HDD clicking on X41T - cache problem on the drive?

Message

bhtooefr · #61 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:17 am

Very interesting...

More results, please?

It DEFINITELY looks like the X41 has cache issues...

theFirst · #62 Post by **theFirst** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:40 am

X41T 18666TU - 60 Gig

I seem to have higher CPU Usage than other benchmark results in presented in this thread.

Default testing speed

Max testing accuracy

bhtooefr · #63 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:45 am

WTF?

In your case, it looks like cache is being misreported as zero, but it's really there - your burst speed indicates that your cache is alive and kicking.

Yotam · #64 Post by **Yotam** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 9:19 am

My results (max testing accuracy):

Here

bhtooefr · #65 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 9:23 am

.di: You WERE just running HDTune, and not doing anything else, right?

Still, I'd call Lenovo and ask what's going on here... even if the benchmarks are indicating that the cache is there, if it's showing 0KB cache.

.di · #66 Post by **.di** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 9:48 am

here is a new test.. with everything shot down.. wlan and antivirus

http://files.upl.silentwhisper.net/uplo ... AT00.2.png

the clicking sound that i was worry about is gone when i do the test.. but when the thinkpad is idle it sounds clicking again.. is it only me who have this problem..

Edited by Moderator: Links, not images, in this forum.

.di: sorry..

bhtooefr · #67 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:01 am

.di: Bad idea, doing that edit. However, it does tell us that your HDD actually *DOES* have cache, based on those speeds.

Anyway...

Edited by Moderator: No images in this forum without a warning in the subject line for dialup users. Links are fine.

How 'bout just killing the img tags, and leaving the URL, then? 3 extra seconds if that on each post...

Edited by Moderator: I used to do that. People didn't modify their behavior. Now, for the most part, I delete.

.di · #68 Post by **.di** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 11:10 am

oki.. then i know there is Cache.. if you guys say so.. but how about the clicking sound.. i have notice that it sounds like the hdd is parking the "head reader" or what the name is.. coz the sound is difference from normal hdd work.. is there a function where I can disable this.. coz I don’t think it is the active hdd protector.. I have the x41 on a table..

edit: i have tested the Active Protection System by shaking the laptop a little.. and when the system park the read arm it sound exactly the same.. as the clicking sound I have..

theFirst · #69 Post by **theFirst** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 11:53 am

My previous benchmarks are done with some normal apps running. This time I closed out all other applications, killed off antivirus.

Here's a new benchmark

Can someone explain to me why my CPU Usage is so high?

Connie

beq · #70 Post by **beq** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 3:54 pm

Just curious, does anyone know if the IBM service partition (containing Rescue & Recovery, PC-Doctor diagnostics, the backups, etc) is interoperable among different ThinkPads?

I mean if I swap the X40's HDD into the X41T, can I still boot into R&R/PC-Doctor from that HDD's service partition (and vice-versa)?

Do you guys think the built-in PC-Doctor drive diagnostics can be as accurate as Hitachi's own DFT (both DOS-based)?

If someone tries it please let us know

blackomegax · #71 Post by **blackomegax** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:58 pm

X40 here. purchased in june 05

drive reports 0kb cache and seek error rate failed.

should i replace it under warranty or what? i have no data corruption as of yet and it "feels" healthy.

bhtooefr · #72 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 5:16 pm

Very interesting, if it's an X40 that's affected.

Run an HDTune benchmark, so we can see the speed. Disable any anti-virus or anti-spyware tools.

blackomegax · #73 Post by **blackomegax** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 5:34 pm

its an x40 2386 KLU

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/3255/bench6pk.jpg

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/1954 ... che1wu.jpg

taob · #74 Post by **taob** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:38 pm

blackomegax,

Looks like your recent X40 has the same drive as the X41/X41T's. IBM/Lenovo must have conslidated some of their parts between the two lines recently. The 40GB hard drive in my March 2004 X40 still reports the "HITACHI" vendor string, while your 40GB drive uses the "HTC" string that we're seeing in the X41's. Maybe something about HDTune isn't jiving right with the firmware on the HTC drives, and as a result it cannot report on the amount of installed cache. I find it hard to believe that any hard drive these days would have absolutely *no* cache whatsoever...

blackomegax · #75 Post by **blackomegax** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:47 pm

yes. given the burst rate. i'd say it definately has cache.

as for the drive.
this X40 is one of THE latest ones, and had a short production cycle as its not on their site for sale anymore.

it was one HELL of a deal under the EPP (i dont think im allowed to say the price here?)

for a 1.5 LV, 512mb integrated (installed a 512 addon for 1gb), and 2 8 cells

bhtooefr · #76 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:54 pm

Doesn't the HMM call for DKnnEA-nn models to be used as replacements?

