EXPIRED Dell 3.84TB SAS SSD 64-80% health ebay $100

[89giop]

Looks like someone has plenty of time flashing the 212 drives this weekend. Dell highly recommend that you update the firmware on these SSD…s.

I chucked them in a Dell server for testing and they did not come up as needing an update. I also could not find the firmware for them. Where did you see this info?

 

[ca3y6]

Tested some of these and was confused by the wear rating. The TBW does not seem to match the wear percentage. TBW is much lower than expected at those wear ratings. Is it maybe because I am thinking of the DWPD rating in sequential terms and these were hammered with random writes instead?

DWPD is normally random writes. see specs

 

[luckylinux]

Tested some of these and was confused by the wear rating. The TBW does not seem to match the wear percentage. TBW is much lower than expected at those wear ratings. Is it maybe because I am thinking of the DWPD rating in sequential terms and these were hammered with random writes instead?

Are you sure it's really the TBW you are looking at ?

Depending on Brand and Model it might be Total LBAs Written, Total Sectors/Blocks written, etc, thus you need to perform the Conversion yourself, which depends if the Drive is 512b or 4k Native (amongst other Things).

It also depends what "much" means to different People. Are you talking a Factor 10x or 100-1000x ?

 

[89giop]

Are you sure it's really the TBW you are looking at ?

Depending on Brand and Model it might be Total LBAs Written, Total Sectors/Blocks written, etc, thus you need to perform the Conversion yourself, which depends if the Drive is 512b or 4k Native (amongst other Things).

It also depends what "much" means to different People. Are you talking a Factor 10x or 100-1000x ?

To be honest I was just using HDD Sentinel to look at the drives (like I always do).

http://imgur.com/a/jSq6D8f

here is 6 of them for example. Ignoring the 99% drive (they sent me a newer model and I got lucky ont that one) , they only have 200TB at most. Also the TBW is not really consistent with the wear rating at all.

Btw, I further plugged the drives in a Dell server after the screenshots as I thought maybe HDD Sentinel was off with the wear ratings, but the DELL server reported the same wear ratings.

 

[BackupProphet]

HDD Sentinel using another scoring of health that just smartctl. I guess power on hours will affect the health score.

 

[luckylinux]

To be honest I was just using HDD Sentinel to look at the drives (like I always do).

http://imgur.com/a/jSq6D8f

here is 6 of them for example. Ignoring the 99% drive (they sent me a newer model and I got lucky ont that one) , they only have 200TB at most. Also the TBW is not really consistent with the wear rating at all.

Btw, I further plugged the drives in a Dell server after the screenshots as I thought maybe HDD Sentinel was off with the wear ratings, but the DELL server reported the same wear ratings.

Well you are relying on HDD Sentinel or DELL Implementation for each Drive / Manufacturer.

I always only use smartctl. Yeah, it sucks in its own Way if the HDD/SSD has not been "Parametrized" so that the correct Attribute Name is shown, but at least you can see the RAW Data and then do your Assessment.

Example on my Crucial MX500:

root@pve16:~# smartctl -A /dev/disk/by-id/ata-CT1000MX500SSD1_2135E5C9B3E3
smartctl 7.4 2024-10-15 r5620 [x86_64-linux-6.14.8-2-pve] (local build)
Copyright (C) 2002-23, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org

=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
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   000    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
  5 Reallocate_NAND_Blk_Cnt 0x0032   100   100   010    Old_age   Always       -       0
  9 Power_On_Hours          0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       16128
12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       11
171 Program_Fail_Count      0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
172 Erase_Fail_Count        0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
173 Ave_Block-Erase_Count   0x0032   252   252   000    Old_age   Always       -       1364
174 Unexpect_Power_Loss_Ct  0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       1
180 Unused_Reserve_NAND_Blk 0x0033   000   000   000    Pre-fail  Always       -       60
183 SATA_Interfac_Downshift 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
184 Error_Correction_Count  0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
187 Reported_Uncorrect      0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
194 Temperature_Celsius     0x0022   073   050   000    Old_age   Always       -       27 (Min/Max 0/50)
196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
197 Current_Pending_ECC_Cnt 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable   0x0030   100   100   000    Old_age   Offline      -       0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count    0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
202 Percent_Lifetime_Remain 0x0030   252   252   001    Old_age   Offline      -       104
206 Write_Error_Rate        0x000e   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
210 Success_RAIN_Recov_Cnt  0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
246 Total_LBAs_Written      0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       400450127514
247 Host_Program_Page_Count 0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       6912033419
248 FTL_Program_Page_Count  0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       21454662989

So for me 246 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 400450127514.

And then I get the TBW Value as (it's a 512b Drive): 400450127514 * 512B / (1099511627776 B/TB) = 186.5 TB

My 1TB Crucial MX500 has a rated Endurance of 360TB according to the Datasheet.

Note that the 202 Percent_Lifetime_Remain 0x0030 252 252 001 Old_age Offline - 104 seems messed up and probably is written not as a true Percentage but as 100% == 255 (or 252 = max Value), although that would bring the TBW to 146TB (360TB * 104/255) NOT 186TB ...

I think you need to look at the S.M.A.R.T. Tab

I like your latest Picture. Estimated Lifetime Remaining: 80 Days . Tick Tock.