Samsung F1 1Tb and 750GB All Defective?

SYROB

What is this storage?
Joined
Apr 15, 2002
Messages
58
Hi,

I have the 750Gb and the 1T Samsung F1s, all get MC error with diagnostic HUTL utility from Samsung. Looks like everyone who tries this utility on the web also gets these errors. ALL F1 are BAD??

Any one here has the F1s and tried HUTL 210 that passed?

SYROB
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
21,607
Location
I am omnipresent
I think this was mentioned in the other thread about the large Samsung drives, but it's entirely likely that Samsung just hasn't gotten around to updating its tools to support the new drives.
 

Will Rickards

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,011
Location
Here
Website
willrickards.net
See my adventures in this thread.
I bought 2 of the 1TB F1 HD103UJ.
Both reported Media Errors.
I even tried getting to their level 3 support 3 times. Each time I got disconnected. They were ready to give me an RMA with mine.
I don't think the drives are bad. I think either the firmware is screwy or the diagnostic tool is screwy.
Windows doesn't report any bad sectors with either drive.

I have a copy of spinrite I guess I could try that but this is my only computer so I don't want it down for too long.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
How could the diagnostic tools affect the results? Isn't it really just an interface for the drive self-diagnostics?

Given how IDE/SATA drives work, why would you expect the tools to even need an upgrade, and in what way?

If this was WD, no-one would bat an eyelid. I think everyone needs a reality check here.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
21,607
Location
I am omnipresent
It's entirely possible that the very large drives could be returning results that the tool would interpret as "out of bounds" on a smaller drive. At any rate, I've seen enough versions of diagnostic tools over the years to know that they need to be updated regularly because they either don't work or don't work correctly on drives newer than the tool.

For what it's worth, WD goes through long periods of making terrible hardware, occasionally (OK, seldom) punctuated by a decent product. Samsung, to my recollection, made awful products 15 years ago that have done nothing but get better. Looking at the historical trend, I'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to one and not the other.
 

SYROB

What is this storage?
Joined
Apr 15, 2002
Messages
58
As posted by datestardi from you know where...

"""I wouldn't assume that an M.C. error is meaningless and ignorable without official notice from Samsung. The maintenance cylinder is the single most important part of the disk surface (even more important than track 0), containing information that may be critical for proper drive operation in both common (every-day) situations and less common (future) situations - like low/high temperatures conditions, high vibration/off-track conditions, sector reallocation, etc.

(If the M.C. errors are being caused by a bug in HUTIL and the drives are actually error-free, I assume Samsung will soon officially make that known if they haven't already.)

My guess (and it's only a guess, assuming that HUTIL is correct) is that Samsung may use the "maintenance cylinder" for the location of spare sectors and/or to track the location of faulty sectors. The M.C. error may be preventing the drive from locating spare sectors and/or "reallocating" faulty sectors to spare sectors when the drive's own diagnostics indicate that data sectors are faulty (e.g. because they have ECC errors).

This may be why many (most?) people with M.C. errors also have ECC errors in the simple and full surface scans of data sectors. (My understanding is: New drives shouldn't have any ECC scan errors. Data sectors with ECC errors should have been reallocated to spare sectors at the factory during the burn-in test just prior to shipment, but perhaps this is not happening because of the M.C. error. Sectors which are reallocated at the factory do not show up as "reallocated" sectors when a SMART utility is run; new drives almost always shows zero reallocated sectors in SMART, the zero meaning no sectors have been reallocated since leaving the factory, even though the new drive may have many factory reallocated sectors.)

Another possibility (guess) for the F1 is that the drives' spare sector areas are being fully filled (or mostly filled) with data from reallocated sectors before the drives leave the factory (due to ECC errors detected during burn-in), and this is giving rise to the M.C. error as a warning message.

Of course, it's best to listen to Samsung on this one (and I haven't seen anything official from them yet).

Samsung's possible use of the maintenance cylinder for faulty sector mapping:

http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&...4190185&F=0

Some other Samsung uses of the maintenance cylinder:

http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&...6624957&F=0

"The outermost zone, cylinder CYL_M, is reserved as a maintenance cylinder to record essential data necessary for the maintenance of the magnetic disk recording apparatus. This essential data may be, for example, a list of defects in the sectors of the disk, the data of spare sectors, parameters of the read/write channels, etc."

and more:

http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&...5078393&F=0

"Information is stored in the annular tracks 134 on the disc 112. Generally, the disc 112 has a data zone where user data is written, a parking zone where a head is located when the drive is not used, and a maintenance cylinder. Values such as a type of a head, write parameter correction values "A" and "B" at low and high temperatures, and write parameter correction values "a" and "b" according to the type of the head, are stored in the maintenance cylinder.""""


Samsung refuses to say anything about this, I personally have called them for over two weeks now, no reply. "Korea not getting back to us"

Is this a real problem??

SYROB
 

Will Rickards

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,011
Location
Here
Website
willrickards.net
I'm regularly scandisking my drives and so far no bad sectors.
I'm betting this isn't a real problem. But I'd like confirmation from samsung either way.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
16,698
Location
USA
My 1TB F1 is fine for data storage. I don't bother to run utility tests when the data integrity is good.
 

Dïscfärm

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
239
Location
Hïntërländs
I've heard various reports that Vista and these latest high-capacity Samsung hard drives have some sort of incompatibility.

One of these drives can act screwy under Vista, but work just hunky dory under WinXP. Other hard drives work fine under Vista or WinXP.
 
Top