Any diagnostic tool for Samsung SATA?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Sun Mar 07, 2004 1:08 pm

A few weeks ago I had a system crash and couldn't get to the desktop. Before that happened, I was getting a check disk on bootup that found some things and they were corrected. About 2 weeks later I had another system crash and couldn't get to the desktop - and preceeding that I was getting those same type check disk on bootup. Each time I was able to wipe the drive clean and do a fresh install of XP. The last time I went through the reinstallation, everything seemed fine after installing all my drivers and software but the next morning, I couldn't get to the desktop for it froze at the XP logo screen and eventually the screen turned dark blue. I again wiped the hdd clean and reinstalled XP but not any firewall - just using XP's firewall now - and McAfee Virus Scan (not Norton Internet Security or as the last time with McAfee's firewall and AV) and today all is well so far. But I have noticed that it takes longer for XP to shut down. Oh, another thing I did this time is install an older driver for my ATI 9600 video card. So far I have not gotten the check disk on bootup but it's only one day and who know what tomorrow will bring?

I called Samsung and they say there is no utility to check the drive for a bad sector or whatever. So, is there a utility to find out if something is wrong with my SP0812C?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Sun Mar 07, 2004 3:38 pm

Just to let you guys know how long it takes Windows to shut down:

From the time I click on Turn Off it takes 45 seconds for the computer to shut down. The real hang time is when "Windows is shutting down" is displayed and that's like at least 30 seconds.

This shutdown problem was solved by taking out McAfee AV and putting in NIS.

dukla2000 · Post by **dukla2000** » Sun Mar 07, 2004 4:45 pm

The only thing I know of is a Scandisk with surface scan. Chances it will find anything useful are minimal but we are clutching at straws as my googling in the past week didn't find any SATA diagnostic utilities (for any maker)!

In Win98 days (for me this morning) slow shutdown (up to and including infinite!) was mostly due to a bad device/driver combo. Your history indicates a dodgy drive but the slow shutdown may be a symptom of something else. Does XP keep a (timed) shutdown log you can check?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Sun Mar 07, 2004 5:51 pm

dukla2000 wrote:The only thing I know of is a Scandisk with surface scan. Chances it will find anything useful are minimal but we are clutching at straws as my googling in the past week didn't find any SATA diagnostic utilities (for any maker)!

In Win98 days (for me this morning) slow shutdown (up to and including infinite!) was mostly due to a bad device/driver combo. Your history indicates a dodgy drive but the slow shutdown may be a symptom of something else. Does XP keep a (timed) shutdown log you can check?

I don't know about a timed shutdown log in XP. I do know that before this last new installation of XP, the computer shut down a lot faster. The driver change is my video card - I went to an older video card driver because I don't know if the new driver from ATI caused that system problem. Otherwise, so far, the computer is working alright and no check disk upon booting - yet!

BTW, boot up time is fine.

The only thing I didn't load from before is the Via Raid Tool that is loaded in Windows at the desktop - but that's just a utility to check your raid configuration. I only use one drive so don't see a need for it. I am trying to isolate the problem causing the system not being able to boot into Windows. So far, it has to be either the video card driver or the hdd. As long as the hdd is working without problems, I would say it was the more recent ATI video card drivers - but too soon to really know.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Sun Mar 07, 2004 6:40 pm

Dukla, this probably has nothing to do with shutdown but just to make sure the BIOS is set right:

Memory Frequency is set to Auto. I have the Barton 2500+ set at 1833 for speed and should I set Memory Frequency to 333 or 400 instead of Auto?

OS/2 Onboard Memory 64M is set to Disabled - is that OK?

dukla2000 · Post by **dukla2000** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:55 am

JVM wrote:Memory Frequency is set to Auto. I have the Barton 2500+ set at 1833 for speed and should I set Memory Frequency to 333 or 400 instead of Auto?

