Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > uk.comp.homebuilt > #60737 > unrolled thread

SSD Failure?

Back to article view | Back to uk.comp.homebuilt

Contents

  SSD Failure? "Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> - 2026-08-06 09:34 +0000
    Re: SSD Failure? Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2026-08-06 14:38 +0100
      Re: SSD Failure? "Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> - 2026-08-06 14:36 +0000
        Re: SSD Failure? Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2026-08-06 17:18 +0100
          Re: SSD Failure? SH <i.love@spam.com> - 2026-08-07 09:15 +0100
            Re: SSD Failure? Abandoned Trolley <that.bloke@microsoft.com> - 2026-08-07 09:55 +0100
            Re: SSD Failure? Ian <${send-direct-email-to-news1021-at-jusme-dot-com-if-you-must}@jusme.com> - 2026-08-07 09:24 +0000
              Re: SSD Failure? SH <i.love@spam.com> - 2026-08-07 10:38 +0100
          Re: SSD Failure? "Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> - 2026-08-07 14:55 +0000
    Re: SSD Failure? Raj Kundra <raj@kundracomputers.co.uk> - 2026-08-06 18:13 +0100
    Re: SSD Failure? "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-08-06 20:27 +0200
      Re: SSD Failure? "Jeff Gaines" <jgnewsid@outlook.com> - 2026-08-06 18:38 +0000

#60737 — SSD Failure?

I set up a 4 TB Crucial SSD using Mini Tool Partition Wizard this morning. 
I've had the SSD for a while and I plugged it in via an Orico cradle, USB3.

Mini Tool was slow to start and then stuck at 97% for a while before it 
said it was finished.

Windows Tools Scanner (is it actually FDISK?) said no problems, I told it 
to scan anyway, still no problems.

AS SSD Benchmark indicated 124 Mb/s read, 34 Mb/s write. I tried the 
benchmark on a 2 TB SSD in the same cradle which returned close to 500 
Mb/s for each.

I planned to use the 4 TB as a backup drive but I think I need to take  
hammer to it.

Any thoughts?

PS it is not under warranty, in fact I think it may be a warranty 
replacement.

-- 
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
I take full responsibility for what happened - that is why the person that 
was responsible went immediately.
(Gordon Brown, April 2009)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#60739

On 06/08/2026 10:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> I set up a 4 TB Crucial SSD using Mini Tool Partition Wizard this 
> morning. I've had the SSD for a while and I plugged it in via an Orico 
> cradle, USB3.
> 
> Mini Tool was slow to start and then stuck at 97% for a while before it 
> said it was finished.
> 
> Windows Tools Scanner (is it actually FDISK?) said no problems, I told 
> it to scan anyway, still no problems.
> 
> AS SSD Benchmark indicated 124 Mb/s read, 34 Mb/s write. I tried the 
> benchmark on a 2 TB SSD in the same cradle which returned close to 500 
> Mb/s for each.
> 
> I planned to use the 4 TB as a backup drive but I think I need to take 
> hammer to it.
> 
> Any thoughts?

Have you looked at the SMART data?

I wouldn't be too quick to rule out a problem with the USB cradle (or 
even a problem caused by poor seating of the drive within the cradle).

Try it with a proper SATA connection.

-- 
Cheers,
  Daniel.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60741

On 06/08/2026 in message <11522om$3rtq1$2@dont-email.me> Daniel James wrote:

>On 06/08/2026 10:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>I set up a 4 TB Crucial SSD using Mini Tool Partition Wizard this  
>>morning. I've had the SSD for a while and I plugged it in via an Orico  
>>cradle, USB3.
>>
>>Mini Tool was slow to start and then stuck at 97% for a while before it  
>>said it was finished.
>>
>>Windows Tools Scanner (is it actually FDISK?) said no problems, I told  it 
>>to scan anyway, still no problems.
>>
>>AS SSD Benchmark indicated 124 Mb/s read, 34 Mb/s write. I tried the  
>>benchmark on a 2 TB SSD in the same cradle which returned close to 500  
>>Mb/s for each.
>>
>>I planned to use the 4 TB as a backup drive but I think I need to take  
>>hammer to it.
>>
>>Any thoughts?
>
>Have you looked at the SMART data?
>
>I wouldn't be too quick to rule out a problem with the USB cradle (or even 
>a problem caused by poor seating of the drive within the cradle).
>
>Try it with a proper SATA connection.

I used the same USB cradle for both tests deliberately to test it.

-- 
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Every day is a good day for chicken, unless you're a chicken.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60743

On 06/08/2026 15:36, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> I used the same USB cradle for both tests deliberately to test it.

Yes, you said that. It's a good test, but not an infallible one. Are the 
two SSDs the same make/model? Even if they are it's not a guarantee that 
the cradle supports both.

Did you try the 4TB SSD again after verifying that the 2TB one worked? 
You may just have not inserted it fully.

I recall, now that I stop and think about it, that I have a USB cradle 
that doesn't work with drives over 2TB (and another that does). I 
believe it's a chipset limitation, from the days when SATA drives just 
weren't big enough to need >2TB support.

I've never heard of your "Orico" cradle ... so could it be one that 
doesn't? I'd guess probably not if it's new enough to be USB3, but it's 
worth checking.

I've just looked at the prices of 4TB SATA SSDs ... I know the world of 
IT has gone crazy but those prices are obscene. I hope you find yours 
does work after all!

-- 
Cheers,
  Daniel.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60747

> 
> I've just looked at the prices of 4TB SATA SSDs ... I know the world of 
> IT has gone crazy but those prices are obscene. I hope you find yours 
> does work after all!
> 

I have 10 off 4TB drives, 4 currently in a DVR and 6 for quick swap 
overs if one of the 4 in the DVR fails.

