Is Samsung's HUTIL system diagnostic valid on a SP1614c?

Silencing hard drives, optical drives and other storage devices

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Is Samsung's HUTIL system diagnostic valid on a SP1614c?

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:15 am

I have downloaded Samsung's hard drive utility (HUTIL v1.21) to test my Samsung SP1614c.

Samsung's website doesn't list this SATA drive under the intended drives for this program, but I've read that others have used this program without incident.

When I run the System Diagnostic in HUTIL, I consistently get an "LBA (some number) error is uncorrectable" error message during it's simple surface scan.

When I run their complete surface scan, I quickly get screens full of "LBA (some number" error is uncorrectable" error messages.

What exactly do these error messages mean and are they valid with my non-EIDE drive?

I have been able to install Windows on a 6 GB C: partition, but a subsequent 130 GB D: partition gets stuck at about 16% during format using diskmgmt.msc. I have also created various other dummy partitions and then a small 1 GB partition afterwards and there appear to be other parts of the disk where formatting of the small 1 GB partition also just gets stuck (says formatting, but just stalls, though my computer isn't frozen in any other way and task manager doesn't say any program is not responding).

I'm hoping that I've just got software conflict and not physical damage to my drive. Is what I describe totally inconsistent with a physically damaged drive (e. g. a massive number of bad sectors? If not, could this be due to shipping damage?)

Any insights would be greatly appreciated!

geogecko
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:05 pm

Post by geogecko » Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:46 am

Have you tried just doing one partition of the entire drive? Are you using fairly new hardware (i.e., motherboard)?

What version of Windows?

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:05 am

Hi:

No, I haven't tried just formatting the whole drive as a single partition. May I ask what problem this maneuveur will prove or rule out?

My mobo is an Asus A7N8X v2 Deluxe (BIOS 1005) with a Silicon Image 3112a integrated SATA RAID controller. I have used various Sil Image drivers, including 1.2.0.57, 1.0.0.32, and 1.0.0.22.

I have installed Windows XP Home sp1a, updated to SP2 and patched to current.

Do you think I have a physically damaged hard drive or does this sound like a driver, bios, or sofware conflict of some sort.

geogecko
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:05 pm

Post by geogecko » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:15 am

The reason for the single partition, is to simplify everything.

Is this a new drive?

Do you have a computer that possibly has SATA support, that isn't RAID based. I looked up your motherboard, and from what I can tell, if you use SATA drives, they are using the SI chip. I guess the nForce2 didn't have SATA built-in?

I'm not sure what this could be. Seems a bit odd, especially if it's a new drive.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:18 am

Yes, it's a brand new OEM pull I won on Ebay (Nidec motor, too).

The auctioner said it was tested and working perfectly and the shipping box appears undamaged.

The A7N8X v2 is the only computer I have with a SATA controller.

It sound like you don't think this is a physically damaged hard drive. True?

geogecko
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:05 pm

Post by geogecko » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:29 am

Well, I wouldn't think so, if it's brand new. But then again, you never know off eBay sometimes. (I've used eBay a lot.)

I'd say if you had a buddy that could try and format it for you, let them try it. If that doesn't work, or you can't find someone that has SATA drives, then I'd check about sending it to Samsung. If you have to have a receipt to send it back, see if you can get the person you bought it from on eBay to send you a receipt for it.

Oh. Wait. Are you using two drives? I think on any RAID configuration, you have to have at least two drives, or it will complain. RAID 0 or 1 both require two drives. One gives you the total amount of space of the two drives added together (performance) the other gives you the amount of space of the smallest drive (i.e., two 80GB drives, gives you 80GB of a RAID drive), which is mirroring (security). I forget which is which, 0 or 1.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:42 am

I've been in contact with the Ebayer I purchased it from and he seems quite reasonable and honest.

If HUTIL is correct about all of those LBA error is uncorrectable messages, what does this mean?

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:45 am

Also, is there any possibility that this is shipping damage?

The drive was in one of those plastic clamshells, with a good layer of bubble wrap around it. It was in a small box without any peanuts. The box doesn't show any evidence of damage, but if the box was dropped, could this have created the problems I'm describing?

geogecko
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:05 pm

Post by geogecko » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:51 am

It could be shipping damage. However, when drives are powered down correctly, the head (the part that reads/writes to the magnetic media) is usually parked, which means it isn't in a place that could damage the media. A hard drive can usually sustain a significant amount of shock damage when the drive in in the parked position.

Did you read the part about having to use two drives with a RAID controller?

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 9:01 am

Yes, I did.

1.2.0.57 is a non-RAID driver, as is 1.0.0.22.

1.0.0.32 is a RAID driver, but others have told me that I can still use it.


:?:

mkk
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Gefle, Sweden
Contact:

Post by mkk » Mon Jan 10, 2005 10:54 am

That it has physical damage is rather obvious from your initial description, so the question is if Samsung could replace it without the need of a receipt from an actual vendor. Check that option out.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:31 am

Hi:

The only problem is that Samsung's website doesn't specifically include the SATA SP1614c in drives covered by it's HUTIL utility:

http://www.samsung.com/Products/HardDis ... /hutil.htm

(no serial ATA drives are included)

:?:

mkk
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Gefle, Sweden
Contact:

Post by mkk » Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:41 pm

The SP1614c is just a P80 series with the interface exchanged for SATA and the Samsung support pages aren't quite up to date in general when it comes to their SATA drives. And already by the sign of the drive not being able to complete or going extremely slow in a full format is sign enough.

