backtop

Print 64 comment(s) - last by Mitchy.. on Oct 30 at 12:57 PM
Data corruption once again strikes Intel's SSDs

It seems as though Intel just can't catch a break with its new X25-M G2 solid state drives (SSDs). Shortly after launching the drives in late July, Intel had to suspend shipments of the drives due to a data corruption problem. A firmware update was issued to correct the problem for drives that managed to make it to customers.

Since that time, those that did want to purchase one of the new G2 drives have been having a hard time finding the drives in stock. Companies like Newegg are low on stock of the 80GB model and Amazon shows a 1-2 month wait period for the drives.

With all the storm clouds surrounding the launch and the lack of availability for the G2 drives, things started to look up yesterday. Intel released a new firmware update which boosted write speeds on the 160GB models by 40 percent and offered full support for the TRIM feature in Windows 7. Reviews from around the web championed the new firmware and urged G2 owners to rush out and apply the update to their drives.

In what seems like even more bad luck for Intel (and for G2 owners), there appears to be yet another firmware issue cropping up to ruin the day. This time around, the new firmware appears to be hosing Windows 7-based systems after the update is applied.

One user, georgewillow, wrote the following on Intel's support pages:

Just did the firmware update and it hosed my Windows 7 installation.  The updater showed a successful firmware update.  Initially the computer booted just fine, but once I was within Windows it installed some drivers and asked for a reboot.  That's when the trouble started.  Now the drive won't boot Windows 7 anymore.  I don't know if it's a Dell problem or Intel problem. The Dell BIOS claims a SMART error. I have a Dell XPS 8000.

The problem continued as users after user confirmed the problems. "I have the same problem. I have a Asus P5E, The X25-M80G2  is on sata port 2, IDE, legacy mode," reported user pox. "After the flash i have a S.M.A.R.T failure. I tried to update the firmware again. But the tool says it is already updated. I have Ubuntu 9.10 and W7 RC installed on the disk."

The problems continue for another user, weuntouchable, "My Windows 7 Install appears to be hosed too.  And this is not a Dell issue as I have a custom built PC.  Exact same issue as the other people who had the problem:  Firmware updates, Windows Reboots and installs something, and then errors or a black screen after reboot.  The errors occur when I disable my raid array again, the black screen occurs with the Raid array enabled."

For its part, Intel has issued the following response according to Engadget:

Yes, we have been contacted by users with issues with the firmware upgrade for our 34nm SSDs and we are investigating. We take all sightings and issues seriously and are working toward resolution. We have temporarily taken down the firmware link while we investigate.

For now, Intel has pulled the firmware update. We will keep you informed on further updates to this story.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
It's true
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/2009 5:31:16 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, this just happened to me not 4 hours ago. The good news, the update does install TRIM and does not 'brick' the drive. The bad news is, you have to reinstall Windows as it appears to wipe out the boot sector. I don't think Data corruption is the right term here personally. The data is fine, Windows just can't boot.

Been running the new firmware just fine for a few hours now. No disk errors or date loss. Just sucks you have to reformat Windows to get the new firmware going lol.




RE: It's true
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/27/2009 5:32:41 PM , Rating: 2
Some people are reporting they can't even reinstall Windows because SMART flags the drives as having errors.

From one of the users in that Intel thread:

quote:
I get SMART errors in the BIOS screen at posting. I tried to reformat and install Windows again, but the Windows installer could recognize the SMART errors and said I couldn't install Windows on a drive that had potential errors. It's not a Dell or Gateway issue. There is a guy with an ASUS MB and one with an EVGA MB with the same problems.


RE: It's true
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/27/2009 5:35:11 PM , Rating: 2
And to add to that:

quote:
Just an update for my situation. I got Windows 7 reinstalled (still hangs on boot with a SMART error, but I can bypass it). Downloaded the SSD toolkbox and clicked Check SMART attributes. I got a warning about attribute B8 (End to End Error Detection Count) Raw - 7381, Normalized - 1, Threshold -99. It says Contact your reseller or local Intel representative for assistance. So something definitely corrupted the drive during that initial reboot in Windows.


Another report:

quote:
My 160gb G2 firmware update worked fine. However my roomate's failed as described with failed/corrupt SMART data. Looks like Intel really screwed up somewhere.