In theory any option should be OK, but in my experience, while BIOS memory settings can make a big difference to memory benchmarks, they make very little difference to real daily work so there is no point overdoing things.
1) If you have DDR2700 you should definately set 333.
2) If you have DDR3200 (or better) then auto will set it to 400. (My 3 systems are all DDR3200 with 166fsb, not sure what auto will select for DDR2700.) You can check this with CPU-Z by the way. 400 (or Auto that causes 333 or 400) will be fine with a Barton.
3) Unless you have some overpriced/branded DDR that details all its specs then my view is set the BIOS to pick timings via SPD.
4) As per 3 set SDRAM 1T Command to disabled or 2T. While 1T makes quite a big improvement to benchmarks, most mid/low end DDR (say Crucial downwards) is not really up to it and I have recently noticed Memtest/Prime soak test problems because I have habitually set 1T=Yes: I am busy reforming!
5) If you have DDR2100 or lower then I would recomend running it overspec at 333. Running DRAM slower than the CPU will throttle the CPU. But I would also 'stability test' the hell out of this overclock setting: full MemTest/Goldmem followed by 24 hours Prime. (Actually I recommend this test regime for any config.)

JVM wrote:OS/2 Onboard Memory 64M is set to Disabled - is that OK?

Yup - or at least that is what I do

No doubt Adrian's Rojak optimisation guide will give the real facts but my understanding is this is one of those daft 'legacy' hangovers that apply to people who run OS/2. Doubt it make any difference to any OS shipped in the last 10 years but figure Disabled is correct.

ps - worked out overnight my suggestion for a shutdown logfile was ridiculous as part of the shutdown process will be to shutdown the HDD after which nothing can be written

While I dont know a way to get Win98 'verbose', Linux is nice in that you can get a log to screen of what is happening (or not as the case may be): not sure if there is a 'verbose' shutdown option for XP?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 8:27 am

Dukla, I have Crucial PC 3200 DDR and do you think it's better to let the MB set it Auto or should I set it at 400? The reason I ask is I wonder if I can trust that auto setting - just paranoid I guess.

Well, so far no problems with check disk - and that's a good sign. But I am getting that long delay before shutting down. I will check out a few things by doing a little work with msconfig and Startup. However, I can't see how the Startup menu would affect shutdown.

I'll have to check that SDRAM 1T Command - With my Crucial memory you are suggesting I set it to 2T or disabled? I'll check it and see where it's at but my only choices are Disabled, Enabled, or Auto. Which one should I select? I just checked and it's set at Auto. Should it be changed to Disabled or left at Auto?

dukla2000 · Post by **dukla2000** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 10:15 am

For paranoia settings I would set mem speed to 333 and 1T to Disabled.

For normal settings I would set Auto (and expect the BIOS to pick 400: as I say if you download CPU-Z you can check what happened) and Disabled.

For tweaking/overclocking I would set 400 and Enabled.

My Crucial DDR2100 survived incredible abuse: running at DDR2700 with 1T enabled I never got any stability test errors. Dont know if their DDR2700 is as robust but would expect it is.

GenghiS_KhaN · Post by **GenghiS_KhaN** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 11:07 am

maybe you can try installing the newest drivers for the radeon and see what happens??

Or if you have a logitech usb keyboar that could be the cause of your slow shutdown too.. Ive seen it al arround the web, people using a logitech keyboard attached to the usb port and having a very slow shut down, even I did, but it kept on trying to shut down all the programs instead of freezing at the windows is shutting down screen...

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:34 pm

dukla2000 wrote:For paranoia settings I would set mem speed to 333 and 1T to Disabled.

For normal settings I would set Auto (and expect the BIOS to pick 400: as I say if you download CPU-Z you can check what happened) and Disabled.

For tweaking/overclocking I would set 400 and Enabled.

My Crucial DDR2100 survived incredible abuse: running at DDR2700 with 1T enabled I never got any stability test errors. Dont know if their DDR2700 is as robust but would expect it is.

Any particular reason you suggest Disabled for 1T command as opposed to Auto?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:36 pm

GenghiS_KhaN wrote:maybe you can try installing the newest drivers for the radeon and see what happens??

Or if you have a logitech usb keyboar that could be the cause of your slow shutdown too.. Ive seen it al arround the web, people using a logitech keyboard attached to the usb port and having a very slow shut down, even I did, but it kept on trying to shut down all the programs instead of freezing at the windows is shutting down screen...

