Should I be worried with these hard drive test results?

[lochmarf]

I used GSmartControl for these tests as one of the staff has recommended.

Short selft-test:



Extended self-test:



Attributes:



If you're wondering what's on the Error Log, they were the pending sectors which have been fixed already by another disk monitoring software called HD Sentinel. It was repaired using the feature called Disk Repair. I've experienced getting 1 current pending sector twice. First time was 6 months ago when I performed hard shutdown (long pressing the power button of my laptop) multiple times because I was experiencing BSOD issues which I was then able to fix. I didn't experience any noticeable changes with the hard drive after I used Disk Repair for this. The second time was just recently when I performed a chkdsk /f /r. Windows notified me of a drive error right after I did a Refresh. Since Windows is broken, I can't do repairs using any of Windows automated processes so I had to do it myself with a chkdsk /f /r on a command prompt using a bootable USB.

Error Log:



HD Sentinel Disk Repair log:

12/3/2020  9:00:12 AM   Sequential test, Disk: [0] 931 GB C: D: ST1000LM024 HN-M101MBB [S30YJ9BG109704] [Repair]
12/3/2020  9:00:12 AM   Test ID# 1 00030002 00250091 1 4 H: 744
12/3/2020  10:52:48 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333352, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:52:51 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333352, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:52:54 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333352, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:52:54 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333352, Block: 4777  [0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) ]
12/3/2020  10:52:57 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333353, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:52:57 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333353, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:52:58 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333353, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:52:58 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333353, Block: 4777  [0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) ]
12/3/2020  10:52:58 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333354, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:53:59 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333354, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:00 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333354, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:00 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333354, Block: 4777  [0 (10) 0 (10) 0 (10) 0 (12) 0 (12) ]
12/3/2020  10:54:00 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333355, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:01 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333355, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:02 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333355, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:02 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333355, Block: 4777  [0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (1) 0 (1) ]
12/3/2020  10:54:02 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333356, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:03 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333356, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:03 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333356, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:54:04 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333356, Block: 4777  [0 (2) 0 (2) 0 (2) 0 (2) 0 (2) ]
12/3/2020  10:54:04 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333357, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:05 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333357, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:06 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333357, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:06 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333357, Block: 4777  [0 (10) 0 (10) 0 (10) 0 (10) 0 (10) ]
12/3/2020  10:55:06 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333358, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:07 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333358, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:07 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333358, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:08 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333358, Block: 4777  [0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) ]
12/3/2020  10:55:08 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333359, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:09 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333359, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:09 AM ! Error: 23 Data error (cyclic redundancy check)., Sector: 933333359, Block: 4777  File: C:\$BadClus
12/3/2020  10:55:09 AM   Repair successful  Sector: 933333359, Block: 4777  [0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) ]
12/3/2020  1:38:20 PM   8 sector(s) successfully repaired.
12/3/2020  1:38:20 PM   Test completed

Aside from the problem with my Windows installations which I was able to fix thanks to SFCFix, I'm not experiencing other problems related to the hard drive. To give more background, I've had this laptop since 2015. Since then, the only hard drive-related problems I got were those two incidents of getting a pending sector. My current concerns are those 3 pre-failures and the read failure on one of the tests. Should I be worried?

 

[xrobwx71]

I'd back up and replace it.

 

[lochmarf]

I already have a partial backup so I'm fine with continuing using this hard drive. But is it going to fail soon even though most elements/attributes are fine? Is there a way to know when those attributes started getting those values?

 

[lochmarf]

What was/were the red flags for you?

 

[xrobwx71]

What was/were the red flags for you?

The entire attributes tab.
Anything above zero (0) in the raw values tab under these
especially according to Backblaze.

• SMART 5 — Reallocated Sectors Count
• SMART 187 — Reported Uncorrectable Errors
• SMART 188 — Command Timeout
• SMART 197 — Current Pending Sector Count
• SMART 198 — Uncorrectable Sector Count

You very well may get years more out of this drive or days, it's hard to tell with 100% certainty.

 

[lochmarf]

I'll keep using it and hopefully those pre-failures are nothing serious yet. Thank you.

 

[xrobwx71]

Is there a way to know when those attributes started getting those values?

I'll look into this.

 

[lochmarf]

These screenshots are from HD Sentinel.

June 9, 2020
This was when I got the current pending sector for the first time. It was already fixed in this screenshot.



Dec. 5, 2020



Is HD Sentinel's OK the same to GSmartControl's pre-failure? If those attributes really mean failure then how long does a drive with this condition usually holds up before it actually fails? Assuming that their values changed in June then it's been 6 months.

 

[zbook]

Run HD Tune (free version) (all drives)
HD Tune website
Post images into the thread for results on these tabs:
a) Health
b) Benchmark
c) Full error scan


Run Sea Tools for Windows
long generic test
Post an image of the test result into the thread
SeaTools for Windows | Seagate
How to use SeaTools for Windows | Seagate Support US

 

[lochmarf]

Run HD Tune (free version) (all drives)
HD Tune website
Post images into the thread for results on these tabs:
a) Health
b) Benchmark
c) Full error scan


Run Sea Tools for Windows
long generic test
Post an image of the test result into the thread
SeaTools for Windows | Seagate
How to use SeaTools for Windows | Seagate Support US

The 2008 version?

