the report requires closer reading or there is a risk that it could be overlooked or misinterpreted.

As to the VALUE of DriveScope I look at it this way. Over the years you, me, and a lot of others bought have purchased one or mire of the three "industrial Strength" volume repair tools for roughly $100 and have spent $30 to $50 or more every year or so since keeping it up to date. And every year we have used them less and less as MacOS has become more and more stable. With the advent of SSDs and APFS those tools have become more and more limited in what they can do and some things we have depended upon them for such as disk and file optimization/defragmentation have become counter productive and pointless. But the question of drive health still remains, particularly anticipating impending drive failure and that is the domain of SMART. But Disk Utility's pass/fail report provides NO WAY to anticipate future failure and given the manufacturer's tendency to be over-optimistic in setting the SMART attribute limits further analysis is needed.

DriveDX, DriveScope, and TechTool Pro provide the information needed for analysis to anticipate that failure. TechTool Pro provides the essential data in what I find to be a highly readable and comprehendible format along with a host of hardware testing tools and HFS+ HD volume repair utilities, DriveDX provides all of the data in text form but not in as obvious a format, Drive Scope provides all the data in what I find to be an easily apprehendable format.
  • Would I pay $100 for TechTool Pro again β€” probably not. It is still a powerful utility but the simple fact is I don't have much, if any, call for its services lately. However, since I already have TTP I will keep it and buy updates if for no other reason than it does a decent job reporting SMART.
  • would I buy DriveDX? I might if there were no other better options, but there are IMO better options
  • Would I pay $50 for Drive Scope? I might, if I anticipated future updates were free and upgrades reasonably priced but as you said, that is a high price for a one trick pony. I initially got Drive Scope as a beta tester and it was little better than TTP, the new version however is a substantial step up and I didn't have much hesitation coughing up the $30 upgrade price.
  • If I had to choose between TTP and Drive Scope it would be a tough decision. I used to feel TTP's eDrive and later their ProToGo drives alone were sufficient incentive to buy the product, but Apple's Recovery Drive/Recovery Assistant has pretty well rendered those TTP utilities non-essential. At this point I would probably go with Drive Scope as having the best value long term. That could easily change if TTP gained more APFS functionality.
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52245 - 08/18/19 11:55 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
Actually the critical information DOES appear in DriveDX but the report requires closer reading or there is a risk that it could be overlooked or misinterpreted.

Bingo!!!

It wasn't until I read that that it finally got through to me that DriveDx reports the SAME critical info that Drive Scope reports; without going into unnecessary detail, I was under the impression that DS is able to dig deeper into the "guts" of a SSD than DDx is.

And as for your conclusion, yeah, I"ve got to agree with you, so the same impetus that drove me to spend $100 + another $50 for DiskWarrior and (only because I was able to get it for a reasonable price) $20 (+ $10 for a CD, because I"ve got an unwarranted affection for hard media crazy ) for TechTool Pro now impels me to invest once again.

Its complicated format and smoke & mirrors notwithstanding, I'd go with DDx simply because at $20 (and including a test period) it's a far better value than DS is at $50, but since my TechTool Pro serial # enables me to get DS for $30 I'll likely go with Micromat as the more established developer (and hope they maintain the price point, which seems quite sufficient for a one trick pony).

Thanks for your indulgence. smile

PS: DDx was unable to read S.M.A.R.T. on the SSD in my OWC Mercury Elite Pro mini enclosure, and according to what I"ve read, it's because it's only USB 3.0, so I'm wondering if that's a can't-get-around-it limitation or it can be circumvented?

PPS: Does DS offer functionality that TTP doesn't, i.e. why do you need both?
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#52249 - 08/19/19 03:36 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: artie505]
freelance Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
Loc: London, UK
I've been following this thread with interest.

I have never had a drive fail, although I pulled a 8Gb HDD from my Beige G3 when it started ticking. How long ago was that!?

Anyway, I downloaded DriveDx and ran the trial. I buy HDDs for data and SSDs for OS/apps. I tend to replace a drive at the end of its warranty period and move it into a backup role.

DriveDx reported the SSD I use very rarely for Snow Leopard at 35% of its lifespan. As it's over five years old, that's not surprising. But what did surprise me is that the 80Gb IBM SSD that I keep on the shelf as backup for the SL drive was reported as excellent over the USB connection and it is over eight years old! I guess it is lasting longer because it is not powered up all day?

Anyway, it cost me Β£40 today for a DriveDx license and a new Crucial 120 Gb SSD.

Cheers! smile
_________________________
Mac Pro dual-2.4 GHz, 10.13.6, 24 Gb RAM, 250 Gb Samsung EVO SSD/Velocity Solo PCIe card, 2x3Tb Seagate HD, 1x3Tb Hitachi HD, Dell 2408WFP; Canon PIXMA iX6550; CanoScan 8800F; MacBook Air 1.8 Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, 10.14.6, 256 Gb SSD; Vodafone Home Hub/BT Wi-Fi Extender.

