Seagate drive "FAILURE"

  • Release Candidate 6
    We are at a “proposed final” true release candidate with nothing known remaining to be changed or fixed. For the full story, please see this page in the "Pre-Release Announcements & Feedback" forum.
  • Be sure to checkout “Tips & Tricks”
    Dear Guest Visitor → Once you register and log-in:

    This forum does not automatically send notices of new content. So if, for example, you would like to be notified by mail when Steve posts an update to his blog (or of any other specific activity anywhere else), you need to tell the system what to “Watch” for you. Please checkout the “Tips & Tricks” page for details about that... and other tips!



Oct 6, 2020
I just ran ReadSpeed on my laptop. The SSD was nice and consistent, but the Seagate dive came up with "FAILURE".

The drive runs fine in Windows 10 and isn't that old. Why would this be?

Driv Size  Drive Identity     Location:    0      25%     50%     75%     100
---- ----- ---------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
 83  256GB TS256GMTS400S                 494.8   503.8   543.1   543.9   531.5

                  Benchmarked: Thursday, 2021-01-07 at 11:40
  • Wow
Reactions: Cozmo
That's interesting. The only time that's expected is when there are read errors on the drive that prevent its success.
When the SSD is working, you'll see the white progress bar across the top moving smoothly ONCE for each of the five locations.
What do you see when the Seagate drive is being tested??
  • Like
Reactions: Barry Wallis
Hello Steve,

I ran it again, the progress bar ran smoothly and finished successfully this time.

The speed really tapers off at the end of this drive.

   NOTE: A faster SATA drive is attached to a slower SATA link. You may add
         the /ident command-line option to display and identify the drive.

Driv Size  Drive Identity     Location:    0      25%     50%     75%     100
---- ----- ---------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
 81  256GB TS256GMTS400S                 494.9   503.5   542.2   543.8   531.4
 82  2.0TB ST2000LM015-2E8174            128.7   128.3   112.6    91.9    63.0

                  Benchmarked: Thursday, 2021-01-07 at 12:16
@HKPostOffice : Thanks for the re-run. Something must have just gotten off on the wrong foot!

And, yeah... What we're all seeing is that our “spinners” are HALF the speed at their end than at their front. This makes sense when you consider that the inner track's circumference is half that of the outer track. Thanks for your reports!