Event Viewer is showing my hard drive has a bad block on it?

Microsoft Windows 7 home premium
May 24, 2020 at 13:33:24
Specs: Windows 10, i7 6700/12 GB RAM
Event Viewer is showing my hard drive has a bad block on it. It's showing this error many times.

The device, \Device\Harddisk0\DR0, has a bad block.

But, it logged this error many times on 4/5 and then again on 5/3. I didn't notice the error. I don't look at my Event Viewer everyday. I use Acrons True Image to back up my PC. The backups quit working around 4/5. I've been troubleshooting it since and trying to get a good cloud backup since then. (It takes forever to upload 1 TB over my cable modem.) Some reason, my old cloud backup would fail constantly. A few weeks ago, I contacted Acronis support and he noticed that a new backup worked, but using my old backup, it failed. That's where he left me. Today, for whatever reason, I looked at my Acronis cloud backups and noticed the new cloud backup was missing and my old backup was showing that it has never completed or backed up anything.

So, I contacted Acronis support again and they noticed the errors in the Event Viewer showing my drive is failing.

But, I have a Samsung 850 SSD 1 TB HD and a 4 TB spinning disk hard drive. My OS is on the SSD. Supposedly, it's my SSD that's failing. I downloaded a program from Samsung's website called Samsung Magician which checks the health of the drives and it's showing "Good" status. According to this tool, there's nothing wrong with it. I also checked the SMART status of the drive and it's showing no errors.

So, what's up with all the errors in the Windows Event Viewer showing bad blocks and my Acronis backups failing about the same time, but everything else showing the drive is fine?

message edited by dorlow


See More: Event Viewer is showing my hard drive has a bad block on it?

Reply ↓  Report •

#1
May 24, 2020 at 14:21:32
Not sure what's a miss here... but how old is the SSD; and presumably you haven't engaged in trying to defrag it (my understanding is that SSD don't need it and to try it isn't good for them)?

If you have a spare drive... try cloning the SSD to that drive; rather than doing a backup? Or get a new drive and clone the SSD to that?

Meanwhile hang about too for others more cogent on SSD issues than am I (to date); they may offer more savvy input..?


Reply ↓  Report •

#2
May 24, 2020 at 15:41:29
The hard drive is probably at least 3 years old. Maybe older. I paid over $1,000 for it. I just ordered a replacement 1 TB SSD drive off of Amazon for $123. I decided to get a sk hynix instead of Samsung. Pc magazine rates it above the Samsung and supposedly there the 2nd largest pc chip manufacturer in the world.

Reply ↓  Report •

#3
May 24, 2020 at 16:42:36
3yrs isn't that long; but SSD have limit on the number rewrites allowed, before they start to go down. It is a large number - but I can't recall what; and I doubt that anyone would know how many they might have used at any given moment? A bit like flash drives - which in effect work the same way? Which is why its useful to have backup of a main system (SSD) on an HDD - in-case of need...

I've used Crucial SSD and had no issues thus far - and some of mine are 3yrs old or more. (Touches wooden leg and side of head for luck at this stage...)

I understand (from info via riider I think) that SSD require to be occasionally powered up lest they fade and lose data storage. Seems powering them up at intervals - and no more than that - refreshes or whatever the "cells" (my term...) and preserves the date therein? I think it was riider (and others here too) who advise to use HDD for long term storage; and certainly for backup/cloned storage etc.; as they don't fade over time...?


Reply ↓  Report •

Related Solutions

#4
May 24, 2020 at 16:56:25
It doesn't make sense I need to reboot them frequently to somehow refresh the sectors. I work in IT. New servers also use SSDs these days. Those servers run for sometimes years without being rebooted. Granted, I do know that a business grade SSD is better than a consumer grade SSD drive. But, it doesn't make sense to me the drive would fail just because I haven't been rebooting it often. Granted it might be failing because I leave the PC on 24x7 so it's constantly probably having some kind of read/write happening to it. But, still our servers in our data centers run 24x7 for years... (I guess it's been 3 years for me with his hard drive... so maybe my analogy of the data center hard drives running for years doesn't mean much.) I don't work in the actual data center so I don't deal with the actual hardware swapping. So, I'm not sure how often a hard drive fails. Of course, all of the drives in our servers are in some kind of RAID configuration.