I have a Microsoft keyboard. I did speak to a guy at AMD who said it does take a long time for XP to shut down. However, I've only experienced this after a reinstallation of a reinstallation. Oh, I checked and just one version of XP on my system.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:40 pm

I just did a scan ay Windows Update and it came up with a driver update from Advanced Micro Devices Processor Update released on 12/17/02 for AMD K7 Processor. I really don't like downloading drivers from Windows Update but can't find this update driver anywhere else. Anyone have any suggestions?

dukla2000 · Post by **dukla2000** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:53 pm

JVM wrote:Any particular reason you suggest Disabled for 1T command as opposed to Auto?

Personal suspicion/cynicism, and being a control freak I like to know what is happening.

For the bus speed I am OK to abdicate control as either option should be OK and I can find out what happened. For 1T Command I know I have had problems with Enabled so am less happy to abdicate: also it is harder to verify. (Sandra seems to get it right, but it gets other things wrong and so I dont really trust it.)

Schroinx · Post by **Schroinx** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:53 pm

Have you tried the Hitachi Drive Fitness Test software? You can still do the SMART test. Well, I could.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:08 pm

Schroinx wrote:Have you tried the Hitachi Drive Fitness Test software? You can still do the SMART test. Well, I could.

I checked with the Hitachi tool and SMART is enabled.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:15 pm

dukla2000 wrote:
JVM wrote:Any particular reason you suggest Disabled for 1T command as opposed to Auto?
Personal suspicion/cynicism, and being a control freak I like to know what is happening. For the bus speed I am OK to abdicate control as either option should be OK and I can find out what happened. For 1T Command I know I have had problems with Enabled so am less happy to abdicate: also it is harder to verify. (Sandra seems to get it right, but it gets other things wrong and so I dont really trust it.)

Okay, Dukla, but I still don't understand why you trust Auto for memory and not the 1T command? The 1T command has Enabled, Disabled, and Auto.

Actually, since we want 400 for memory, why not just set it at 400 instead of Auto?

dukla2000 · Post by **dukla2000** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 5:47 pm

JVM wrote:... why you trust Auto for memory

Because if you have DDR3200 and select Auto the BIOS cannot get it wrong - 333 is fine, 400 is fine.

JVM wrote:... and not the 1T command?

Because there is a chance the BIOS can get it wrong: if you set Auto and the BIOS decides to enable 1T command there is a chance of instability (at least with non-premium RAM. IMHO Crucial defines the middle ground: inexpensive but performs pretty well even if you tweak it. Anything more expensive is premium and should definately perform to better settings than Crucial. Anything less expensive may be OK but may be low performing or even unable to perform.)

JVM wrote:Actually, since we want 400 for memory, why not just set it at 400 instead of Auto?

Because the gains are somewhere between 0 and minimal; the CPU cant handle data any faster. And by running DDR3200 at DDR2700 speed you may get a notch faster on all the other timings (CAS etc) or just be more stable.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:02 pm

dukla2000 wrote:
JVM wrote:... why you trust Auto for memory
Because if you have DDR3200 and select Auto the BIOS cannot get it wrong - 333 is fine, 400 is fine.
JVM wrote:... and not the 1T command?
Because there is a chance the BIOS can get it wrong: if you set Auto and the BIOS decides to enable 1T command there is a chance of instability (at least with non-premium RAM. IMHO Crucial defines the middle ground: inexpensive but performs pretty well even if you tweak it. Anything more expensive is premium and should definately perform to better settings than Crucial. Anything less expensive may be OK but may be low performing or even unable to perform.)
JVM wrote:Actually, since we want 400 for memory, why not just set it at 400 instead of Auto?
Because the gains are somewhere between 0 and minimal; the CPU cant handle data any faster. And by running DDR3200 at DDR2700 speed you may get a notch faster on all the other timings (CAS etc) or just be more stable.

Okay, I thank you for the explanations.

But just one, well, two more questions:

Since I paid about $100 dollars for my 512 MB Crucial card, what do you consider expensive, or better yet, what are the premium memory cards?