RE: It's true
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/2009 5:58:06 PM , Rating: 2
Whoa Brandon, I spoke hastily. It appears I was one of the lucky ones *whewh* :)


RE: It's true
By xxsk8er101xx on 10/27/2009 8:55:52 PM , Rating: 2
It's always a good idea to wait before doing any kind of newly released firmware, bios, or service pack updates.


RE: It's true
By Mitch101 on 10/28/2009 8:30:12 AM , Rating: 2
I would have done this myself given the performance boost this was to deliver. But I am surprised Intel borked something like this up. I would imagine almost all people are using these as their OS drive. Thats bad but OS's can be re-installed personal data is another since most people never backup their stuff. Hopefully nobody's company scheduled a rollout of this.

The good is that hardcore people would be buying these and would understand this is Intels fault. Had this been a mainstream hard drive people would blame the OS.


RE: It's true
By JuPO5b4REqAYbSPUlMcP on 10/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: It's true
By rs1 on 10/27/2009 8:49:19 PM , Rating: 2
It's not entirely true. I installed the update yesterday and have had no issues whatsoever (Asus G51VX-A1 laptop, Win 7 Ultimate x64, 80 GB "G2" SSD), nor did Windows try to install some new driver when I rebooted. I followed the stated instructions of:

1. Set the drive to Legacy/IDE mode in BIOS.
2. Apply the firmware update from the CD.
3. Set the BIOS back to "Enchanced" mode.
4. Reboot to Windows.

...I'm curious as to whether the people who are reporting issues neglected to do either step 1 or step 3. The documentation explicitly states that bad things may happen if this is not done.


RE: It's true
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2009 12:56:06 AM , Rating: 2
The BIOS tool couldn't even detect the SSD UNTILL I did those steps, and it still messed up my install of Windows.


still waiting
By Randomblame on 10/27/2009 6:00:02 PM , Rating: 2
Good thing I held off on these, I decided to buy 3 seagate 7200.12 500gb single platter drives and stripe them instead. Sure raid 0 is "dangerous" and "unreliable" but my array has been going strong for 6 months and is wicked fast plus I get 1.5tb all for less than the 80gb intel g2 and amazingly they're having more problems than a 3 disk raid 0 array!

Maybe when the kingston 40gb g2 comes out for $115 I'll pull the trigger and use my raid array for storage...




RE: still waiting
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: still waiting
By Voo on 10/27/2009 6:45:55 PM , Rating: 2
40gb 34nm Flash with an intel controller for ~80$ after mail-in, hardly qualifies as "crap" imho.
Surely I wouldn't want to exchange it for my 160gb G2 drive, but for the price it's a great deal and certainly faster than any hdd in the interesting sections (random r/w and access time)


RE: still waiting
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/09, Rating: -1
RE: still waiting
By DukeN on 10/27/2009 8:17:08 PM , Rating: 2
No, it's the JMicron's that are bottom end.

40G is way more than enough for a lot of people, including my wife and most people at my work who don't exceed 15GB in total storage running XP


RE: still waiting
By Silver2k7 on 10/28/2009 5:53:12 AM , Rating: 1
XP and SSD in the same sentence are you serious ??

People who run a decade old OS usually don't run bleeding edge hardware.. like SSD's are today.

Personally im guessing here that people who run DX11 or SSD hardware are also on windows 7 95% of the time.


RE: still waiting
By SAnderson on 10/28/2009 8:21:22 AM , Rating: 3
Kingston drives have the same controller and the same NAND chips. They are basically the same. Having few physical chips makes them slower as is the case for all SSD manufactures.

SSDs will greatly improve the performance of any OS. I'd love to have any of the Intel/Kingston offerings at work where we have quite a few home built programs on XP. Most of the data is on the network anyway and not on our PCs.

Most people are not going to be on Win7 who have an SSD. What about all those that already have an SSD before Win7 came out. Laptop users with SSDs. Mac users. Sir...your logic sucks.


RE: still waiting
By semo on 10/28/2009 6:19:13 AM , Rating: 2
just don't update the firmware and you'll be fine. you can't compare spindles to ssds in terms of performance at all.intel will fix this one way or another and if you wait a few weeks before new firmware versions come out you are unlikely to have many issues.


So far so good
By Branger on 10/28/2009 12:06:41 PM , Rating: 2
I wish there were more information about the specifics of the failure (I'd rather focus on the problem then debate the relative merits of a technobabbical discussion).

Flashed to trim while XP was on the drive, repartition and reformatted with win7 64-bit Pro custom install. So far no issues. I am somewhat afraid to put the drive into suspend.