That could explain it if repaired ones aren't fixed, as the DKnnEA-nn is the older drive...

jokerunm · #77 Post by **jokerunm** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 9:10 pm

Interesting to see an x40 drive reporting no cache. Even so, all the drives look like they should have working caches judging from the benches . No way can we have these kind of burst rates and not have working caches.

The newer drives seem to have better performance as well. Its looking more and more like the cache is being reported incorrectly. But it's looking more like a problem with the drive firmware, than the ide/ata controller.

Thanks for all the benches everyone. I would still like to see someone stick an X41 drive in an x40 ; just to verify.

beq · #78 Post by **beq** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:05 am

taob wrote:blackomegax,

Looks like your recent X40 has the same drive as the X41/X41T's. IBM/Lenovo must have conslidated some of their parts between the two lines recently. The 40GB hard drive in my March 2004 X40 still reports the "HITACHI" vendor string, while your 40GB drive uses the "HTC" string that we're seeing in the X41's. Maybe something about HDTune isn't jiving right with the firmware on the HTC drives, and as a result it cannot report on the amount of installed cache. I find it hard to believe that any hard drive these days would have absolutely *no* cache whatsoever...

Thanks, that makes sense to me too. Anyways that's interesting about newer X40's apparently coming with a drive from the Hitachi C4K60 series instead of an older series (I also note that on the TABOOK some new X40 models added Oct 2005 now come with 60GB HDD, whereas the previous Hitachi HDD series topped out at 40GB).

So guys this seems to be proof that a C4K60 drive (that originally only came with the X41/X41T) used in the X40 also misreports no cache under diagnostics utilities

jokerunm · #79 Post by **jokerunm** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 5:08 am

Have you tried swapping the drives yet?

beq wrote:
taob wrote:blackomegax,

Looks like your recent X40 has the same drive as the X41/X41T's. IBM/Lenovo must have conslidated some of their parts between the two lines recently. The 40GB hard drive in my March 2004 X40 still reports the "HITACHI" vendor string, while your 40GB drive uses the "HTC" string that we're seeing in the X41's. Maybe something about HDTune isn't jiving right with the firmware on the HTC drives, and as a result it cannot report on the amount of installed cache. I find it hard to believe that any hard drive these days would have absolutely *no* cache whatsoever...
Thanks, that makes sense to me too. Anyways that's interesting about newer X40's apparently coming with a drive from the Hitachi C4K60 series instead of an older series (I also note that on the TABOOK some new X40 models added Oct 2005 now come with 60GB HDD, whereas the previous Hitachi HDD series topped out at 40GB).

So guys this seems to be proof that a C4K60 drive (that originally only came with the X41/X41T) used in the X40 also misreports no cache under diagnostics utilities

PDADoc · #80 Post by **PDADoc** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 5:31 am

Well, on a (somewhat) related note, my hard drive has finally given out.

I first had an unrecoverable disk error, then I tried to use the recovery CDs that IBM/Lenovo sent me because the service partition wasn't working. But get this: whenever I try to restore the system to a factory state, it gets to the point where it asks for CD 1, and then it says that the restore can't continue because it can't find the service partition!

This just keeps getting better and better for me. I paid a lot of money for this machine, and have only had it for a few weeks, and now this!

Anyway, IBM/Lenovo is sending me a replacement HDD, hopefully this one will work the way it's supposed to. To make things worse, the backup I made using the Apricorn utility that came with my second HDD adapter for the X41 shows that no data actually exists on it at all, only the service partition was backed up! So if I manage to get this machine up and running again, I'll have to REINSTALL EVERYTHING FROM SCRATCH!!!! Come Monday, Apricorn will hear an earful from me.

So much for a pleasant weekend.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

#81 Post by **BillMorrow** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:20 am

richard,
I suggest true image and a USB HDD..
really slick..
but you'll need an external CD..
with the apricorn free version you need a floppy and 2nd HDD in the base..

FWIW, my X41T is doing a backup of the furum database right now as i type and it just made a rather loud click..
sounds like a re-seek..
could be bad news or not..

PDADoc · #82 Post by **PDADoc** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 7:12 am

[quote="BillMorrow"]richard,
I suggest true image and a USB HDD..
really slick..
but you'll need an external CD..
with the apricorn free version you need a floppy and 2nd HDD in the base..quote]

Bill, I had both of those in place when I made the backup, but for some reason, even though the software said the backup of the partition was successful, it didn't take. It could have been the HDD's fault and not the software, though.

Tell me more about ths True Image app, though.

