Is my Seagate failing?


F

Frustrated

I'm not getting any help on Seagate Forums.

Just wondering if this Seagate Barracuda drive is failing. I am getting a
high reallocated sector count which previously, back in January I had normal
values. I have attached a link to the image (via imageshack):
http://img31.imageshack.us/i/screenshot005dnb.jpg/

HDTune shows the following issues:

HD Tune: ST31000340AS Health

ID Current Worst
Threshold Data Status
(01) Raw Read Error Rate 118 99 6
201166210 Ok
(03) Spin Up Time 91 91 0
0 Ok
(04) Start/Stop Count 100 100 20
406 Ok
(05) Reallocated Sector Count 99 99 36
21 Ok
(07) Seek Error Rate 72 60 30
34174535 Ok
(09) Power On Hours Count 99 99 0
1189 Ok
(0A) Spin Retry Count 100 100 97
3 Ok
(0C) Power Cycle Count 100 100 20
396 Ok
(B8) (unknown attribute) 100 100 99
0 Ok
(BB) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BC) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BD) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BE) Airflow Temperature 63 58 45
622329893 Ok
(C2) Temperature 37 42 0
37 Ok
(C3) Hardware ECC Recovered 48 17 0
201166210 Ok
(C5) Current Pending Sector 100 100 0
0 Ok
(C6) Offline Uncorrectable 100 100 0
0 Ok
(C7) Ultra DMA CRC Error Count 200 200 0
0 Ok

Power On Time : 1189
Health Status : Ok
 
Ad

Advertisements

A

Arno

Frustrated said:
I'm not getting any help on Seagate Forums.
Just wondering if this Seagate Barracuda drive is failing. I am getting a
high reallocated sector count which previously, back in January I had normal
values. I have attached a link to the image (via imageshack):
http://img31.imageshack.us/i/screenshot005dnb.jpg/
HDTune shows the following issues:
HD Tune: ST31000340AS Health
ID Current Worst
Threshold Data Status
(01) Raw Read Error Rate 118 99 6
201166210 Ok
(03) Spin Up Time 91 91 0
0 Ok
(04) Start/Stop Count 100 100 20
406 Ok
(05) Reallocated Sector Count 99 99 36
21 Ok

21 reallocations is not a lot.
(07) Seek Error Rate 72 60 30
34174535 Ok

Something wrong with seeking, it seems.
(09) Power On Hours Count 99 99 0
1189 Ok
(0A) Spin Retry Count 100 100 97
3 Ok
(0C) Power Cycle Count 100 100 20
396 Ok
(B8) (unknown attribute) 100 100 99
0 Ok
(BB) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BC) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BD) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BE) Airflow Temperature 63 58 45
622329893 Ok
(C2) Temperature 37 42 0
37 Ok
(C3) Hardware ECC Recovered 48 17 0
201166210 Ok

But this looks bad. A coocked value of 48 indicates a real issue to me.
(C5) Current Pending Sector 100 100 0
0 Ok
(C6) Offline Uncorrectable 100 100 0
0 Ok
(C7) Ultra DMA CRC Error Count 200 200 0
0 Ok
Power On Time : 1189
Health Status : Ok

I would say this thing has some real problems reading, which
also lead to seek problems. Machanical shock, damage
to the read amplifier and bad power are the likely candidates.
In the last case the disk would be fine.

If you do not mind too mauch, replace it but keep it for a while
in case the new drive also shows symptoms.

Arno
 
R

Rod Speed

Frustrated said:
I'm not getting any help on Seagate Forums.
Just wondering if this Seagate Barracuda drive is failing.

Looks like it.
I am getting a high reallocated sector count which previously, back in January I had normal values.

That normally does mean that the drive is failing.
I have attached a link to the image (via imageshack): http://img31.imageshack.us/i/screenshot005dnb.jpg/
HDTune shows the following issues:

HD Tune: ST31000340AS Health

ID Current Worst
Threshold Data Status
(01) Raw Read Error Rate 118 99 6
201166210 Ok
(03) Spin Up Time 91 91 0
0 Ok
(04) Start/Stop Count 100 100 20
406 Ok
(05) Reallocated Sector Count 99 99 36
21 Ok

