Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Hard drive testing software

R

Rockadile

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 11, 2012
501
210
I'm aware of SoftRAID. Is this what everyone else uses or is there a better, cheaper option?

SMART data is apparently very limited thru USB, Firewire, and eSATA using SoftRAID.
Going to assume this is the case with similar software and that Thunderbolt is the only reliable choice.
 
I haven't tested SoftRAID so I cant commend on that.

I do use DriveDX for SMART monitoring, it will support USB if you install third party driver that can be found on the DriveDX website. Third party driver might cause problems if you have some conflicting software installed.

Support also depends on the USB dock/case you are using, some models might not work...
 
Ebenezum said:
I haven't tested SoftRAID so I cant commend on that.

I do use DriveDX for SMART monitoring, it will support USB if you install third party driver that can be found on the DriveDX website. Third party driver might cause problems if you have some conflicting software installed.

Support also depends on the USB dock/case you are using, some models might not work...
Click to expand...

How are you liking DriveDX and do you use external drives with it?
Wondering if my OWC enclosures are supported but the development of the 3rd party driver looks stopped judging by their github. Compatibility list has no OWC at all.
 
Rockadile said:
Are you using external drives with it?
Click to expand...
Yes, I have been using it to check external spinner drives, especially for checking new high capacity external spinners (6 - 8 TB) to verify functionality and to record a baseline before putting a new drive in service.
 
CoastalOR said:
Yes, I have been using it to check external spinner drives, especially for checking new high capacity external spinners (6 - 8 TB) to verify functionality and to record a baseline before putting a new drive in service.
Click to expand...
Does Scannerz need third-party driver for this? Which enclosure brands & connection types have you used?
 
Rockadile said:
Does Scannerz need third-party driver for this? Which enclosure brands & connection types have you used?
Click to expand...
No it does not need a 3rd party driver. Scannerz is a app that tests the drive when you launch the app and select the drive to test.
I have used it on Toshiba, Seagate, OWC, HGST, and LaCie drives. I have used it with USB2, USB3, Firewire 800, Thunderbolt1, and Thunderbolt2 connections.
 
Rockadile said:
How are you liking DriveDX and do you use external drives with it?
Wondering if my OWC enclosures are supported but the development of the 3rd party driver looks stopped judging by their github. Compatibility list has no OWC at all.
Click to expand...

It has performed well, I use it with USB3 and FireWire drives. It has found 2 failing drives during the last 3 years.

CoastalOR said:
No it does not need a 3rd party driver. Scannerz is a app that tests the drive when you launch the app and select the drive to test.
I have used it on Toshiba, Seagate, OWC, HGST, and LaCie drives. I have used it with USB2, USB3, Firewire 800, Thunderbolt1, and Thunderbolt2 connections.
Click to expand...

I assume that it cant show SMART information on external non Thunderbolt drives since that limitation seems to be in the OS and not in the software itself?

Furthermore based on the website if I'm correct that check seems to be similar in idea to extended test with DriveDx?
 
Ebenezum said:
I assume that it cant show SMART information on external non Thunderbolt drives since that limitation seems to be in the OS and not in the software itself?

Furthermore based on the website if I'm correct that check seems to be similar in idea to extended test with DriveDx?
Click to expand...
You are right. It does not show the SMART status on USB external drives. I use the software to scan the drives and save a report of the scan results.
 
Ebenezum said:
It has performed well, I use it with USB3 and FireWire drives. It has found 2 failing drives during the last 3 years.



I assume that it cant show SMART information on external non Thunderbolt drives since that limitation seems to be in the OS and not in the software itself?

Furthermore based on the website if I'm correct that check seems to be similar in idea to extended test with DriveDx?
Click to expand...
Which brand of drives are you using?

[doublepost=1502343535][/doublepost]
CoastalOR said:
You are right. It does not show the SMART status on USB external drives. I use the software to scan the drives and save a report of the scan results.
Click to expand...
What is in the scan results if it can't show SMART?
 
Last edited:
Rockadile said:
How are you liking DriveDX and do you use external drives with it?
Wondering if my OWC enclosures are supported but the development of the 3rd party driver looks stopped judging by their github. Compatibility list has no OWC at all.
Click to expand...

I used it with the OWC Envoy just last week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockadile
Rockadile said:
What is in the scan results if it can't show SMART?
Click to expand...
Here is the kind of report it generates:

Code: 
                 Scannerz for OS X, version number 1.9.9.99A

Log started: 20:33:04, Mon. Mar. 27, 2017
The device under test is a primary drive with a drive ID of: disk2
Raw device designation: /dev/rdisk2

Device Characteristics:

Primary Disk Data:
 Primary Disk/Volume Status: Primary Disk
 Primary Disk ID:  disk2
 Primary Disk Size:  2.0 TB
 Primary Disk Partition Type:   GUID Partition Scheme

Volume/Partition Information (if applicable):
 Volume ID:   disk2
 Volume Partition Type:   N/A
 Volume File System Type:  N/A
 Volume Name:  N/A
 Volume Partition Size:  2.0 TB
 Volume Free Space:   0.0 KB

General Information About This Device:
 S.M.A.R.T. Status:  Not Supported
 UUID:  N/A
 Drive Is Internal:   External
 Drive Interface Type:  USB External Media
 Drive Media:   Generic
 Media is Bootable:   NO
 Media is Ejectable:   YES

 Scannerz File Prefix: M000021-D-USB-03-20-2017-13-32-54

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SIZING SCAN START

Sizing Scan Results:
 Detected size: 2000398934016
 Number of 512 byte sectors: 3907029168
Sizing Scan Completed Normally.

