just brew it! wrote:While that would be of some use to tell the OP if the drive has already failed, it seemed to me he was more interested in finding out whether it had significant wear (e.g. a potentially shortened lifespan) due to being used/refurb.
UberGerbil wrote:I don't know anything really about the controllers used in thumb drives but it's quite possible that information isn't even available. In an SSD, the controller tracks writes to inform its wear-levelling routines. But USB flash drives don't do wear-levelling (AFAIK) so they may not bother keeping track of total writes. (And it they do, it's probably for diagnostic purposes at the factory in case of warranty returns, etc, so would require breaking open the case and attaching test equipment.)
Flatland_Spider wrote:Anything used is buyer beware, and we'll never know why it was returned. With that being said, flash is a lot hardier then it used to be, and I wouldn't feel squeamish about a factory refurbed flash drive anymore then I would a factory refurbed mechanical drive (They would both a 5 on the confidence scale with a used drive of unknown origin being a 3.).
just brew it! wrote:Good point. They're not going to be doing any background wear-leveling / garbage collection, though. And they could achieve much of the same effect with a simple LRU/MRU list (which, if you're being cheap, doesn't even have to include every block of storage, which would allow you to use the same limited controller regardless of the capacity of NAND it's attached to -- certainly not ideal from a reliability standpoint, but we're talking cheap USB thumbdrives here).USB flash drives must do at least *some* wear leveling, though I'm sure the algorithms aren't as sophisticated as on a full-blown SSD. Otherwise they would fail almost immediately, since the areas containing file system meta-data get updated every time a file gets written or updated.
The Egg wrote:Well, I weighed the pros/cons and decided to pop open the clamshell package and give it a shot. The drive is bad. It fails during file transfers, and fails during format attempts. I'm not even going to screw with it beyond that.
So basically, I got a bait and switch from Newegg, a defective product, and then Newegg expects me to eat the return shipping cost. I could probably get a free label, but it's not worth the aggravation. I'm not really upset about the deal, just more saddened by the state of Newegg. They used to be my #1 electronics dealer, and I would often purchase from them even if they were a couple dollars more. These days I'm nervous about purchasing a little $30 thumb drive. I'm lucky to place a couple small orders per year now, and that number may drop further.
Dirge wrote:If you're sure it being "re-conditioned" (what ever that means for a flash drive) wasn't mentioned, I would give them hell about false advertising. Either its new or its not.
Its a shame this thread hasn't turned up any way to test wear level on a flash drive.