Thats certainly very high.
(07) Seek Error Rate 72 60 30
34174535 Ok

Thats not great either.
(09) Power On Hours Count 99 99 0
1189 Ok
(0A) Spin Retry Count 100 100 97
3 Ok
(0C) Power Cycle Count 100 100 20
396 Ok
(B8) (unknown attribute) 100 100 99
0 Ok
(BB) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BC) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BD) (unknown attribute) 100 100 0
0 Ok
(BE) Airflow Temperature 63 58 45
622329893 Ok
(C2) Temperature 37 42 0
37 Ok
(C3) Hardware ECC Recovered 48 17 0
201166210 Ok

Neither is that.
(C5) Current Pending Sector 100 100 0
0 Ok
(C6) Offline Uncorrectable 100 100 0
0 Ok
(C7) Ultra DMA CRC Error Count 200 200 0
0 Ok

Power On Time : 1189
Health Status : Ok

Its passed its useby data, you into necrophilia ?
 
F

Frustrated

Thanks guys. I'm going to RMA the drive. I am having problems though
with Acronis backing it up. I'm backing it up on a drive that has over
200 GB of room. Acronis needs about 170 GB to backup the entire drive
(two partitions); however, even after several hours of backing it up, it
fails the Validation when I run it manually. I'm going to get a new
drive, a WD and try to clone the Seagate. I sure hope there won't be
any problems during the process. Do you think there will be?
 
R

Rod Speed

Frustrated said:
Thanks guys. I'm going to RMA the drive. I am having problems though
with Acronis backing it up. I'm backing it up on a drive that has
over 200 GB of room. Acronis needs about 170 GB to backup the entire
drive (two partitions); however, even after several hours of backing
it up, it fails the Validation when I run it manually. I'm going to
get a new drive, a WD and try to clone the Seagate. I sure hope
there won't be any problems during the process. Do you think there will be?

Probably, likely its the seek error problem thats preventing a proper image.

Havent tried using TI on a drive thats that bad tho. Cloning might work better than imaging.
 
F

Franc Zabkar

Something wrong with seeking, it seems.

Not at all.

The drive has experienced zero seek errors in 34174535 seeks.

A new drive begins life with a cooked value of 60.

- Franc Zabkar
 
Ad

Advertisements

R

Rod Speed

Ato_Zee wrote
Acronis nearly always fails validation when the drive
is not a SATA or IDE device off the motherrboard.

Bullshit. I havent ever had it fail in that situation.
If I copy a failed validation on an external USB to the PC's OS HD it passes validation.

Then there is a problem with your USB.
Showing it wasn't corrupt after all, and it does restore without error.
Yes.

Googling showed that this failed validation on USB external drives is not uncommon.

Thats nothing like your original.
Tip, after restore run a defrag, the restored files seem scattered
all over the drive. If using Perfect Disk a defrag at roughly
monthly intervals will optimise the drive using smart placing.

Defragging is a complete waste of time with modern drives.
 
F

Frustrated

: Probably, likely its the seek error problem thats preventing a proper
image.
:
: Havent tried using TI on a drive thats that bad tho. Cloning might
work better than imaging.

I'm using version 11. I tried doing a backup using USB drive to load
Acronis (usually do it this way) and also with Windows. Got an error
message at 86% saying unable to compete or something similar "likely
caused by bad sector".

I'm running XP checkdisk and attempting to fix the bad sectors as I type
this. If I dont succeed, any idea if there is an app that can do a
better job in attempting to recover the bad sectors or even allowing me
to backup my drive?
 
R

Rod Speed

Frustrated wrote
I'm using version 11. I tried doing a backup using USB drive
to load Acronis (usually do it this way) and also with Windows.
Got an error message at 86% saying unable to compete or
something similar "likely caused by bad sector".

There werent any pending sectors on the last SMART report, see if there are any now.
I'm running XP checkdisk and attempting to fix the bad sectors as I type this.
If I dont succeed, any idea if there is an app that can do a better job in
attempting to recover the bad sectors or even allowing me to backup my drive?

Yes, CloneDisk from http://www.invircible.com/resq.php
should clone the drive fine, trys hard with bad
sectors and clones what it can with a dying drive.

Its not free tho, tho not very expensive, and runs on DOS
so you do need to be able to boot dos from say a floppy.
 
F

Frustrated

: There werent any pending sectors on the last SMART report, see if
there are any now.

None reported. I downloaded Seatools for DOS and it passed both the
Short DFT.
:
: Yes, CloneDisk from http://www.invircible.com/resq.php
: should clone the drive fine, trys hard with bad
: sectors and clones what it can with a dying drive.
:
: Its not free tho, tho not very expensive, and runs on DOS
: so you do need to be able to boot dos from say a floppy.