SIZING SCAN END

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

START OF SURFACE SCAN TEST: 20:33:17, Mon. Mar. 27, 2017

Scan start - Start Byte: 0 End Byte: 1048575999 Index: 0
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 0 End Byte: 1048575999 Index: 0

Scan start - Start Byte: 1048576000 End Byte: 2097151999 Index: 1
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1048576000 End Byte: 2097151999 Index: 1

Scan start - Start Byte: 2097152000 End Byte: 3145727999 Index: 2
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 2097152000 End Byte: 3145727999 Index: 2

Scan start - Start Byte: 3145728000 End Byte: 4194303999 Index: 3
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 3145728000 End Byte: 4194303999 Index: 3

Scan start - Start Byte: 4194304000 End Byte: 5242879999 Index: 4
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 4194304000 End Byte: 5242879999 Index: 4

Scan start - Start Byte: 5242880000 End Byte: 6291455999 Index: 5
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 5242880000 End Byte: 6291455999 Index: 5

Scan start - Start Byte: 6291456000 End Byte: 7340031999 Index: 6
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 6291456000 End Byte: 7340031999 Index: 6

Scan start - Start Byte: 7340032000 End Byte: 8388607999 Index: 7
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 7340032000 End Byte: 8388607999 Index: 7

Scan start - Start Byte: 8388608000 End Byte: 9437183999 Index: 8
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 8388608000 End Byte: 9437183999 Index: 8

Scan start - Start Byte: 9437184000 End Byte: 10485759999 Index: 9
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 9437184000 End Byte: 10485759999 Index: 9

Scan start - Start Byte: 10485760000 End Byte: 11534335999 Index: 10
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 10485760000 End Byte: 11534335999 Index: 10

You get the idea - some report text has been deleted to shorten this forum post.

Scan start - Start Byte: 1992294400000 End Byte: 1993342975999 Index: 1900
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1992294400000 End Byte: 1993342975999 Index: 1900

Scan start - Start Byte: 1993342976000 End Byte: 1994391551999 Index: 1901
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1993342976000 End Byte: 1994391551999 Index: 1901

Scan start - Start Byte: 1994391552000 End Byte: 1995440127999 Index: 1902
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1994391552000 End Byte: 1995440127999 Index: 1902

Scan start - Start Byte: 1995440128000 End Byte: 1996488703999 Index: 1903
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1995440128000 End Byte: 1996488703999 Index: 1903

Scan start - Start Byte: 1996488704000 End Byte: 1997537279999 Index: 1904
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1996488704000 End Byte: 1997537279999 Index: 1904

Scan start - Start Byte: 1997537280000 End Byte: 1998585855999 Index: 1905
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1997537280000 End Byte: 1998585855999 Index: 1905

Scan start - Start Byte: 1998585856000 End Byte: 1999634431999 Index: 1906
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1998585856000 End Byte: 1999634431999 Index: 1906

Scan start - Start Byte: 1999634432000 End Byte: 2000398934015 Index: 1907
   Scan passed - Start Byte: 1999634432000 End Byte: 2000398934015 Index: 1907


The following subsections PASSED surface scanning tests:

   Start: 0                End: 1048575999       Index: 0
   Start: 1048576000       End: 2097151999       Index: 1
   Start: 2097152000       End: 3145727999       Index: 2
   Start: 3145728000       End: 4194303999       Index: 3
   Start: 4194304000       End: 5242879999       Index: 4
   Start: 5242880000       End: 6291455999       Index: 5
   Start: 6291456000       End: 7340031999       Index: 6
   Start: 7340032000       End: 8388607999       Index: 7
   Start: 8388608000       End: 9437183999       Index: 8
   Start: 9437184000       End: 10485759999      Index: 9
   Start: 10485760000      End: 11534335999      Index: 10
 
You get the idea - some report text has been deleted to shorten this forum post.

   Start: 1992294400000    End: 1993342975999    Index: 1900
   Start: 1993342976000    End: 1994391551999    Index: 1901
   Start: 1994391552000    End: 1995440127999    Index: 1902
   Start: 1995440128000    End: 1996488703999    Index: 1903
   Start: 1996488704000    End: 1997537279999    Index: 1904
   Start: 1997537280000    End: 1998585855999    Index: 1905
   Start: 1998585856000    End: 1999634431999    Index: 1906
   Start: 1999634432000    End: 2000398934015    Index: 1907

The following scan sections ***FAILED*** surface scanning tests:

   THERE WERE NO FAILURES DETECTED IN THIS TEST.


