Hello.

OCZSSD2-2VTXE90G

BIOS will not recognize SSD.

Console:


Can anyone decipher consoles dump?
Has anyone 24C256 EEPROM content?

Can you post full terminal log after this ˙ýŢŤĂţ ..... ?
Why you interested in EEprom content, how it is going to help you? Better tell what is your goal about this ssd drive and what condition it is now (busy ?, Id ? safe mode? ) ?
MCU sf-1222 or sf-1281 ?

_________________
Angel Data Recovery

I'm trying to run this drive, the data are not necessary to me.

SF-1222TA3-SBH

Log output is xor ?

BR

have you tried different term settings? it looks like the baud rate might be wrong even though the initial bootup is seen ok

Those hynix parts are specified for 2.7V - 3.6V with a nominal operating voltage of 3.3V. Assuming that the 2.90V reading is correct, and assuming this is the flash supply voltage, then these parts are being operated at the bottom end of their design range. It's curious because there was another thread involving a dead Vertex 2 SSD where the flash supply was 2.8V.

H27UBG8T2A Series 32Gb (4096M x 8bit) NAND Flash:
http://www.szyuda88.com/uploadfile/cfil ... 220663.pdf

I wonder if the reduced flash Vcc could explain why OCZ SSDs appear to be significantly less reliable than similar products from their competitors?

_________________
A backup a day keeps DR away.

GENUINE and GOOD OCZ SSDs are no different from other. The difference is on what people do with the SSD and the crappy environment where usually the device is used (sadly).

The rest doesn't pry out a bit out of the "bricked" device.

I didn't see that.. I had not considered this possibility. interesting if it is.

I don't think so
Moreover lowering voltage of NANDs could improve reliability

Also could you please provide statistics on what you based this conclusion "OCZ SSDs appear to be significantly less reliable than similar products". Such statement seems strange to me

_________________
SAN, NAS, RAID, Server, and HDD Data Recovery.

Check PM

_________________
Angel Data Recovery

I've brought this subject up before, and I've explained why I think lowering the voltage could reduce the reliability of the SSD. You and your colleagues seem to focus on chip reliability, in which case it would be reasonable to assume that lowering the Vcc would lead to increasing chip life. But I'm focusing on SSD failures, not chip failures. There's a difference.

If you watch the storage forums, you'll notice that users generally report that their OCZ SSDs most often fail at power-up, and rarely in-flight. One consequence of a reduced Vcc would be much less time for emergency "housekeeping" after a power loss event, which in turn would make the Flash Translation Layer much more vulnerable to corruption. In this case the Vcc would only need to decay from 2.9V to 2.7V instead of the usual 3.3V to 2.7V scenario. In an earlier thread a Vertex 2 240GB SSD had a Vcc of 2.8V.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25650

So do those two cases represent genuine failures, or are they an intentional design choice?


Components returns rates:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/881- ... tes-7.html

- 40.00% for the OCZ Petrol 64 GB
- 39.42% for the OCZ Petrol 128 GB
- 30.85% for the OCZ Octane 128 GB SATA II
- 29.46% for the OCZ Octane 64 GB SATA II
- 9.73% for the OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB 3.5"
- 9.59% for the OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB
- 6.73% for the OCZ Vertex 2 60 GB
- 5.43% for the OCZ Agility 3 240 GB
- 5.12% for the OCZ Vertex Plus 128 GB

"With such rates, we can justly classify such models [OCZ Petrol and Octane SATA II] as defective and it is shameful that such products have remained on sale in stores!"

Corsair and Crucial have overall return rates of 1% compared with 5% for OCZ.

Notice that OCZ's Indilinx based SSDs are described as "defective". The funny thing is that OCZ bought the company and has preferential access to firmware updates. So this begs the question, just what are OCZ doing differently? Is there a common factor between their SandForce and Indilinx products, and is this common factor a lower flash Vcc? Are SSDs with backup capacitors any less prone to failure than equivalent models without backup caps?

Even in endurance tests where presumably most drives were operated 24/7, OCZ fared worse than the others:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/sho ... nm-Vs-34nm

So what does this tell us? Are chips actually less reliable at lower Vcc? If so, could this mean that worn chips can no longer be reliably erased and programmed at lower voltages?

_________________
A backup a day keeps DR away.

If you would know how NAND chips are read you would probably agree with me
And also I didn't say that it's related to NAND life

_________________
SAN, NAS, RAID, Server, and HDD Data Recovery.

It is important to understand that when we talking about SSDs we should not compare apples to oranges
If we talking about 2012 returns then:
Corsair mostly used SandForce controllers for their SSDs
Intel used their own controllers and, also some SSDs were produced on SandForce and Marvell
Crucial used Marvell
OCZ used SandForce and Indilinx. It is important to notice that only Vertex 2/3 and Agility 2/3 in that article are actually based on SandForce. And as article says "The most popular ranges, namely the Vertex 3s and Agility 3s, do relatively well with returns of 1.51% and 2.03% respectively."

So, you could safely assume that the very first Indilix controller was in fact very crappy one. And OCZ was unfortunate to use it but as articles stated their latest SSDs are not differ from other brands in reliability

_________________
SAN, NAS, RAID, Server, and HDD Data Recovery.

Log out:
We ELF header

Hi, I am unable to see the elf header in either of the 2 files. They saved on my system from the browser to unicode, so I converted to both ANSI and UTF-8 but neither had the elf header at 0x0780... more info?
cheers

Then you must know something that Intel's and Samsung's engineers don't know. Do they run their own chips at reduced voltages? I bet not. In fact, if OCZ were deliberately choosing a reduced voltage, wouldn't they be advertising the fact? After all, being green is good for PR.

In any case, what's stopping you or anyone else watching this thread from breaking out a multimeter and measuring the voltages for themselves? Is the NAND Vcc a big secret? If I had asked this question in a group of my peers, it would have been answered within the day.

_________________
A backup a day keeps DR away.

If I'm not mistaken NAND voltage can be regulated by the ASIC on the fly and that's part of the error recovery process on SSDs
But would it be true for this SSDs can be checked with schematics

_________________
SAN, NAS, RAID, Server, and HDD Data Recovery.

Why don't you do that then

_________________
SAN, NAS, RAID, Server, and HDD Data Recovery.

You're mistaken, at least in the case of the last Vertex 2 I looked at.

_________________
A backup a day keeps DR away.

I'm asking you.

_________________
A backup a day keeps DR away.

But we're not only talking about current models. The OP's drive dates back to early 2011 (AFAICT from the date codes on the chips - 114).

If you look at the previous roundups, then OCZ fares consistently worse than the others:

http://www.behardware.com/art/imprimer/831/ (April 20, 2011)
http://www.behardware.com/articles/843/page7.html (November 16, 2011)
http://www.behardware.com/articles/862/page7.html (June 25, 2012)

BTW Samsung's NAND flash is produced in various voltage ranges. Their "U" chips are specified for a range of 2.7V - 3.6V, 3.3V nominal, as is the OP's H27UBG8T2ATRBC hynix chip. However, they also have a "B" chip (2.7V nominal, 2.5 - 2.9), an "E" chip (2.3V - 3.6V), plus several others. Curiously, there is one part where the Vcc is specified as "O:NONE".

_________________
A backup a day keeps DR away.