Thanks. I'll definitely take a look at it if subsequent back-ups fail.

Have you or anyone else disabled the "disable bad sectors option" in
Acronis and tried to make an image that way?
 
Ad

Advertisements

R

Rod Speed

Frustrated wrote
None reported. I downloaded Seatools for
DOS and it passed both the Short DFT.
Thanks. I'll definitely take a look at it if subsequent back-ups fail.
Have you or anyone else disabled the "disable bad sectors option"
in Acronis and tried to make an image that way?

I havent, essentially because I backup frequently so I dont need to do
anything special if a drive dies. And I have only ever had one drive die
anyway and it didnt die fast enough to be a problem. In fact it died
so slowly that I had to kill it quite literally to claim on the warranty.
 
F

Frustrated

: I havent, essentially because I backup frequently so I dont need to do
: anything special if a drive dies. And I have only ever had one drive
die
: anyway and it didnt die fast enough to be a problem. In fact it died
: so slowly that I had to kill it quite literally to claim on the
warranty.

That's cool.

I downloaded Clonedisk and transferred it to a floppy. I wasn't able to
do so in Windows 7 so I went to XP. Now, when I boot from the floppy,
Free DOS just hangs. Maybe it needs a license but I didnt see anywhere
I would/could enter it?
 
F

Frustrated

: > I downloaded Clonedisk and transferred it to a floppy. I wasn't
able
: > to do so in Windows 7 so I went to XP. Now, when I boot from the
: > floppy, Free DOS just hangs. Maybe it needs a license but I didnt
: > see anywhere I would/could enter it?
:
: http://www.invircible.com/intro/reg_into.php


Thanks. Looks like TI "clonedisk" worked. However, Windows 7 wouldn't
boot and I have to use a floppy to access my one of my two previous XP
partitions. I even used a windows based Partition fixer and created
another MBR but that won't allow my system to boot like before:

1. Earlier Windows versions (new and old)
2. Windows 7.

I'll be repairing Windows 7 and see how that goes. However, I dunno why
this happened since I disconnected my old Seagate drive and connected my
new, cloned drive. Everything should've worked as it should, so I
thought. :(
 
R

Rod Speed

Frustrated wrote
Thanks. Looks like TI "clonedisk" worked. However, Windows 7 wouldn't boot

There have been some issues with cloning it even with perfect drives.
and I have to use a floppy to access my one of my two previous XP partitions.

What happens if you dont ?
I even used a windows based Partition fixer and created another
MBR but that won't allow my system to boot like before:
1. Earlier Windows versions (new and old)
2. Windows 7.

You should be able to manually edit the boot.ini
The format is pretty obvious and its documented on the web.
I'll be repairing Windows 7 and see how that goes.

Yeah, worth a try.
However, I dunno why this happened since I disconnected
my old Seagate drive and connected my new, cloned drive.
Everything should've worked as it should, so I thought. :(

Yeah, but the cloning may well have failed to copy some stuff properly.
 
Ad

Advertisements

F

Franc Zabkar

Are you sure? I thought the convention was to start
with 100 or 255 and that is the values I have been
seeing so far...

AFAICT Seagate drives start with 253 and then quickly settle on 60.

I believe this is because early data are not statistically
significant. For example, what can you infer about a drive that fails
on its very first seek, or experiences 1 seek error in 10 seeks?

AFAICT a cooked value of 60 equates to no errors in 1 million seeks,
and a value of 70 represents 10 million.

- Franc Zabkar
 
T

Tom Del Rosso

Franc said:
AFAICT a cooked value of 60 equates to no errors in 1 million seeks,
and a value of 70 represents 10 million.

How can you determine that? There isn't enough info to calculate it for my
drive because it gives the number of errors but not the total number of
seeks.
 
F

Franc Zabkar

How can you determine that? There isn't enough info to calculate it for my
drive because it gives the number of errors but not the total number of
seeks.

I have analysed data from many different Seagate drives including my
own. The raw Seek Error Rate figure is a 48 bit value. The uppermost
16 bits store the number of errors, in your case zero, and the lower
32 bits hold the total number of seeks.

- Franc Zabkar
 
Ad

Advertisements

A

Arno

I have analysed data from many different Seagate drives including my
own. The raw Seek Error Rate figure is a 48 bit value. The uppermost
16 bits store the number of errors, in your case zero, and the lower
32 bits hold the total number of seeks.

Hmm. I seem to be falling fro this time and again. Thanks
for the reminder.

Arno
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top