WD60EFRX pre-install test for TS-EC1080 Pro (1 of 11 DoA)

[GoetzVonBerlichingen]

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

I am a little surprised that this Forum's administrators/moderators decided to start selectively deleting my posts beginning mid-October 2014. I was given no notice that I had violated some rule, nor a notice that my posts were being deleted. Readers should understand that the content you read has been selectively edited to ensure QNAP remains happy. It's almost as if this "Community Forum" is, in fact, intended to be a Potemkin village, and not a real community.

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

E'er the helpful type, I elected to help them eradicate traces of me, and deleted the contents of this post on 31 October 2014.

[ToreBK]

Thanks for the replies, I agree we should probably make a new thread called "WD60EFRX - DLGDIAG initial testing". Before we do, though, just a few remarks:

I thought I would go about it something like this:

WD_Diag_sheet.jpg

I started off with one drive (serial nnn200), the quick scan was uneventful:

2014-08-28 23.55.23.jpg

Then I started the Extended test:

2014-08-29 10.28.35.jpg

As you can see, it's a rather lengthy process... Anyways, about half an hour after this photo was taken, my computer halted / froze. I saw no other alternative but to reboot, but on POST I noticed that BIOS wasn't detecting the attached WD60EFRX anymore

I tried AHCI, IDE Enhanced, IDE compatible, all 6 SATA-ports on the Motherboard, different SATA-cables, different power cables... no luck. I tried booting UBCD5.2.0, UBCD5.2.8 and finally UBCD5.3.1, trying all different available versions of DLGDIAG available on all different versions of UBCD. Every time I got this error message:

2014-08-29 11.42.43.jpg

None of them could find and / or communicate properly with the attached WD60EFRX, which by now also started making clicking sounds, especially on cold restart of computer (power off - power on as opposed to restart). This brought my attention to what was mentioned in this thread about another tool, so I even tried to launch the WDIDLE3 just to see if it could communicate with the drive:

2014-08-29 11.44.38.jpg

As you can see, it actually did find the drive in some miraculous way, but I could not read the serial number and there was also a "CMD Error" message.

Thinking I had just about eliminated all other alternatives, I decided to open another bag to try another HDD. Voila, connection at once!

This was not a good start, first HDD I tested is now unreachable. I have started the same procedure on HDD #2, but if that also ends up in the same dramatic way I think it would be best to cancel my testing activities all together.

Have I damaged the drive, or was it damaged even before I opened the bag (DOA)?

[doktornotor]

There's no way to damage the drive by running a diagnostics. DoA pretty much, be glad you discovered it early.

[Thomas_L]

Sorry to hear your first drive is broken.

3 out of 8 of my 6TB drives have tested OK so far.

Disk#1 tested with both DLGDIAG 5.20 and 5.21 and it passed on both versions.
Disk#2 tested with DLGDIAG 5.21 and it passed. (didn't want to use 5.20 anymore since it did cause GoetzVonBerlichingen's PC to lock up).
Disk#3 tested with DLGDIAG 5.21 and it passed.

5 disks left to test... I'm using multiple PCs now and they'll be finished tomorrow.

I'm still deciding whether I should leave the TIMER3 at 300s or disable them. My plan is to keep the drives spinning all the time and I'm not sure if it's better to leave the timer at 300s or disable it.

Brgds... /Thomas

[GoetzVonBerlichingen]

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

I am a little surprised that this Forum's administrators/moderators decided to start selectively deleting my posts beginning mid-October 2014. I was given no notice that I had violated some rule, nor a notice that my posts were being deleted. Readers should understand that the content you read has been selectively edited to ensure QNAP remains happy. It's almost as if this "Community Forum" is, in fact, intended to be a Potemkin village, and not a real community.

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

E'er the helpful type, I elected to help them eradicate traces of me, and deleted the contents of this post on 31 October 2014.

[GoetzVonBerlichingen]

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

I am a little surprised that this Forum's administrators/moderators decided to start selectively deleting my posts beginning mid-October 2014. I was given no notice that I had violated some rule, nor a notice that my posts were being deleted. Readers should understand that the content you read has been selectively edited to ensure QNAP remains happy. It's almost as if this "Community Forum" is, in fact, intended to be a Potemkin village, and not a real community.

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

E'er the helpful type, I elected to help them eradicate traces of me, and deleted the contents of this post on 31 October 2014.

[GoetzVonBerlichingen]

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

I am a little surprised that this Forum's administrators/moderators decided to start selectively deleting my posts beginning mid-October 2014. I was given no notice that I had violated some rule, nor a notice that my posts were being deleted. Readers should understand that the content you read has been selectively edited to ensure QNAP remains happy. It's almost as if this "Community Forum" is, in fact, intended to be a Potemkin village, and not a real community.

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

E'er the helpful type, I elected to help them eradicate traces of me, and deleted the contents of this post on 31 October 2014.

[doktornotor]

Why?
What's the point?
If you were just exercising a little bit of curiosity, i.e., learning more about some of the drive utilities, etc. ... well good on you!