About your comment of defragging, I don't defrag. Everything I read says thats not really necessary these days. FAT filing systems were nutorious for getting fragmented. When NT 4.0 came out, they didn't even include a defragmenter because Microsoft didn't think it needed it. NTFS doesn't fragment anywhere near what FAT did. Linux doesn't include defragmenters because all of their filing systems don't experience fragmenting. But, fragmentation wouldn't cause hard drive failures. Maybe in a spinning disk because the heads having to move between fragmented sectors and the thrashing between the fragmented sectors could cause a drive to fail. But, in an SSD, there are no moving parts so there isn't any thrashing.


Reply ↓  Report •

#5
May 24, 2020 at 16:57:12
"The device, \Device\Harddisk0\DR0, has a bad block"
https://www.partitionwizard.com/par...

Reply ↓  Report •

#6
May 25, 2020 at 00:54:28
dorlow replied to trvlr:

> It doesn't make sense I need to reboot them frequently to
> somehow refresh the sectors.

I think you might have misunderstood what trvlr was
saying in the last paragraph of his reply. He wasn't saying
that the drive needs to be rebooted frequently, just that it
needs to be powered up occasionally. Like, it shouldn't sit
for 18 months without ever being plugged in.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis


Reply ↓  Report •

#7
May 25, 2020 at 01:20:15
I hope I still have some of the references which came my way (way back) when the issues re’ SSD defragging, and losing data over time were discussed here. If I can I’ll post them here. Possibly others may have them as well and chip in and post them too?

I agree fully with your sentiments re’ the whole issue nonetheless. As regards NT and NTFS defrag issue, when I was studying for my MCSE in those far off days of ‘98, the view then was no need of defrag. But that changed over time, and certainly my own experience in the broadcast profession was that defrag was considered useful at least by IT support teams, as user PCs clearly slowed down over time - even after junk removal...; and in many cases there were some serious restrictions invoked to prevent, or at least limit as best they could, the access to and acquisition of junk. And I agree that defrag didn’t cause mechanical dive (HDD) failures.

RAID would certainly be the norm in any serious data storage environment; as you appreciate they safeguard against a drive failure. And unless one was directly involved in the server banks it’s unlikely likely anyone not involved in that area, would know when a drive failed.

However the usual approach was to re-image the drive, rather than wait for a defrag utility to create complete. That decision being more efficient time wise, as they actually replaced the whole end user’s computer/workstation and re-imaged accordingly elsewhere.

To go back to SSD fading over time if not occasionally powered up, I’ve had two brand name flash drives fail whilst in storage, and not powered up for quite a while (over a year at least). Fortunately the content was (still is) on non installed HDD, and/or my NAS.

I run Macs these days; gave up on was windows for various reasons... Like any Unix based system (Linux variants galore) it doesn’t require defrag, But there are Mac fans and supporters who do say that even the Mac benefits from a re-image or similar over time (usually a very... long period of time). I have no personal stance on that issue.


Reply ↓  Report •

#8
May 25, 2020 at 02:13:56
Should You Or Should You Not Defrag An SSD
https://www.easeus.com/partition-ma...

Reply ↓  Report •

#9
May 25, 2020 at 02:38:03
Presumably your disk is an 850 PRO or an 850 EVO (these are the only !TB disks in the 850 series). Warranties on these are 10 years and 5 years, respectively, so if it really is bad you should get it replaced under warranty.

However - a single bad block is nothing to worry about. Almost all SSDs have a number of bad blocks; the firmware maps them out of the active pool. And there is something very wrong with Acronis backup if it fails because of a single bad block. I suspect that this message is a red herring (the sort of thing that scammers rely on to persuade people that their computers need fixing).

Things I would do before considering replacement:

1. Check the SSD's firmware, and update it if necessary.

2. Try an alternative backup program (there are several free ones) to see if they can back up your computer.

As for the discussion about fragmentation - all filesystems suffer it to some degree, but it doesn't matter with an SSD. The problem with fragmentation is that it requires the heads to move a lot when reading files from the disk. No heads, no problem.

In general, SSDs nowadays are more reliable than mechanical hard disks and have a longer MTBF.


Reply ↓  Report •

#10
May 25, 2020 at 15:49:30
The Samsung 850 SSD specs state that is a 256GB 2.5" internal HD. You could try re-seating the cables.

Reply ↓  Report •

Ask Question