Top
#52250 - 08/19/19 06:22 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: freelance]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
I just ordered 1.0TB Mercury Extreme Pro 6G 2.5-inch 7mm SATA 6.0Gb/s Solid-State Drive from OWC to replace the failing 480 GB SSD.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.6, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#52251 - 08/19/19 07:47 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: artie505]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: artie505
PS: DDx was unable to read S.M.A.R.T. on the SSD in my OWC Mercury Elite Pro mini enclosure, and according to what I"ve read, it's because it's only USB 3.0, so I'm wondering if that's a can't-get-around-it limitation or it can be circumvented?

I have three of those same enclosures and the limitation is the USB standard which does not provide for carrying S.M.A.R.T. data and so is not included in the USB bridge chips. Either Thunderbolt 2 or 3 provides for reporting S.M.A.R.T. in the standard.

Originally Posted By: artie505
PPS: Does DS offer functionality that TTP doesn't, i.e. why do you need both?

It depends on whether the drive itself uses an ATA (SATA or PATA) or NVMe attachment.
  • With an ATA attached HDs or SSDs DS not only reports the drive's attributes but additionally in separate screens details about the drive itself, its capabilities, can trigger shut or long self-tests, and a log of previous self tests including SMART pass/fail.
  • With NVMe drives DS only reports the NVMe data and SMART logs. I believe this is a limitation of the NBVMe standard.
Only the attributes are essential and those are reported by TTP and DriveX as well, but the other information could be informative, not to mention the ability to trigger a self test. By the way a Short self test on a 1TB 7200 rpm HD takes 2 minutes, the long test takes 3 hours and the drive will be off-line during the test. (Not sure how that works with the boot drive??)

FOR MORE INFORMATION
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52252 - 08/19/19 08:42 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: freelance]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: freelance
DriveDx reported the SSD I use very rarely for Snow Leopard at 35% of its lifespan. As it's over five years old, that's not surprising. But what did surprise me is that the 80Gb IBM SSD that I keep on the shelf as backup for the SL drive was reported as excellent over the USB connection and it is over eight years old! I guess it is lasting longer because it is not powered up all day?


❓❓the 80Gb IBM SSD that I keep on the shelf as backup fo the SL drive was reported as excellent over the USB connection❓❓
Please elucidate! The USB standard does not support reporting SMART values. How were you able to accomplish this feat of legerdemain?

SSDs have no moving parts β€” rotating disks, moving read/write heads, bearings, etc. β€” that wear when the drive is powered up. The biggest wear factor for SSDs is the number of Write operations to the drive. A data segment on an SSD can only be written/re-written a finite number of times before it will no longer accept a write operation. There are a number of techniques to even out the wear on the drive (for details see this Wikipedia article) and there are spare sectors built into every SSD that can be mapped in when a well used sector reaches its limit. "Wear" is therefore measured by the percentage of spares that have been used, and the % remaining available spares. As long as an SSD is primarily being read and seldom, if ever, written to there is nothing creating wear and so it theoretically could last generations.

WARNING: While an SSD could theoretically last generations, that is not true of the data written on the SSD. All electronic data storage deteriorates over time and SSD data deteriorates faster than most. Experience and tests have shown that data on industrial grade SSDs begins to deteriorate in as little as two to three years and for whatever reason consumer grade SSDs can go as long as four years and still be reliably readable. The point is, if you are using SSDs for long term historical or archival storage of data, the data needs to be "refreshed" (re-written) every few years to maintain its integrity. Data on magnetic media such as Hard Drives is longer lived but HDs are not immune to data loss over time either. I suspect your eight year old backup drive has lost some, perhaps a significant amount of its data integrity over the years. The drive is still perfectly usable but the data would be suspect. That is why I don't recommend SSDs for Time Machine and other backup media. HDs are still a LOT less expensive, retain data integrity longer, and speed is not a significant factor for backup purposes.
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52254 - 08/19/19 11:20 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
freelance Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
Loc: London, UK
Please elucidate! The USB standard does not support reporting SMART values. How were you able to accomplish this feat of legerdemain?

I had the SSD mounted in a USB caddy. DriveDx said if I wanted to get a report about the drive, I had to install another app, which I did. A reboot later, I got more info about the SSD.

The SSD in question is actually two 80Gb SSDs in a caddy which allows a RAID configuration, so it reads as a single drive.

Anyway, I've saved the report for you:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/d2hvur4uhzd3snx/DriveDxReport2019-08-19_20-17-17-294.txt?dl=0
_________________________
Mac Pro dual-2.4 GHz, 10.13.6, 24 Gb RAM, 250 Gb Samsung EVO SSD/Velocity Solo PCIe card, 2x3Tb Seagate HD, 1x3Tb Hitachi HD, Dell 2408WFP; Canon PIXMA iX6550; CanoScan 8800F; MacBook Air 1.8 Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, 10.14.6, 256 Gb SSD; Vodafone Home Hub/BT Wi-Fi Extender.