 

[lochmarf]

I've done all of those tests already with HD Sentinel and they all came out fine. But I'll still try HD Tune.

 

[Digerati]

I can't do repairs using any of Windows automated processes so I had to do it myself with a chkdsk /f /r on a command prompt using a bootable USB.

Okay and what were the results of the chkdsk scan? Did it fix all problems found?

I note every error I see is a "data" error. That does NOT automatically indicate the drive itself is failing. While it could be caused by the drive itself, this corruption could be cause by something else - to include malicious activity or unstable power issues.

What bothers me more is the fact your problem is not "one - off". That is, they recur. If I was certain my systems were clean of malware, my OS was current, and I was providing good, clean stable power to my systems, I would be more inclined to suspect my drive is failing. And I would be looking to replace it. The problem with drives with apparent intermittent problems is they can fail completely tomorrow, or 3 or more years from now.

In the meantime (even if everything consistently is working fine), you need to make sure you have a good, robust backup plan in place.

Personally, I am not a huge fan of using 3rd party tools to check hard drive status. So I stick with Windows Error Checking, Check Disk (chkdsk) or I go with the drive maker's own diagnostic tools. Since your model number (ST1000LM024) tells us that is Seagate drive, I recommend using the latest version SeaTools, as suggested by zbook.

*******

As a side note for future reference, when running chkdsk /r, you don't need the /f switch too. If enter chkdsk /? you will see /r "implies" /f. That means the functions /f perform are also done by /r. It does not hurt to use /r /f in your command. It just doesn't serve any purpose as /f is ignored.

 

[zbook]

HD Sentinel surface / error scans were not seen.

The HD Tune free version is old but it performs the surface / error scan.

If you prefer you can run the trial version.

 

[lochmarf]

Okay and what were the results of the chkdsk scan? Did it fix all problems found?

I'm just gonna type it out because the photo I took was crappy.

Windows has made corrections to the file system.
No further action is required.

467414015 KB total disk space.
429095648 KB in 1670967 files.
905128 KB in 248705 indexes.
0 KB in bad sectors.
2023147 KB in use by the system.
65536 KB occupied by the log file.
35390092 KB available on disk.

4096 bytes in each allocation unit.
116853503 total allocation units on disk.
8847523 allocation units available on disk.
Failed to transfer logged  messages to the event log with status 50.

But I have a feeling you're looking for the messages for each stage? I wasn't able to take pictures of those.

I note every error I see is a "data" error. That does NOT automatically indicate the drive itself is failing. While it could be caused by the drive itself, this corruption could be cause by something else - to include malicious activity or unstable power issues.

What bothers me more is the fact your problem is not "one - off". That is, they recur. If I was certain my systems were clean of malware, my OS was current, and I was providing good, clean stable power to my systems, I would be more inclined to suspect my drive is failing. And I would be looking to replace it. The problem with drives with apparent intermittent problems is they can fail completely tomorrow, or 3 or more years from now.

In the meantime (even if everything consistently is working fine), you need to make sure you have a good, robust backup plan in place.

I'm not sure if I understood this. What problems do I have that recur?

Personally, I am not a huge fan of using 3rd party tools to check hard drive status. So I stick with Windows Error Checking, Check Disk (chkdsk) or I go with the drive maker's own diagnostic tools. Since your model number (ST1000LM024) tells us that is Seagate drive, I recommend using the latest version SeaTools, as suggested by zbook.

I'll try this.

As a side note for future reference, when running chkdsk /r, you don't need the /f switch too. If enter chkdsk /? you will see /r "implies" /f. That means the functions /f perform are also done by /r. It does not hurt to use /r /f in your command. It just doesn't serve any purpose as /f is ignored.

Yeah the tutorial I followed mentioned that too. I just want to include it for fun lol

 

[lochmarf]

HD Sentinel surface / error scans were not seen.

I wasn't able to take a pic of the finished scan but there were no problems except for the bad blocks that were later on fixed by Sentinel. The darker greens according to the guy at HD Sentinel are those data that can't be accessed properly because they're being used so they're slow hence the darker green.

 

[zbook]

Had you ran the Gsmart extended self test (3 1/2 hrs) ?

Please run the HD Tune full surface test.

 

[lochmarf]

Had you ran the Gsmart extended self test (3 1/2 hrs) ?

Yeah. The results were here Should I be worried with these hard drive test results?

Please run the HD Tune full surface test.

Running it now.

 

[lochmarf]

Am I supposed to run every test on SeaTools?

 

[Digerati]

I'm not sure if I understood this. What problems do I have that recur?

You said in your first post you experienced the problem twice. Could be a coincidence, however.

But I have a feeling you're looking for the messages for each stage?

I am not looking for errors. By that, I am not asking you post the error messages. I am just wondering if chkdsk reported errors that it could not repair.

 

[zbook]

Only long generic for Sea Tools.