Samsung F4EG/HD204UI 2TB. "(B5) Program Fail Count" S.M.A.R.T Attribute?

[llmercll]

Update. If you own a Samsung F4EG/HD204UI 2TB drive, please check the (B5) program fail count S.M.A.R.T attribute in a program like HDtune, and post your value in this thread. I have 3 drives with very high program fail count values (500,000 280,000 and 60,000), and still trying to decide whether or not this is a precursor to failure. I would very much appreciate your information =)

http://img573.imageshack.us/img573/3590/programfail.png

Original Post.

I recently got one of these and it's been a fairly pleasurable experience. No DOA's, but there is one S.M.A.R.T attribute that concerns me, and that's (B5) Program Fail Count. On my drive, and a friends, theres a large "Raw Data" number when viewing SMART.

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/1045/programfailcount.png

Our drives both report as pass/good on the smart evaluation, but that number keeps increasing. Mine started at 365, then jumped to 20,100, and now is at 91,000. My friends started at 75, and jumped to 285,000. SMART still reports good, though. It seems to happen after writing data to the disk, as it went up drastically after I filled it to 60%.

http://kb.acronis.com/content/9183

This is all the info I could find, not much. "Although degradation of this parameter can be an indicator of drive aging and/or potential electromechanical problems". This concerns me.

Does anyone have more info on this? Do we have bad drives just waiting to fail? I was told that it's an attribute found only on SSD's, and these aren't hybrid drives either. I have another one coming from newegg (although there was some shipping issues, ugg) and hopefully that one doesn't have it.

If you own this drive could you please check your numbers? It's been driving me nuts for days and theres no information on it.

thanks!

Heres some additional SMART info. Sorry for the poor formatting, I couldn't get it wide enough.

C:\Program Files (x86)\smartmontools\bin>smartctl -a D:
smartctl 5.40 2010-10-16 r3189 [i686-w64-mingw32-win7(64)] (sf-win32-5.40-1)
Copyright (C) 2002-10 by Bruce Allen, http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net

=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
Device Model: SAMSUNG HD204UI
Serial Number: S2H7J1BZ924019
Firmware Version: 1AQ10001
User Capacity: 2,000,398,934,016 bytes
Device is: Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall]
ATA Version is: 8
ATA Standard is: ATA-8-ACS revision 6
Local Time is: Sat Nov 06 04:44:41 2010 EDT
SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability.
SMART support is: Enabled

=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED

General SMART Values:
Offline data collection status: (0x00) Offline data collection activity
was never started.
Auto Offline Data Collection: Disabled.
Self-test execution status: ( 0) The previous self-test routine completed

without error or no self-test has ever
been run.
Total time to complete Offline
data collection: (19980) seconds.
Offline data collection
capabilities: (0x5b) SMART execute Offline immediate.
Auto Offline data collection on/off supp
ort.
Suspend Offline collection upon new
command.
Offline surface scan supported.
Self-test supported.
No Conveyance Self-test supported.
Selective Self-test supported.
SMART capabilities: (0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering
power-saving mode.
Supports SMART auto save timer.
Error logging capability: (0x01) Error logging supported.
General Purpose Logging supported.
Short self-test routine
recommended polling time: ( 2) minutes.
Extended self-test routine
recommended polling time: ( 255) minutes.
SCT capabilities: (0x003f) SCT Status supported.
SCT Error Recovery Control supported.
SCT Feature Control supported.
SCT Data Table supported.

SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_
FAILED RAW_VALUE
1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x002f 100 100 051 Pre-fail Always -
0
2 Throughput_Performance 0x0026 252 252 000 Old_age Always -
0
3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0023 068 067 025 Pre-fail Always -
9967
4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
12
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 252 252 010 Pre-fail Always -
0
7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x002e 252 252 051 Old_age Always -
0
8 Seek_Time_Performance 0x0024 252 252 015 Old_age Offline -
0
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
100
10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0032 252 252 051 Old_age Always -
0
11 Calibration_Retry_Count 0x0032 252 252 000 Old_age Always -
0
12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
12
181 Program_Fail_Cnt_Total 0x0022 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
90572
191 G-Sense_Error_Rate 0x0022 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
1
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0022 252 252 000 Old_age Always -
0
194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0002 064 064 000 Old_age Always -
27 (Min/Max 22/36)
195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered 0x003a 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
0
196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032 252 252 000 Old_age Always -
0
197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0032 252 252 000 Old_age Always -
0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0030 252 252 000 Old_age Offline -
0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x0036 200 200 000 Old_age Always -
0
200 Multi_Zone_Error_Rate 0x002a 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
0
223 Load_Retry_Count 0x0032 252 252 000 Old_age Always -
0
225 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always -
12