RE: So far so good
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2009 12:32:03 PM , Rating: 2
Why would you want to suspend an SSD anyway ?


RE: So far so good
By Branger on 10/28/2009 1:20:19 PM , Rating: 2
Well, putting the drive into suspend isn't so much the issue as putting the computer into suspend.


OCZ's got the lead
By sandhuatdt on 10/27/2009 5:49:41 PM , Rating: 2
OCZ has already had a TRIM enabled firmware for sometime now and IMHO are doing a much better job with the user community for testing new firmware releases. OCZ already has a strong base that tests beta firmware for them, exactly to avoid situations like this. Maybe Intel should copy the OCZ model of customer engagement.




RE: OCZ's got the lead
By ratbert1 on 10/27/2009 6:07:01 PM , Rating: 2
If Intel did that, G1 owners would complain when the update was only offered to G2 owners. Then Intel would have to offer the update to those bunch of whiners(omg). This way they stay disconnected from all that complaining.


Dodged a bullet there
By DOSGuy on 10/28/2009 12:29:08 AM , Rating: 1
I never upgrade my OS or any firmware until it has been out for a while so that the bugs can be discovered. Windows 7 was an exception because it had been so widely beta tested, and the RTM had been available for months on MSDN and Technet (and, of course, I backed up my data).

When I read the Anandtech article and saw that the update not only added TRIM (and the benchmarks proving its non-performance-degrading awesomeness), but also that it increased sequential write speeds, I went straight to Intel's site to download the upgrade. I was about to burn the CD when I said to myself, "self, you should wait a few days to allow any bugs to be discovered". I'm glad I didn't have to go through the headache that these folks experienced. For those who backed up their data, this was at least an inconvenience, and for those who didn't, my condolences.

This, once again, illustrates why you never download new firmware, service packs, etc., on release day (other than in a test system, since obviously the bugs aren't going to be discovered until people start using it.)




RE: Dodged a bullet there
By kellehair on 10/28/2009 9:42:25 AM , Rating: 2
I actually built a new rig last night with an 80GB G2 Intel drive. I was excited to get the new firmware but I was tired so I went to bed. Looks like I may have dodged a bullet too.


By Griswold on 10/29/2009 4:04:52 AM , Rating: 2
The manifestation of data corruption and bricked SSD has been seen even before this particular firmware upgrade. What this could mean is fairly clear: its not likely the firmware itself but something else, which apparently can be triggered by the process of flashing a new firmware.

And its also noteworthy that people concluded on some hardware forums, as little as the percentage of unsuccessful flashings may be, it appears that most of the issues occur with the newest intel chipsets and not so much with older ones such as 9xx, p35 and p45.

One thing is for sure, though. It is not a mass phenomenon. On some hardware forums, its one out of 20 or less who ran into this problem. One shouldnt look at the intel support forum to meassure the magnitude of the issue - those without problems arent going to post there at all. Regulars on other forums will, though.




weird
By Mitchy on 10/30/2009 12:57:01 PM , Rating: 2
I have this exact same drive, i installed win 7 64bit, runs great no problems, didnt do any fireware updates or anything




So now...
By JuPO5b4REqAYbSPUlMcP on 10/27/09, Rating: -1
RE: So now...
By The0ne on 10/27/2009 5:43:05 PM , Rating: 2
WD isn't for me, at least not their passport and worldbook series. Had way too many failures on those products. The OEM's I have in my systems, however, are fine. Oh, WD supports sucks when I was able to reach them. Suck in this case meaning they don't know what the hell they're talking about with dead drives, power issues, bit loss during transfers, etc. They blame it on my system, yea...whatever.

So now who really to trust? Well, these are just bad batches I'm sure and in time they'll regain my trust again :) Same for Seagate with the horrible 1.5TB drives, which none of them worked when I first got them ><.


RE: So now...
By morgan12x on 10/27/2009 5:47:09 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't trust WD either. I've RMA'd over 20 drives this year alone (Blue series) for bad sectors and head crashes. Here lately, Hitachi Deskstars have been holding up better than anything else. But to each his own.


RE: So now...
By Shining Arcanine on 10/27/2009 6:34:00 PM , Rating: 5
The likelihood of having 20 drives fail on you due to a manufacturing is very small unless you have say, tens of thousands of them.

I think it is more likely that something is wrong with the power that the drives are receiving.


RE: So now...
By kamel5547 on 10/27/2009 6:56:54 PM , Rating: 2
Unless they are from the same batch, or it is a design flaw. Either of those could cause such an issue.

