MSI Spatium M480 SSD health

P

pro_alve154102d9

New member
Joined
Jan 27, 2022
Messages
6
30 days of use 440GB of writing and 6% decrease in disk health I don't think it's normal, anyone else with the same/similar situation?

Screenshot_1.png
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Yeah it's a bit surprising. Look at the actual SMART data with CrystalDiskInfo. In there under "Function" -> Advanced Feature -> Raw Values, select "10 [DEC]" to have human-readable values.
It will also warn you if some values are bad.

But it has to be said, this health percentage is not standardized at all. Each firmware has its own definition of how fast that drops, and you have very different implementations.

For example, the fast-dropping and then steady health:
smart-kingston-v300-4.png


Note that the end of the blue line on the right is when the drive ACTUALLY had errors (some files couldn't be read successfully or drive was not detected anymore).
Only then was it "dead" for the intents and purposes of that test.

The even faster-dropping health:
kingston-uv400-5.png


There are many more peculiar curves, you can read all about it here: https://3dnews-ru.translate.goog/93..._sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The main takeaway is, the health indicator is often good for nothing. You have to look at certain individual SMART values (often the "normalized" ones, which in CrystalDiskInfo means the "Current" value, not the Raw value.

So i think this is a cosmetic issue more than anything. Maybe they require a firmware update. It has nothing to do with the real state of the drive, which is most likely fine.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yep seems a bit excessive I would contackr MSI and ask directly
>>How to contact MSI.<<
SupportCenter | MSI Global
But will drop a couple of mine in as examples I have one I am keeping a eye on as it has dropped more than expected and is a 2TB Nvme 3x4

Old M.2 Sata drive now used as external Drive was my original OS drive
1643335022810.png

New OS drive
1643335168399.png


And this one is a Game Library only and has only been used as Steam library yet has lost 2% for not much writes
1643335326722.png
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
In comparison MX500 868 days of use 12.93TB of writing and 11% decrease in disk healt in line with what is expected.
Screenshot_2.png

CrystalDiskInfo
Screenshot_5.png

Someone sees something wrong?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
No, there's nothing wrong in the SMART data. It doesn't list the normalized values (current/threshold) like the Samsung SSDs do, it only lists the raw values, but still, they are fine.
You seem to have no reallocated sectors, as the "available spare" is still on 100, and no critical warnings either.

So we have to assume that the "health" data is using a wrongly programmed algorithm, probably a firmware bug that makes it lower too quickly. These kind of bugs can happen:

crucial-mx300-6.png


Also, most SSDs hold way longer than their TBW rating, you simply cannot destroy them from normal usage. For example, MX500 1TB is rated for 360 TBW, but from the Russian test, it turns out to have 10x more endurance than claimed, so that would be around 3600 TB. And that's just an average value, some other models, especially from Samsung, do even better.

So this kind of health value is doubly misleading, you can't give any credence to it. So yeah, contact MSI about it, maybe it's a bug or wrong algorithm.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Support's answer...
Dear Paul,
I think this is still good.
If you still want to RMA for service to check more detail, please let us know

At this point I don't know what to do.
This is my main SSD at the moment I don't have another one to put there, for how long or at what level of decrease should I be alert/concerned if it continues to go down at this rate, and send it to RMA.
Or should I buy another one now and send this one for RMA immediately?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You have to realize that the health number has no actual bearing on how long the SSD is going to last. It's a very unscientific calculation they implement in the firmware, where they mostly factor in how many times they think the cells can be overwritten, in other words, it's related to the TBW spec. Often times, they are way off the mark there, because they like to be conservative (which benefits them because they don't have to deal with warranty claims of an SSD that went beyond the TBW value). So the SSD will show bad health sometimes ten times earlier than when it's actually dying.

But secondly, even in that bad algorithm, there can be bugs. I think this is what you see here. The health value decreases too rapidly by the factor 10 or something. In all likelihood, the actual NAND cells are doing absolutely fine. This is like flying a plane in clear weather with a steady altitude, but your flight level sensor is showing that the plane is on a steep descent. Your eyes and your common sense tells you that this is a sensor error. You will not suddenly crash into the ground when the flight level hits zero. Your plane is still perfectly fine to stay airborne until your destination.

Personally, i would probably RMA this SSD nonetheless. Even though i'm pretty sure nothing bad will happen with this SSD, a low health indicator will be hard to explain when you want to sell the SSD one day, for example. And of course it might give an uneasy feeling, even though it's most likely just an algorithm acting up. I would get a Samsung 980 PRO (if i didn't have one already), it is cheaper, but also better. And the firmware is rock solid with Samsung.

CrystalDiskInfo_20220129123438.png
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I changed the samsung 970 PRO that I had for this one thinking about taking advantage of the Motherboard's PCIe 4.0 interface and what I would gain in transfer speed.
At the time of purchase I had a big discount compared to the samsung 980 PRO if I knew what I was getting myself into.
Thanks for the comments, the best thing to do is to RMA the SSD.
I already ordered a samsung 980 PRO 1TB to replace this one in the meantime.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The samsung 980 PRO arrived and installed.
CrystalDiskInfo_20220201122619.png

MSI Spatium M480 is on its way to RMA the decrease seems consistent every 5-6 days SSD health drops by 1%, definitely not normal.
I leave the last print before taking it off the pc.
2.png

CrystalDiskInfo_20220201122618.png

Thanks to everyone who somehow helped.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
pro_alve154102d9 said:
30 days of use 440GB of writing and 6% decrease in disk health I don't think it's normal, anyone else with the same/similar situation?

View attachment 156259
Click to expand...
Hey there mate are you still there , I bought the same ssd and its been 5months and its health is at 71 % , can you please tell me what happened after the RMA and the solution of it , please reply
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
citay said:
Yeah it's a bit surprising. Look at the actual SMART data with CrystalDiskInfo. In there under "Function" -> Advanced Feature -> Raw Values, select "10 [DEC]" to have human-readable values.
It will also warn you if some values are bad.

But it has to be said, this health percentage is not standardized at all. Each firmware has its own definition of how fast that drops, and you have very different implementations.

For example, the fast-dropping and then steady health:
smart-kingston-v300-4.png


Note that the end of the blue line on the right is when the drive ACTUALLY had errors (some files couldn't be read successfully or drive was not detected anymore).
Only then was it "dead" for the intents and purposes of that test.

The even faster-dropping health:
kingston-uv400-5.png


There are many more peculiar curves, you can read all about it here: https://3dnews-ru.translate.goog/93..._sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The main takeaway is, the health indicator is often good for nothing. You have to look at certain individual SMART values (often the "normalized" ones, which in CrystalDiskInfo means the "Current" value, not the Raw value.

So i think this is a cosmetic issue more than anything. Maybe they require a firmware update. It has nothing to do with the real state of the drive, which is most likely fine.
Click to expand...
SSD health percentages can be confusing since they don't always reflect real-world performance, and it's useful to compare SMART data and write history before assuming there's a problem. I like the same level of transparency when choosing food, which is why detailed menu guides with prices and nutrition, are so helpful.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Back
Top