SMART Error Log Version: 1
No Errors Logged

SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1
No self-tests have been logged. [To run self-tests, use: smartctl -t]


Note: selective self-test log revision number (0) not 1 implies that no selectiv
e self-test has ever been run
SMART Selective self-test log data structure revision number 0
Note: revision number not 1 implies that no selective self-test has ever been ru
n
SPAN MIN_LBA MAX_LBA CURRENT_TEST_STATUS
1 0 0 Completed [00% left] (0-65535)
2 0 0 Not_testing
3 0 0 Not_testing
4 0 0 Not_testing
5 0 0 Not_testing
Selective self-test flags (0x0):
After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk.
If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute delay.


C:\Program Files (x86)\smartmontools\bin>

 

[tweakboy]

You should try a low level format which can fix bad sectors or possible issues your having.

DL a app like max llf low level format ,,, lots of free apps out there , so it does a deep format and fixes any flaws... hmm gl

 

[llmercll]

My second drive should be arriving Monday or Tuesday.

bump

 

[taltamir]

You should try a low level format which can fix bad sectors or possible issues your having.

You must have forgotten what I explained to you mere 3 days ago http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30704786&postcount=21
so let me quote what I said the last time you told someone to do that:

low level format cannot be performed in drives made in the past 15 years or so. Modern drives have such miniaturization that the low level format is performed on the platters by specialized hardware before they are assembled into a drive.

 

[tweakboy]

Yes you can do a low level format on any drive. Your wrong,, I did it and it fixed my 3 bad sectors ,,

A regular format didnt fix it nor apps nor chkdsk.. just 3 bad sectors,, now its 0 bad sectors after the low level format. Why you saying you cant do low level format I dont know ! That is what I did and it fixed the 3 bad sectors.

 

[taltamir]

Yes you can do a low level format on any drive. Your wrong,, I did it and it fixed my 3 bad sectors ,,

A regular format didnt fix it nor apps nor chkdsk.. just 3 bad sectors,, now its 0 bad sectors after the low level format. Why you saying you cant do low level format I dont know ! That is what I did and it fixed the 3 bad sectors.

there is no such thing as a regular format in windows.
windows has only two kinds of format, quick and full.
quick format simply writes a new and empty file table.
in winXP and earlier full format performs a quick format, followed by a bad sector test (read test).
in winVista and later full format performs a quick format then writes 0s to all sectors (which also finds bad sectors)

NEITHER is a low level format. but it WILL find bad sectors, it does not "fix" them, when the drive finds the bad sectors it remaps them to hidden spare area that has been preallocated exactly for that purpose.

A low level format actually has the drive rewrite the actual tracks, which cannot be done in any modern drive. Windows does not have an option to attempt a low level format because drives haven't been made that are capable of low level formatting themselves since DOS days.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Tweakster, he's right. LLF cannot be performed on modern IDE/SATA drives. That last drive that I LLFed was an MFM or RLL drive, back in the DOS XT days. Back then, drives had stepper motors controlling the heads, not voice-coil actuators.

 

[SickBeast]

This seems to be a common problem with these 2TB Samsung drives, unfortunately. I still wish I could have gotten one for $60 on newegg the other day though!

 

[llmercll]

This seems to be a common problem with these 2TB Samsung drives, unfortunately. I still wish I could have gotten one for $60 on newegg the other day though!

Could you explain more? Did you read about this somewhere else, I'd really like to see the article/thread.

program fail count on mine went up to 430,000.

 

[trelin]

Got one a week ago. Did a full zero-write to hopefully spur any initial reallocations (there weren't any) then backed up my other drives onto it, so thus far I've written the full 2TB worth of zeroes plus ~1TB of actual data.

My B5 is up to 675,000 and climbing. I say "B5" instead of "Program Fail Count" because that SMART attribute seems rather ill defined. Whereas some SMART utilities label it "Program Fail Count" others simply respond with "Unknown", indicating either an out of date program or a lack of standardization (atm both "System Information for Windows" and CrystalDiskInfo maintain the "Unknown" label). My own attempts to learn about that particular code have only produced documents relating it to solid state drives (that, and an amusing number of hits of various forums with posts by "||merc||", haha).

It's only a slightly educated guess, but my gut feeling is that it isn't anything to worry about. SMART has historically been haphazardly standardized in my opinion and I suspect this is another one of those times. Still, let us know if you find out more.