That being said the only thing I guarantee is drives will die, no matter what brand you choose, solid state or not.


RE: So now...
By Drag0nFire on 10/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: So now...
By xxsk8er101xx on 10/27/2009 8:33:43 PM , Rating: 3
Your fault. Redundant backups if the data is that important. It should be understood that every hard drive you store data on is going to fail some day. Do raid 5 next time ;)


RE: So now...
By Sivar on 10/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: So now...
By Spoelie on 10/28/2009 4:49:02 AM , Rating: 4
RAID is NOT a replacement for backups

RAID does not protect against data corruption (a lot can cause this) or accidental/intentional wipes - the only thing it protects against is physical failure of a disk.

RAID is only really useful in a business/server environment - backups however, are useful for everyone.


RE: So now...
By kondor999 on 10/28/2009 7:48:31 AM , Rating: 3
I agree that all drives will fail *eventually*. But the devil's in the details (like maybe that drive was a few days old) - and you failed to obtain (or account for) those details before posting yet another asinine comment, bereft of manners or even utility.

A lot of people here strike me as burnt-out helpdesk types who absolutely detest end-users. Let's cut the elitism and realize that Joe Sixpack isn't always wrong.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/2009 6:07:48 PM , Rating: 1
How can you "not trust" Intel because of a minor Firmware issue that effects maybe 2% of their products ? Seriously guys come off it.


RE: So now...
By HrilL on 10/27/09, Rating: -1
RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/2009 7:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Because the EU sued them, or AMD crying sour grapes sued them?

Or is it just 'unethical' in general to make money these days...


RE: So now...
By Spuke on 10/27/2009 7:17:20 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Or is it just 'unethical' in general to make money these days...
It's not unethical to make money, just unethical to make more money than rappers and basketball players.


RE: So now...
By FaaR on 10/27/2009 10:41:14 PM , Rating: 4
It's unethical to use some of your money to sweet-talk your customers into not buying anything from the much smaller competitor, in order to make even more money in return.

It has nothing to do with sour grapes or anything of the sorts. Please read up on the subject kkthx.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2009 12:14:08 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
It's unethical to use some of your money to sweet-talk your customers into not buying anything from the much smaller competitor, in order to make even more money in return.


NO it's not. Might have been illegal, but even that isn't proven. It's more like a gray area, but far from unethical.

Businesses give incentives to customers all the time. This whole "we're the little guy and it's all Intels " fault act by AMD is sad.


RE: So now...
By icanhascpu on 10/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: So now...
By HrilL on 10/28/2009 2:40:14 AM , Rating: 2
what you and the Intel fanboys don't know or don't want to believe is that Intel performed shady business deals that blocked out AMD from selling their CPUs to some of the bigger OEMs and wholesalers. They continued to do this while AMD had the best CPUs on the market and AMD would have gained a lot more market share if it was not for Intel's shady deals. The type of deals they made makes them unethical.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2009 3:08:03 AM , Rating: 2
They didn't "block" anything. Gateway and Compaq are companies, and NOBODY has a right to tell them who's CPU's they should use. Intel made an offer, and they took it. Trying to make this seem 'shady' is completely ignorant.

Also there is one little fact you AMD guys overlook on this. AMD was already operating at maximum capacity. Even if Gateway and other OEM's were to offer their CPU's, AMD could not have met the production required. The idea that Intel stopped AMD from growing as a company is a fabrication of you Fanboi's.

quote:
AMD would have gained a lot more market share


Nope. Potential market share, that they wouldn't even be able to meet the demands for. They did not have the product to sell in large enough numbers. Sorry.


RE: So now...
By seamonkey79 on 10/28/2009 8:37:29 AM , Rating: 2
Combine with the obvious lack of stock at their peak market shares after Dell started selling AMDs and I couldn't find them at Newegg or Zipzoomfly or Mwave, etc...

They've never ever ever had the fab capacity to even pretend to be competition to Intel for market share, so pretending that Intel's actions are/were at fault for AMD's lack of performance is ridiculous.


RE: So now...
By HrilL on 10/28/2009 12:31:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yes us fanboi's?? I guess the European commission is also a fanboi and the South Korean government as well?

Clearly you lack understanding of the whole situation. The fact is Intel did this from the start. Back in the K6 and K6-2 days and continued for years. AMD couldn't build market share at that time when they had an on par or even better CPU in some cases. Then athlon came along and AMD started to gain some market share and yes they were producing at their max. But if they would have been able to gain more market share over the years before they came out with athlon then they would have had more capital to build more foundries and thus meet high production demands.