At this stage of the game, you're essentially burning-in the drive while performing a WD-designed check of the media. If the point of all of your efforts ToreBK, however was to try to get the drive to somehow pass, then I can only scratch my head ... Puh-leez! The drive is bad (DOA as doktornotor observed, who has already commented on WDC not burning-in/testing the run-of-the-mill drives, for example, here). One failed try is enough, for my standards, that I don't want to rely on the drive to house my data for the next 3-5 years.

Yeah, exactly... RMA the drives. Not to be trusted. Honestly, these East Asia guys do about none proper testing on the consumer-grade HW before shipping. There needs to be a thorough antitrust investigation into the WD/Seagate oligopoly, seriously. The Thailand floodings years over, prices still outrageous and the quality goes down the drain.

[Thomas_L]

didn't want to use 5.20 anymore since it did cause GoetzVonBerlichingen's PC to lock up).

This is the last time I going to whip what otherwise should be a very dead horse ...

My goal is to only use a drive if it passes the most stringent test.

I really wish you could have tested one of your drives that caused 5.20 to freeze with 5.21 as well. Isn't it possible that 5.21 would actually display an error message instead of just locking up the computer?

I have no interest in making a defective drive pass, that's why I'm not using v5.22 that has the version history note "Removed missing tracks check".

@ Thomas_L. Did you photograph the display while testing with 5.20 and 5.21 ... and if so, were the descriptive stats for the drives the same? If the 5.21 stats appear more plausible, then this might be the difference between the versions.

Same C H S stats are displayed in 5.20 and 5.21 (same values as ToreBK).

Brgds... /Thomas

[GoetzVonBerlichingen]

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

I am a little surprised that this Forum's administrators/moderators decided to start selectively deleting my posts beginning mid-October 2014. I was given no notice that I had violated some rule, nor a notice that my posts were being deleted. Readers should understand that the content you read has been selectively edited to ensure QNAP remains happy. It's almost as if this "Community Forum" is, in fact, intended to be a Potemkin village, and not a real community.

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

E'er the helpful type, I elected to help them eradicate traces of me, and deleted the contents of this post on 31 October 2014.

[ToreBK]

I saw no other alternative but to reboot, but on POST I noticed that BIOS wasn't detecting the attached WD60EFRX anymore

I tried AHCI, IDE Enhanced, IDE compatible, all 6 SATA-ports on the Motherboard, different SATA-cables, different power cables... no luck. I tried booting UBCD5.2.0, UBCD5.2.8 and finally UBCD5.3.1, trying all different available versions of DLGDIAG available on all different versions of UBCD. Every time I got this error message:

2014-08-29 11.42.43.jpg

Why?

What's the point?

Isn't that obvious?

I opened the antistatic bag, connected the HDD to the computer, cranked it up just to see BIOS identify the drive, then running DLGDIAG for a good 10 hours - and then, suddenly, I couldn't even get any computer to even recognize the drive. Why? What happened? Did the HDD just die? Or could it be a cable? The PSU? The SATA controller? Of course I felt an urge to eliminate all other possibilities in order to safely conclude:

this particular HDD had a "MTBF" of 10 hours! This Norwegian Blue is dead!

[Thomas_L]

Scan is finally finished on all my 8 drives... they all tested OK using DLGDIAG 5.21 extended test.

@Goetz: 5.22 show same stats as 5.20 and 5.21.

Brgds... /Thomas

PS. Remarkable bird the Norwegian Blue!

[GoetzVonBerlichingen]

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

I am a little surprised that this Forum's administrators/moderators decided to start selectively deleting my posts beginning mid-October 2014. I was given no notice that I had violated some rule, nor a notice that my posts were being deleted. Readers should understand that the content you read has been selectively edited to ensure QNAP remains happy. It's almost as if this "Community Forum" is, in fact, intended to be a Potemkin village, and not a real community.

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

E'er the helpful type, I elected to help them eradicate traces of me, and deleted the contents of this post on 31 October 2014.

[ToreBK]

Ordered 11 HDDs for my 10-bay NAS, got 10 of them through the tests and found 1 DoA (RMA'ed already). It must be my lucky day!

WD60EFRX_test_results.JPG

WDC WD60EFRX-68MYMN1, FW: 82.00A82

Using UBCD 5.2.0 and DLGDIAG 5.20

[GoetzVonBerlichingen]

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

I am a little surprised that this Forum's administrators/moderators decided to start selectively deleting my posts beginning mid-October 2014. I was given no notice that I had violated some rule, nor a notice that my posts were being deleted. Readers should understand that the content you read has been selectively edited to ensure QNAP remains happy. It's almost as if this "Community Forum" is, in fact, intended to be a Potemkin village, and not a real community.

QNAP's money. QNAP's house. QNAP's rules.

E'er the helpful type, I elected to help them eradicate traces of me, and deleted the contents of this post on 31 October 2014.