Now the last question, Windows Update found a software update for me "Advanced Micro Devices Processor Software Update Released on 12/17/02 Supported Hardware AMD K7 Processor.

Now, I have a K7 Processor according to the AMD guy I spoke to. I don't like to update software from Windows Update but can't find this update elsewhere. The AMD guy said it's at ViaArena but I went there and I couldn't find it. Do you have any suggestions?

Thanks!

dukla2000 · Post by **dukla2000** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 1:55 am

JVM wrote:Since I paid about $100 dollars for my 512 MB Crucial card, what do you consider expensive, or better yet, what are the premium memory cards?

Corsair seem to me to be the leaders, Geil, OCZ etc are trying to emulate. I have never bought anything 'better' than Crucial so dont claim expertiese in this area.

I dont know WinXP at all so cant comment on the update: isn't there a link when MS proposes the update that will give more details?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 8:50 am

dukla2000 wrote:
JVM wrote:Since I paid about $100 dollars for my 512 MB Crucial card, what do you consider expensive, or better yet, what are the premium memory cards?
Corsair seem to me to be the leaders, Geil, OCZ etc are trying to emulate. I have never bought anything 'better' than Crucial so dont claim expertiese in this area.

I dont know WinXP at all so cant comment on the update: isn't there a link when MS proposes the update that will give more details?

All it says is what I showed above and no link but just Supported Hardware K7 Processor.

Schroinx · Post by **Schroinx** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:15 am

You have forgotten to mention Mushkin. It seems to be pretty reliable but are a little expensive. However I have noting to compare it with. Have two sticks of 512 500MHz.

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 12, 2004 5:04 pm

For those interested, I called Samsung last week and was told there was no utility for SATA hdd's. Today I got a call from Samsung tech support that they contacted Korea and e-mailed me the Hutil utility for SATA drives. This is not the same one as on the website according to the tech guy. The one on the website is just for PATA drives. So, just thought I'd let you guys know there is a utility for Samsung SATA drives that checks the HDD and changes AAM and does all that the PATA version does--but it is not on their website at this time.

I got it through e-mail.

owain_thomas · Post by **owain_thomas** » Sat Mar 13, 2004 4:56 pm

any chance you could share it, how big is the file, hotmail-able?

Thanks
Owain

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Sat Mar 13, 2004 5:10 pm

owain_thomas wrote:any chance you could share it, how big is the file, hotmail-able?

Thanks
Owain

It's only 150 KB. I sent it to MikeC and maybe he will post here somewhere; meanwhile, if you send me a private message with your email address, I could send it to you. You could also reply here with your email address - either way it works.

owain_thomas · Post by **owain_thomas** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 11:58 am

just tried the utility, it looks like its looking at the IDE channels instead of the SATA ones, did you get it to work on yours JVM?

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 4:18 pm

owain_thomas wrote:just tried the utility, it looks like its looking at the IDE channels instead of the SATA ones, did you get it to work on yours JVM?

No, I haven't because the check disk errors I was getting has disappeared with my last install of XP. So the drive is working alright and I don't have a need to do anything. I am surprised at what you say. I can assure you that Samsung tech support told me over the phone he was e-mailing the SATA version of the hutil.creator exe utility and that's what I sent you.

dimva · Post by **dimva** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:33 pm

owain_thomas wrote:just tried the utility, it looks like its looking at the IDE channels instead of the SATA ones, did you get it to work on yours JVM?

Same problem here. In fact I checked, it looks like the util JVM sent me is the same one you can download from their site - and both are PATA-only.

owain_thomas · Post by **owain_thomas** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 12:44 am

JVM · Post by **JVM** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:18 am

Well, that's Samsung's tech support. All I can say is this guy from tech support told me the download came from Korea and is for the SATA drives.

EasyRaider · Post by **EasyRaider** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 6:21 am

About DDR333 vs. 400:

It's usually recommended to run with synchronous FSB and memory frequency. nForce(2) systems, and possibly others, will actually run slower if you set the memory to 400 with a 333 MHz FSB.