You can't just look at it from a short amount of time when this happened for about a decade.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2009 3:10:38 AM , Rating: 1
And furthermore, so what ???

Why should the end user NOT buy the best things on available because of some kids opinion about the company who's offering them ? How does something that happened to AMD supposedly like 7 years ago affect the performance of my PC today ??

OMG I have an Intel SSD AND a Core2Duo.. I must be complete scum right ?


RE: So now...
By DigitalFreak on 10/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: So now...
By MonkeyPaw on 10/27/2009 6:36:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Western Digital it is?

Actually, I don't care much for WD, either. I've owned 3, and 2 failed in under 2 years. Of all my drives over the years, Maxtors have never failed me--even though they always ran hotter than hell. One Maxtor actually survived UPS shipping, in which UPS managed to utterly destroy the case.

Anyway, it just goes to show it's not worth "rushing out to get new software updates," especially firmware. History has shown that manufacturers like to release products and updates that are really no better than beta. Let others go and brick their systems while you patiently wait out minor issues like total drive failure. It's not like waiting a week or two will really kill you.


RE: So now...
By kondor999 on 10/27/2009 6:37:53 PM , Rating: 2
This is incredibly embarrassing for a large company like Intel to be thoroughly trounced by a small outfit like Indilinx in terms of:

1) Availability - ridiculous for a company this size!
2) Sequential write performance
3) Bricking the drive/losing data with flaky firmware

I've got a G1 X-25m 80gb and love it, btw. But that was months ago. Now?

Indilinx and perhaps Samsung RBX FTW.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/2009 6:48:52 PM , Rating: 1
Availability for all SSD drives are very low. The demand for the Intels is just MUCH higher. This is new technology, Intel can't snap their fingers and create manufacturing processes out of thin air.

Sequential write performance ? Overrated. The Intel's trash the competition where it counts, which is random reads and writes. THAT'S what makes a PC feel snappy and quick. And with the TRIM firmware ( when it works ), the Intel's bridge the gap in sequential writes anyway.

I'm not excusing mistakes. But you are making a mountain out of a molehill and showing a bit of ignorance.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/27/2009 6:51:47 PM , Rating: 2
And don't take my word for it

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=36...

It speaks for itself. If you buy anything other than an Intel SSD right now, you are just nuts.


RE: So now...
By Tasulian on 10/27/2009 9:52:26 PM , Rating: 2
Obviously, someone hasn't checked Anandtech lately.

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=36...

For those to lazy to read the article, I'll summarize.

In Anandtech's real world test, the OCZ Vertex is
quote:
more than good enough, this is faster than Intel.


quote:
The write speed improvement that the Intel firmware brings to 160GB drives is nice but ultimately highlights a bigger issue: Intel's write speed is unacceptable in today's market.


Intel may have been heads and shoulders above everyone 6 months ago, but things change quickly.


RE: So now...
By Touche on 10/28/2009 5:15:28 AM , Rating: 2
Really?

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=36...
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=35...
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=35...

Wow, what a dominance...NOT!

Maybe you should look less at synthetic benchmarks.

Even with this "fantastic" new firmware:
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=36...

Not a real world test, but even it shows that Intel is far from a league of its own.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2009 9:37:33 AM , Rating: 1
Maybe you would have read this part..

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=36...

Do you guys understand SSD's at all ? Sequential write speed isn't the end all the all of SSD benchmarking !

Do you guys even know what sequential writes mean ? I seriously doubt you, or anyone else, would be stupid enough to use an SSD for constantly doing sequential writes over and OVER and over again.

In this link we see that, where it counts, Intel is far ahead. Random read/writes is what REALLY makes your system feel happy. Conversley, this is where many standard Hard Drives come up short, while being very good at sequential writes. SSD's are different. You might give up some sequential writing peak numbers, but what you gain in random reads and writes simply makes it a non issue. Programs open and close instantly. Windows starts up super fast. Searches and virus scans, no problem.

I noticed you conveniently left out the Overall System Performance benchmark, which Intel solidly wins hands down. Enjoy your big sequential writes number while the rest of us are actually doing shit.

No look, the OCZ is a damn good buy. But personally, I couldn't even begin to consider one. First off, where is the 80gig Vertex Turbo ?? It's either buy one that's way too small, or drop 600 bucks on their 120gig. 120 ??? At least if you drop 600 bucks on an X25, you get the full 160gigs.