Try leaving the drive on formattting over night and see what error messages that appear. Using the format command in the command prompt rather than formatting through the disk manager probably gives you more information earlier about what is happening. Make sure the drive is well ventilated if left overnight, as it may have a lot of hard work to do if there are many faulty sectors or serious mechanichal issues.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:57 pm

I ran HUTIL again and got the following:
- simple surface scan: pass
- random surface scan: LBA (number) error is uncorrectable
- read surface scan: got to ~ 18.5%, then I started getting a screenful of LBA error is uncorrectable messages. This continued until ~ 20.50%. It remained error free for a little while, then I started getting screens full of error messages again at ~ 21.9%. At this point, I stopped the test.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:26 pm

I just attempted to install Windows on a single C: partition and the installation hung at 18% of formatting (this correlates with the 16% point of my previous 130 GB D: partition).

I'm starting to develop a sickly feeling that I've got a defective or damaged hard drive.

:(

wing
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:14 pm
Location: Toronto (Ontario), Canada
Contact:

Post by wing » Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:47 pm

You could try to do a "low level format" (a.k.a. fill with zeroes) of the drive from hutil. If it seems to erase the drive ok, do another full test from hutil and see if it passes the test.

This might fix the problems, but I don't know how much trust I can place on such a drive. (My PATA Maxtor was in the same situation.)

Doing a format from Windows when there are many uncorrectable errors on a drive is a really bad idea; it could worsen the situation and make the drive completely die.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:57 pm

I did that a while ago.

I wrote 0 to the first 40 GB of the hard drive (was taking too long), but I still get the format hanging at ~ 27 GB.

wing
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:14 pm
Location: Toronto (Ontario), Canada
Contact:

Post by wing » Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:18 pm

mshan wrote:I did that a while ago.

I wrote 0 to the first 40 GB of the hard drive (was taking too long), but I still get the format hanging at ~ 27 GB.
I know, this takes more than half a day, but you have to let the zero fill run completely to the end. It does make a difference. Filling part of the drive with zeroes does not work; the whole drive must be filled.

When my Maxtor started getting those uncorrectable blocks, I started the zero fill (not from hutil but the equivalent program from Maxtor), thought it was taking too long (just like you felt), interrupted it (just like you did), and then found that the drive is still not working. Reran the zero fill and the full test passed.

If that doesn't work then your drive is dead :(
Last edited by wing on Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:20 pm

Is there any possibility that I have a BIOS, driver, configuration problem or is what I describe consistent only with a physically damaged drive (e. g. bad sectors or other?)?

wing
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:14 pm
Location: Toronto (Ontario), Canada
Contact:

Post by wing » Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:27 pm

mshan wrote:Is there any possibility that I have a BIOS, driver, configuration problem or is what I describe consistent only with a physically damaged drive (e. g. bad sectors or other?)?
I would first try to zero fill the whole drive (yes, it will take almost the whole day to run but I found that an interrupted zero fill does not work) and rerun the full test.

Other than that, what you describe does sound like a damaged drive (but not necessarily physically, since I found that zero fill sometimes can fix it). If the zero fill does not fix it I'd say it's physically damaged.

mshan
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by mshan » Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:30 pm

What type of damage is this consistent with?

Also, even if writing 0 to the whole drive works, is this only a patch over a defect that the drive will always have?

wing
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:14 pm
Location: Toronto (Ontario), Canada
Contact:

Post by wing » Mon Jan 10, 2005 9:07 pm

Unfortunately I am not an expert :-(

According to http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ "uncorrectable" means
Disk drives store data in blocks (sectors) of 512 bytes. Each 512 bytes has additional bytes appended to it (usually 40 to 60) which are used internally by the disk firmware for error checking/detection and correction. These are called ECC bytes.

Sometimes the data in a sector gets corrupted. This can happen because a speck of dust scratched the disk, or because the disk was powered down while writing data to that sector, or for other reasons. Usually the ECC bytes can be used to correct the corrupted data. However if the ECC bytes are inconsistent or can't be used to correct the bad data, then the 512 bytes of data are lost. Such a sector is called unreadable or uncorrectable.

If your disk has an unreadable sector, this means that some of your data can't be retrieved. You can force the disk to replace the unreadable sector with a spare good sector, but only at the price of losing the 512 bytes of data forever.

Disks with uncorrectable sectors can often be repaired by using the disk manufaturer's 'disk evaluation and repair' utility (see previous FAQ entry). Beware: this may force reallocation of the lost sector and thus corrupt or destroy any file system on the disk.
Other than physical damage, from my experience I know uncorrectable errors can occur at least from (1) faulty power supply, and (2) a disk drive getting too old and about to fail (obviously not your case).

I'm not sure how ok it is to use the disk that's zeroed and then found to be ok. I would imagine that if it is not physical damage, the disk should pass the test and should be ok to use, but personally I'm a bit afraid of such a disk myself

Post Reply