 

[tweakboy]

Well it did something positive when I used the free low level format app. Because it took away my 3 bad sectors, where as I had done 2 formats regular in windows on it and the bad sectors were there until I got this app I believe it was called max llf Anyhow I was seeing errors while it was doing it, Im like whats going on,, I rebooted and it wouldnt boot it had been formatted soo when I came back online I saw I ave 0 bad sectors. The low level app did something because it cleaned my bad sectors when other disk utilities failed and format failed too until I did this low level format where information can never be recovered by recovery software. If anyone has bad sectors I recommend. thx

 

[Soundmanred]

Well it did something positive when I used the free low level format app. Because it took away my 3 bad sectors, where as I had done 2 formats regular in windows on it and the bad sectors were there until I got this app I believe it was called max llf Anyhow I was seeing errors while it was doing it, Im like whats going on,, I rebooted and it wouldnt boot it had been formatted soo when I came back online I saw I ave 0 bad sectors. The low level app did something because it cleaned my bad sectors when other disk utilities failed and format failed too until I did this low level format where information can never be recovered by recovery software. If anyone has bad sectors I recommend. thx

Well, time to give up guys. He says he did it, so we must believe him. He's always been right in the past...

 

[llmercll]

It's only a slightly educated guess, but my gut feeling is that it isn't anything to worry about. SMART has historically been haphazardly standardized in my opinion and I suspect this is another one of those times. Still, let us know if you find out more.

Yeah, I'm thinking it's not a big deal either. That's why I want to get more user input to see how common it is. It most people have 0, then it may not be as harmless as I hope =/

The more users that submit their information the better =)

 

[tweakboy]

Well, time to give up guys. He says he did it, so we must believe him. He's always been right in the past...

gg and gb

 

[Soundmanred]

gg and gb

Man, you crucify me.

On Topic:
I've had some drive with some strangely high S.M.A.R.T. readings (in certain categories) and they've never shown any kind of decreased performance or any adverse effects. Higher numbers in some cateegories can be a prelude to failure, but it seems some are just there as simple data.

 

[llmercll]

Keep the thread on topic please

bump!

 

[SickBeast]

Could you explain more? Did you read about this somewhere else, I'd really like to see the article/thread.

program fail count on mine went up to 430,000.

TBH I don't remember where I read it, but IIRC I've read a few stories about people having issues with these drives. There were a bunch of horror stories because Samsung apparently doesn't always honor their warranties. I'm pretty sure some of the stuff I read was on the newegg.com user reviews.

 

[llmercll]

Got my third drive...and more flash program errors!

Started at 308, transferring data to it now, already up to 3000.

up to 8000

 

[SickBeast]

Got my third drive...and more flash program errors!

Started at 308, transferring data to it now, already up to 3000.

up to 8000

Perhaps there is a problem within your computer. What kind of PSU do you have? It doesn't make sense that you've received 3 bad drives in a row. The odds of that happening are incredibly remote.

I've seen shoddy old electrical systems in houses kill computer components before.

 

[SickBeast]

gg and gb

Isn't "gb" a gravity bong? Are you serious?

 

[SickBeast]

If it is a gravity bong it explains a lot. :biggrin:

 

[llmercll]

I agree it's highly unlikely that I'd receive 3 "bad" drives in a row. My computer is fine as far as I can tell, no issues whatsoever, and the hard drives are all working great...so I'm starting to think this smart value is just some BS.

That's why I want more people to post their information, if a lot of owners have high program fail count data, it may just be the way these drives are. It seems like an iffy SMART value from the get-go.

up to 60,000 now, climbing about as fast as the other drives did, only when writing data it seems. reading doesn't make it go up.

 

[tweakboy]

That sounds normal to me SoundMandred no need to worry about it but of course doing a image or backin up is essential.

llmercll that is crazy, I mean Im thinking it might be something on your end like you dont screw on the drives tightly enough on both sides, thus vibration thus errors etc.. Not blaming you Im just saying. As long as the drive is not Maxtor or Hitachi your drives should last for long time. I still got my 120GB WDC going strong at 42000 hours... 6 years... this pic was taken 2 months ago btw..

 

[llmercll]

The drives are screwed in and secured in my antec 900. It could be my computer, but it runs flawlessly, all fairly new equipment on a rock solid corsair PSU =)

I'm just going to keep them. I doubt it's anything major, and the drives are performing flawlessly asides from the program fail count. I'm just going to have to keep a close eye on smart, and of course keep my data securely backed up. ES Tool passes all the drives.

Still looking for information though, if anyone has one of these drives please check smart for (b5) program fail count and let me know what the RAW value says.

 

[SickBeast]

Is your computer overclocked in any way? I know that if you mess with the FSB it can cause hard drive corruption if you don't lock things down properly.