RE: So now...
By kondor999 on 10/28/2009 7:31:59 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I read the same article and took away a totally different message. I think you're living in an "ignorant" Intel-loving fantasyland if you can gloss over the serious issues which I mentioned.

Bricking drives is a molehill?

Unbelievable.


RE: So now...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/28/2009 10:02:50 AM , Rating: 2
First off, the drives aren't bricked if they didn't do something wrong. They just have to reinstall Windows.

And anyone who's EVER worked with a PC knows that there are always risks when you flash anything, bios, DVDdrive, and SSD's. And we have no way of knowing if these people followed the directions or did it the right way.

I'm not excusing Intel, but please. Most of this is people jumping on the hate wagon for no reason.

If you were typing this from an Intel X25 you would be an Intel lover too. They freed my PC from the chains of those draconian spinning dinner plates, and I'm forever saved. Brother, I'm born again :P


RE: So now...
By FaaR on 10/27/2009 7:17:32 PM , Rating: 2
The Intel drive trounces any other SSD out now on any benchmark that counts. Sequential write performance is basically a non-issue for 99% of all users - assuming it's decently high of course, which you have to say it easily is for the intel drive. It roughly matches, or OUTmatches pretty much any 3.5" desktop drive out there today in average write speed (HDDS are much slower on inner cylinders than along the outside of the disks).


RE: So now...
By sleeprae on 10/27/2009 7:21:08 PM , Rating: 2
1. Not only is the demand for the Intel SSD extremely high, but it's also on a new process and has been on the market for much less time.

2. STR is not the end-all, be-all that so many people make it out to be. That being said, I do think that Intel should have made the G2 competitive on this spec, even if it has little impact on actual performance for most use scenarios.

3. I've deployed 45 120GB Vertex drives at work. One drive completely lost its firmware after 2 months of use and was a total loss, and another flaked out after a week of use and resulted in a partial loss. My point? The same as was made here already--all drives have problems and all drives will die.

I loved the Indilinx drives when they were clearly superior at the price point, but the G2 Intels changed all that IMO.


RE: So now...
By kondor999 on 10/28/2009 7:37:24 AM , Rating: 2
Apples and oranges. We're not talking the typical random hardware failure here. We're talking about an officially-sanctioned Intel "tested" firmware that can brick your drive.

Big, big difference. If it was Indilinx that put out a fw like that, you guys would roast them over an open flame.

Is it me, or are we just plain consumers outnumbered by industry types with vested interests on this site? Seems like there's a real tendency for people to defend the larger companies and flame the smaller. Interesting.


RE: So now...
By Alexvrb on 10/27/2009 7:53:38 PM , Rating: 2
Actually the Deskstars have been good for a long time now. It was the old IBM "deathstars" from way back that would fail left and right. Mostly sub-120GB drives, certain models. The later IBM models, and anything produced since Hitachi bought their drive business, are generally very solid. I've also had good luck with Samsung spinpoint drives.

As far as WD goes? I like some of their drives, like their Velociraptor and Caviar Black drives. But I haven't been pleased with their cheaper drives, and their original Raptors had some issues. I had a 150GB Raptor fail catastrophically, I was unable to recover any data. With their 7200RPM drives I am usually able to at least recover most of the data.

I will say that WD's warranty service is excellent. I mail them a failed drive, I get a new drive back (often brand spanking new out of their plant). No hassles.


RE: So now...
By bigboxes on 10/27/2009 10:13:22 PM , Rating: 2
It was the 60gb Deskstar drives that failed repeatedly. It was a new denser platter technology. Just remember the "click of death" terminalolgy that became famouse because of this drive. I know. I had NINE of their drives that FAILED! They were fast and quiet... and POS!! Too bad for Hitachi as I haven't bought any of their drives since.

Seriously, all drives fail. It's only a matter of time or of the wrong batch (see early Seagate 1.5TB drives). I've had all makers fail. You're only recourse is BACKUP! That and I love Seagate's five year warranty.


RE: So now...
By xxsk8er101xx on 10/27/2009 8:53:13 PM , Rating: 2
All drives fail. That's why they have 3 to 5 year warranties. If you need one just buy one. It doesn't really matter. If you're so concerned about data lost setup raid 5 or raid 6. Then have 1 or 2 drives for spares.


“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads



Latest Headlines








botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki