Timeline for "Bad" read error rate for SSD?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2021 at 6:35 | comment | added | ManRow |
@JamesT Indeed -- even wmic diskdrive get status reports a "Pred Fail" for my SSD...
|
|
| May 26, 2021 at 7:06 | comment | added | James T | @sawdust From the new Micron Storage Executive screen shot, it looks like your right (since they interpret the drive to be in good health). I assumed Micron's docs must be wrong or misunderstood since growing the normalized current value with age goes against the norm. Any SMART utility other than Micron's own will interpret this SSD as bad. | |
| May 26, 2021 at 2:18 | comment | added | sawdust |
I prefer to interpret the numbers using the manufacturer's documentation rather than generic guides. Additionally the other SMART values do not correlate at all with a doomsday read error rate, e.g. the raw Cumulative ECC Bit Correction Count and Reported Uncorrectable Errors are not large.
|
|
| May 26, 2021 at 1:34 | comment | added | James T | @sawdust I'm talking about the normalized value which is used in the "Current" field. It is standard for a higher number to be better in the normalized value. Please see the article I referenced and quoted. It is also described in the wikipedia article. You are correct that a higher value in the "Raw Values" column is probably not a good thing. | |
| May 26, 2021 at 0:59 | comment | added | sawdust | "higher is better" -- A "higher" error rate is never "better". | |
| May 25, 2021 at 19:28 | history | answered | James T | CC BY-SA 4.0 |