Top
#52255 - 08/19/19 11:37 AM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
freelance Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
Loc: London, UK
Quote:
The point is, if you are using SSDs for long term historical or archival storage of data, the data needs to be "refreshed" (re-written) every few years to maintain its integrity. Data on magnetic media such as Hard Drives is longer lived but HDs are not immune to data loss over time either. I suspect your eight year old backup drive has lost some, perhaps a significant amount of its data integrity over the years. The drive is still perfectly usable but the data would be suspect. That is why I don't recommend SSDs for Time Machine and other backup media. HDs are still a LOT less expensive, retain data integrity longer, and speed is not a significant factor for backup purposes.

Would using Carbon Copy Cloner every month constitute a "refreshing?"

As far as "cheaper" goes, this 120 Gb SSD only cost under Β£20! I think I paid Β£120 when it was new. I know it's not a data backup solution and 4Tb SSDs are wildly expensive, but for what I needed, Β£20 was a bargain.
_________________________
Mac Pro dual-2.4 GHz, 10.13.6, 24 Gb RAM, 250 Gb Samsung EVO SSD/Velocity Solo PCIe card, 2x3Tb Seagate HD, 1x3Tb Hitachi HD, Dell 2408WFP; Canon PIXMA iX6550; CanoScan 8800F; MacBook Air 1.8 Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, 10.14.6, 256 Gb SSD; Vodafone Home Hub/BT Wi-Fi Extender.

Top
#52256 - 08/19/19 01:11 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: freelance]
joemikeb Online
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Originally Posted By: freelance
I had the SSD mounted in a USB caddy. DriveDx said if I wanted to get a report about the drive, I had to install another app, which I did. A reboot later, I got more info about the SSD.

What was the "other app"? There are others here who might like to know.

I notice the DriveDX report does not show the individual drives in your array and the actual SMART attribute values are not included in this report so in essence this becomes an elaborate SMART pass/fail similar to Disk Utility and other apps. What is missed by the lack of the individual attributes is any means of anticipating future drive failure. (I have had two drives fail completely yet Disk Utility still reported SMART passed.)

I have a four drive Thunderbolt 2 enclosure configured RAID 5 and Drive Scope reports each drive individually with all of their characteristics and reported SMART attributes, so I see the health of each drive independently. Since it is RAID 5 if any one of the four drives fails or is failing it can be "hot swapped" for a new drive while the array is in use and the system will automatically re-build/re-populate the failed drive so it is important that I know the health of each individual drive.

Originally Posted By: freelance
Would using Carbon Copy Cloner every month constitute a "refreshing?"

Maybe. Remember in CCC...

Originally Posted By: CCC
Only items that have been modified since the last backup task will be copied.
...so it is possible some files may grow quite old and never be rewritten.


Edited by joemikeb (08/19/19 01:35 PM)
Edit Reason: Add CCC comment
_________________________
joemikeb β€’ moderator

Top
#52258 - 08/19/19 03:18 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
freelance Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
Loc: London, UK
Quote:
What was the "other app"? There are others here who might like to know.

This page on BinaryFruit's site will explain:
https://binaryfruit.com/drivedx/usb-drive-support

I downloaded the DriveDx installer from their site and just followed the instructions when it noticed the external (UBS-mounted) drive. And, as you say, the report was not nearly as detailed as for the internal drives.

I only attached the report for the external drive. All internal drives had rather extensive reports, impressive enough for me to part with my cash.
_________________________
Mac Pro dual-2.4 GHz, 10.13.6, 24 Gb RAM, 250 Gb Samsung EVO SSD/Velocity Solo PCIe card, 2x3Tb Seagate HD, 1x3Tb Hitachi HD, Dell 2408WFP; Canon PIXMA iX6550; CanoScan 8800F; MacBook Air 1.8 Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, 10.14.6, 256 Gb SSD; Vodafone Home Hub/BT Wi-Fi Extender.

Top
#52265 - 08/19/19 10:29 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
With an ATA attached HDs or SSDs DS not only reports the drive's attributes but additionally in separate screens details about the drive itself, its capabilities, can trigger shut or long self-tests, and a log of previous self tests including SMART pass/fail.

Just noting that DriveDx does all of the same.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#52266 - 08/19/19 10:39 PM Re: SSD fails SMART [Re: joemikeb]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Originally Posted By: joemikeb
I notice the DriveDX report does not show the individual drives in your array and the actual SMART attribute values are not included in this report so in essence this becomes an elaborate SMART pass/fail similar to Disk Utility and other apps. What is missed by the lack of the individual attributes is any means of anticipating future drive failure. (I have had two drives fail completely yet Disk Utility still reported SMART passed.)

There's not much of it, but isn't this the S.M.A.R.T. attributes section of freelance's report?

=== DRIVE HEALTH INDICATORS ===
ID | NAME | TYPE | UPDATE | RAW VALUE | VALUE | THRESHOLD | WORST | LAST MODIFIED | STATUS
194 Temperature (Celsius) Life-span online 44 56 30 50 - 37.1% OK
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Moderator:  alternaut, cyn