I was set to go back to using Ghost, an app I'd used successfully in the past with no problems, but if this is a better solution, then I'll look at this instead. As for the USB HDD, can the X41T recognize it after booting into a DOS prompt? I have a 2nd HDD in the base (as I mentioned earlier), which is how I had always backed up my ThinkPads, going back to the 600X and 770 series, and it's always worked flawlessly for me.

theFirst · #83 Post by **theFirst** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:12 pm

I got an email this morning from the Hitachi rep I spoke to on Friday. Apparently there is a bug in their Drive Fitness Test.

-Connie

#-------------------------------

Connie,

We have tested your scenario in our lab and discover that the drive in
question (C4K60) does not report its cache to our tool properly. Thank you
for discovering this!

We have passed the information to our tool design team for correction in
the next tool release.

_______________________________
Hitachi Global Storage Technologies
US toll-free: 888.426.5214
Fax: 507.322.2419
support_usa@hitachigst.com
www.hitachigst.com
_______________________________

Yotam · #84 Post by **Yotam** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:56 pm

Very interesting...

You know why? because pc-doctor, hd-tune and all other HD diagnostic tools has the same bug as the hitachi fitness tool...

bhtooefr · #85 Post by **bhtooefr** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:03 pm

Hmm...

Can you say this?

Code: Select all

if drive.model == "C4K60":
     drive.setCacheSize(2048)

Yotam · #86 Post by **Yotam** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:02 pm

bhtooefr wrote:Hmm...

Can you say this?
Code: Select all
if drive.model == "C4K60":
     drive.setCacheSize(2048)

blackomegax · #87 Post by **blackomegax** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:50 pm

how in the WORLD does one file a claim with ibm/lenovo to have a replacement HDD shipped out under warranty so i can ghost my current one to it and then send the original back in, preferably, a prepaid shipping box from lenovo.

their "electronic service call" site gives me the feeling i'll be charged if i submit it. and is overall very confusing as well.

reason being: the SMART failure for seek error rate.
ANY smart failure means the drive is defective.
*unless that error is being misreported as the cache is*

Adam · #88 Post by **Adam** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 10:18 pm

Hey guys, I just picked up a X41t 18666SU and I also have the clicking noise. I'll run some HD tests tomorrow to see what I come up with. This is upsetting to say the lease considering I spent over $3,000 (CDN) on this.

buswolf · #89 Post by **buswolf** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:23 am

I just got my new X41 today. It constantly makes annoying clicking noise. DFT and HDTune all indicates it has 2MB cache. So I assume that the noise has nothing to do the cache. As for the performance, I barely notice any degradation associates with the clicking noise for now. I did some research on the web(that's why leads me here), and I havn't seen any case in which the hard disk failed because of this noise or whatever behind it. Actually I had thinkpad notebook before. I certianly remember it also made this knid of click noise. I even heard this noise from my friend's Apple pb. But this frequently clicking really exceed my expectation. Maybe I can live with it for a while cause I have 3 years warranty. If things goes more serious, I will call for support. Hope you guys could found something useful.

.di · #90 Post by **.di** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:52 am

i asked Hitachi about this and they reply thie..

"Dear Mr Hoang,

Thank you for contacting our Hitachi Technical Support Center regarding
your enquiry relating to the brief sound that emanates from our drives.

We suspect that the occasional 'sound' you are hearing is the Idle Time
Function that has been introduced on our latest drive designs as a
reliability enhancement. You need not be alarmed by this,

This "sound" is due to a brief but deliberate head arm movement every so
often. This has been added to maximise the reliability of our disk drive
products. This function is only invoked if an extended period of inactivity
is detected, so has no impact on active performance. [It is bad to leave
the heads hovering over the same data track unnecessarily].

Even after a period of time of activity the Idle Time Function can be
implemented as the Idle Time Function is a cumulative function.

The level of sound emitted may vary from one drive to another and as such
this should not give rise to concern or be considered an impending failure.

Please be assured that this drive design is one of the quietest drives, at
this data density, in the industry.

We trust this information will be of use and help you to resolve your
problem(s).

Best regards,

Hitachi Technical Support Center

Please reply with all history for a speedier response.
Damit wir Ihren Fall schneller bearbeiten koennen fuegen Sie bitte alle
Email-Korrespondenz bei.
Ci riscriva con tutti i dettagli precedenti per una risposta piu celere.
Veuillez joindre tout l’historique dans votre prochain email.

email : support_uk@hitachigst.com or support_de@hitachigst.com

homepage : http://www.hitachigst.com"

HDD clicking on X41T - cache problem on the drive?

Here's my benchmark

This time without apps

Here's what Hitachi wrote me

Who is online