Surface Scan Relative Performance Indices

   Surface Scan Linear RPI: 7.653012
   Surface Scan Ratio RPI: 2.545596

END OF SURFACE SCAN TEST: 00:43:09, Tue. Mar. 28, 2017

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

START OF SEEK SCAN TEST: 00:43:09, Tue. Mar. 28, 2017

 Seek Start: 0              End: 66679963648    Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 133359927296   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 200039890944   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 266719854592   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 333399818240   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 400079781888   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 466759745536   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 533439713280   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 600119676928   Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 0              End: 666799640576   Status: PASSED
 
You get the idea - some report text has been deleted to shorten this forum post.

 Seek Start: 1666999107584  End: 1733679067136  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1666999107584  End: 1800359030784  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1666999107584  End: 1867038994432  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1666999107584  End: 1933718958080  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1733679071232  End: 1800359030784  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1733679071232  End: 1867038994432  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1733679071232  End: 1933718958080  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1800359034880  End: 1867038994432  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1800359034880  End: 1933718958080  Status: PASSED
 Seek Start: 1867038998528  End: 1933718958080  Status: PASSED

END OF SEEK SCAN TEST: 00:43:31, Tue. Mar. 28, 2017

Number of errors during seek test: 0
Number of irregularities during seek test: 0
RESULTS: Seek scan *** PASSED ***  with no errors and no irregularities.


Seek Scan Relative Performance Indices

   Seek Scan Linear RPI: 1.736452
   Seek Scan Ratio RPI: 1.173074

         ---------- ALL TESTS ON THIS UNIT ARE NOW COMPLETE ----------

You can save the report as a text file for record.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockadile
smartmontools is a good command line one. Then there QuickBench, ZoneBench, Integrity which comes together and are paid.
 
I use DriveDX as well and like it a lot. I am using it with HGST, WD, Samsung, and Fujitsu HDDs, Samsung, SanDisk, Crucial, Silicon Power SSDs, via eSATA, USB 2.0, USB 3.1 gen1, FW800, and Thunderbolt 2. I am extremely happy with its ease of use and ability to predict failures that macOS' own monitoring tools flat out missed (macOS has on multiple occasions reported failing or failed drives as 'Verified'). IIRC it now supports the TB MBPs and iMacs with recent support, both on Sierra and supposedly High Sierra.

With single volumes and modern enclosures, I've only had issues with a few common USB enclosures not returning satisfactory (or any) metrics. I initially thought it was the older HDDs but upon popping them in different enclosures I got the stats I wanted. Even many of my old USB 2.0 and FW800/USB2.0 enclosures work fine.

Its ability to return metrics on soft RAID volumes seems very enclosure-dependent. In the case of a HW RAID 0 via eSATA with two SSDs, the amount of data it returned was very, very limited - perhaps SMART data with hard RAID setups might be more inherently limited???? IIRC there is a trial that is free you could play with to see if, upon installing the extra driver, it can return enough data to make the purchase justifiable for your needs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ElectronGuru and Rockadile
ZapNZs said:
I use DriveDX as well and like it a lot. I am using it with HGST, WD, Samsung, and Fujitsu HDDs, Samsung, SanDisk, Crucial, Silicon Power SSDs, via eSATA, USB 2.0, USB 3.1 gen1, FW800, and Thunderbolt 2. I am extremely happy with its ease of use and ability to predict failures that macOS' own monitoring tools flat out missed (macOS has on multiple occasions reported failing or failed drives as 'Verified'). IIRC it now supports the TB MBPs and iMacs with recent support, both on Sierra and supposedly High Sierra.

With single volumes and modern enclosures, I've only had issues with a few common USB enclosures not returning satisfactory (or any) metrics. I initially thought it was the older HDDs but upon popping them in different enclosures I got the stats I wanted. Even many of my old USB 2.0 and FW800/USB2.0 enclosures work fine.

Its ability to return metrics on soft RAID volumes seems very enclosure-dependent. In the case of a HW RAID 0 via eSATA with two SSDs, the amount of data it returned was very, very limited - perhaps SMART data with hard RAID setups might be more inherently limited???? IIRC there is a trial that is free you could play with to see if, upon installing the extra driver, it can return enough data to make the purchase justifiable for your needs.
Click to expand...
If you can list those USB enclosures not returning much metrics, that would be very helpful.

Maybe you can try the SoftRAID software for your raid setup.
 
Rockadile said:
If you can list those USB enclosures not returning much metrics, that would be very helpful.

Maybe you can try the SoftRAID software for your raid setup.
Click to expand...

The exact ones I can recall are the Transcend aluminum USB 3.1 enclosures, Oyen MiniPro dual 2.5-inch RAID 0 enclosure, StarTech m.2 SATA enclosure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockadile
By the way guys, are these software able to detect sudden infant mortality or just deterioration over time?
 
What is everyone using nowadays for testing every sector on a spinning drive before it is put into a production environment. My old standby of SpeedTools doesn't run on High Sierra.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back