The drive made it to about 2 petabytes before it failed (2,000 TB)! It was rated for far less life than that. A Samsung 840 Pro was the torture test champion in TechReport’s torture test, where they wrote to the drives continuously until they failed. SSDs have a rated number of write cycles they can endure, but reaching that point doesn’t mean the NAND cells are actually dead. I’d keep using it at 59% if it were mine. I would agree that this is a more fitting estimate of the drive’s remaining rated life. 0xB1 in hex is 177 in decimal, so it is the attribute I was referring to above. Edit: I see now that the author of one of the programs has said that the drive life is now based on 0xB1, wear leveling count, instead of some others. I don’t know how the programs arrive at their overall health status, but the normalized value of SMART attribute 177, wear leveling count, is the percentage of rated life left in the NAND cells. My 840 Pro has a raw wear-leveling count of 1167, normalized 68, for 68% remaining. My 850 Evo has a raw wear-leveling count value of 29, but the normalized value is 98, for 98 percent of the rated life remaining. I have several Samsung SSDs, so I took a look at their SMART stats to compare them to yours.
0 kommentar(er)