Thankfully I have 8 cameras that covers every inch of the house's vicinity.

I also have a commercial grade 2 alarm system and every room the house 
has a PIR. This also includes the bathrooms and utility room.....

So the 10 hard drives are very well protected :-)

Or perhaps I should sell all 10 drives and retire? :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60748

> 
> Or perhaps I should sell all 10 drives and retire? :-)
> 
> 


or maybe alarms systems should have some purpose in life apart from 
securing the alarm system hardware ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60749

On 2026-08-07, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I've just looked at the prices of 4TB SATA SSDs ... I know the world of 
>> IT has gone crazy but those prices are obscene. I hope you find yours 
>> does work after all!
>> 
>
> I have 10 off 4TB drives, 4 currently in a DVR and 6 for quick swap 
> overs if one of the 4 in the DVR fails.
>
> Thankfully I have 8 cameras that covers every inch of the house's vicinity.
>
> I also have a commercial grade 2 alarm system and every room the house 
> has a PIR. This also includes the bathrooms and utility room.....
>
> So the 10 hard drives are very well protected :-)

Fire!






-- 
Ian

"Tamahome!!!" - "Miaka!!!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60750

On 07/08/2026 10:24, Ian wrote:
> On 2026-08-07, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I've just looked at the prices of 4TB SATA SSDs ... I know the world of
>>> IT has gone crazy but those prices are obscene. I hope you find yours
>>> does work after all!
>>>
>>
>> I have 10 off 4TB drives, 4 currently in a DVR and 6 for quick swap
>> overs if one of the 4 in the DVR fails.
>>
>> Thankfully I have 8 cameras that covers every inch of the house's vicinity.
>>
>> I also have a commercial grade 2 alarm system and every room the house
>> has a PIR. This also includes the bathrooms and utility room.....
>>
>> So the 10 hard drives are very well protected :-)
> 
> Fire!
> 

LOL!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60751

On 06/08/2026 in message <1152c3s$3vd4e$1@dont-email.me> Daniel James wrote:

>On 06/08/2026 15:36, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>I used the same USB cradle for both tests deliberately to test it.
>
>Yes, you said that. It's a good test, but not an infallible one. Are the 
>two SSDs the same make/model? Even if they are it's not a guarantee that 
>the cradle supports both.
>
>Did you try the 4TB SSD again after verifying that the 2TB one worked? You 
>may just have not inserted it fully.
>
>I recall, now that I stop and think about it, that I have a USB cradle 
>that doesn't work with drives over 2TB (and another that does). I believe 
>it's a chipset limitation, from the days when SATA drives just weren't big 
>enough to need >2TB support.
>
>I've never heard of your "Orico" cradle ... so could it be one that 
>doesn't? I'd guess probably not if it's new enough to be USB3, but it's 
>worth checking.
>
>I've just looked at the prices of 4TB SATA SSDs ... I know the world of IT 
>has gone crazy but those prices are obscene. I hope you find yours does 
>work after all!

I followed up after you post and tested the drive connected in 3 ways, 5 
runs for each test, results from AS SSD Benchmark:

Crucial 4TB Test (MB/s)

SATA SSD cartridge

Read	68	170	232	191	313

Write	250	29	247	251	251

Orico USB 3 Cradle

Read	329	222	191	309	251

Write	397	390	388	392	389

Fitted in motherboard SATA Express

Read	237	201	340	269	220

Write	420	427	419	436	436

The cartridge is hard wire into the PC but connected to an extension card, 
looks as if it may be the only SATA 1 card I have!

The USB cradle is interesting and read faster than mounting the drive on 
the motherboard.

The motherboard figures are also interesting with slower read but faster 
write than USB.

It supports your suggestion it may not have been plugged in properly for 
the previous test but also raises questions about the plug in SATA card 
and the on board SATA compared to USB!

-- 
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
You can't tell which way the train went by looking at the tracks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60744

On 06/08/2026 10:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> I planned to use the 4 TB as a backup drive but I think I need to take 
> hammer to it.
Sell it on E bay
Or send to me to give it a good home.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60745

On 6 Aug 2026 09:34:44 GMT, Jeff Gaines wrote:

8< snip >8
> I planned to use the 4 TB as a backup drive but I think I need to take  
> hammer to it.
> 
> Any thoughts?

I can't help you with your problem, but you may want to look at this
when you're planning to use an SSD as a backup drive:
<https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/storage/unpowered-ssd-endurance-investigation-finds-severe-data-loss-and-performance-issues-reminds-us-of-the-importance-of-refreshing-backups>

-- 
s|b

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60746

On 06/08/2026 in message <ndk1vtFfd98U2@mid.individual.net> s|b wrote:

>On 6 Aug 2026 09:34:44 GMT, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
>8< snip >8
>>I planned to use the 4 TB as a backup drive but I think I need to take
>>hammer to it.
>>
>>Any thoughts?
>
>I can't help you with your problem, but you may want to look at this
>when you're planning to use an SSD as a backup drive:
><https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/storage/unpowered-ssd-endurance-investigation-finds-severe-data-loss-and-performance-issues-reminds-us-of-the-importance-of-refreshing-backups>

That is very interesting, thank you :-)

My backups are all kept on spinning drives now, because of cost rather 
than any inner knowledge, but it seems it may have been a good decision.

-- 
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Captcha is thinking of stopping the use of pictures with traffic lights as 
cyclists don't know what they are.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | uk.comp.homebuilt

csiph-web