WD SSD Dashboard is Broken Garbage: Return Drive?

[Glaring_Mistake]

Yeah, I am using your posted images as a conversion(thanks again). Though it is the closest open source tool. I can read it mostly without conversion.

Okay, so you kind of fill the gap with those screenshots.
And it does not seem like there's a lot of better options either.

Anyway I noticed that HD Sentinel looks to base life expectancy on the WLC rather than on the remaining spare sectors (like I first thought).
Have not worn it out enough however to determine if it will scale accurately with WLC.

 

[PeterScott]

Being an open source tool. I determined that my SSD wasn't in the Database and was able to tweak the DB, and get this out of the command line tool that feeds the GUI:

Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE      UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
  9 Power_On_Hours          0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       292
 12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       4
165 Block_Erase_Count       0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       2555931
166 Minimum_PE_Cycles_TLC   0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
167 Max_Bad_Blocks_per_Die  0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       32
168 Maximum_PE_Cycles_TLC   0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       1
169 Total_Bad_Blocks        0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       944
170 Grown_Bad_Blocks        0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
171 Program_Fail_Count      0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
172 Erase_Fail_Count        0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
173 Average_PE_Cycles_TLC   0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
174 Unexpected_Power_Loss   0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
184 End-to-End_Error        0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
187 Reported_Uncorrect      0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
188 Command_Timeout         0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       7
194 Temperature_Celsius     0x0022   069   044   ---    Old_age   Always       -       31 (Min/Max 21/44)
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count    0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0
230 Media_Wearout_Indicator 0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       7/7
232 Available_Reservd_Space 0x0033   100   100   ---    Pre-fail  Always       -       100
233 NAND_GB_Written_TLC     0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       523
234 NAND_GB_Written_SLC     0x0032   100   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       590
241 Total_Host_GB_Written   0x0030   253   253   ---    Old_age   Offline      -       576
242 Total_Host_GB_Read      0x0030   253   253   ---    Old_age   Offline      -       295
244 Temp_Throttle_Status    0x0032   000   100   ---    Old_age   Always       -       0

I thought the GUI would just display these values, but it gets the Attribute names from somewhere else.

But at least the MWI is more readable at a glance now. 230 (counts up as wear) and 232 (counts down reserve) are the important ones.

 

[Glaring_Mistake]

That looks a lot more accurate than the attributes it displays otherwise.
Not sure if I get how the MWI (230) works based on that however.
Anyway, I'd guess that it is rated for about 800 P/E cycles similar to what the Trion 150 looks to be rated for (uses the same NAND but from Toshiba).
So far WD Blue 3D seems to be rated at 800 P/E cycles too, had expected a bit higher to be honest considering some claims of improvement to the endurance.

Seems I may have been wrong about 165 being Total Erase Count though I do not really know what the difference is between Total Erase Count and Block Erase Count.

 

[PeterScott]

230 is strange. It is a big register with duplicate of the LSB higher up in the range. So in HEX it is something like 00007000000007, and it was previously 00006000000006. It is counting up but duplicated.

If you look at the whole thing in decimal, it is a meaningless large number. This is how it previously displayed. It was coded in the database file as raw48, I changed it to raw24/raw32 to make it display as it does here. For whatever reason, you can't just put in the code to display just raw32 or it gets a syntax error.

At least I can watch it count up in a more recognizable form. This is the one that is divided by some number to give an increasing percentage of wear...

The 165-168 range I don't really pay attention to. Since WD classes them as internal. It is hard to be sure what they mean.

 

[Glaring_Mistake]

230 is strange. It is a big register with duplicate of the LSB higher up in the range. So in HEX it is something like 00007000000007, and it was previously 00006000000006. It is counting up but duplicated.

If you look at the whole thing in decimal, it is a meaningless large number. This is how it previously displayed. It was coded in the database file as raw48, I changed it to raw24/raw32 to make it display as it does here. For whatever reason, you can't just put in the code to display just raw32 or it gets a syntax error.

At least I can watch it count up in a more recognizable form. This is the one that is divided by some number to give an increasing percentage of wear...

Yes, unless you're using WD SSD Dashboard or HD Sentinel (LOW or HIGH word) it looks pretty nonsensical.

The 165-168 range I don't really pay attention to. Since WD classes them as internal. It is hard to be sure what they mean.

Well, I think Block Erase Count is probably accurate and 166 and 168 should be Minimum and Maximum P/E Cycles.
With 167 being Maximum Bad Blocks Per Die which may be the least interesting of them to most consumers.
I appreciate the 168 since I plan to wear out my WD Blue 3D at some point and that will warn me if some cells get disproportionately worn.

 

[PeterScott]

Just a followup, to add my experience with Western Digital Support.

Like the WD SSD software, WD support is also garbage.

I opened a ticket and exchanged a few emails with WD Support, I gave them all info that I noted in this thread, and much more.

IMO there is no sign whatsoever that WD actually has any developers looking at fixing these issues, the ticket has set up a regular automated email to automatically close the ticket unless I respond within 24 hours.

Note they aren't asking for info, they are just going to automatically close the ticket unless I acknowledge it. Assuming that eventually I will get tired of responding to the pointless emails, and then the ticket will close. Problem solved.

If they were doing this properly, a tickets should represent issues, and should be closed when the issues are fixed.

With this kind of problem tracking/resolution, it is no surprise the software remains broken garbage.

 

[Glaring_Mistake]

Ah, your recent reply reminded me that I was going to add a few things.

First of all WD Blue is supposed to be rated for around 700 P/E cycles and the WD Blue 3D at 1000.
Secondly, HD Sentinel no longer displays an accurate value for the MWI like it used to.
And thirdly the life meter on the WD SSD Dashboard does decrease as the drive gets worn.
Though obviously as long as you can't get WD SSD Dashboard to work that will be of little benefit for you.

 

[Elixer]

Come to think of it, we did have a WD rep here, @Captain_WD ... haven't seen much of them at all for a long time, and they could have at least tried to offer some feedback here.

 

[coercitiv]

Like the WD SSD software, WD support is also garbage.

The way WD handled support for their wireless router range was a real eye opener for me: roughly one year after launching their shiny new routers they simply halted software updates, retired the entire product line, and made the firmware source code public.

In the times before SSDs become the norm, I was a WD only HDD customer. After the router incident I became weary of new WD products (outside their established HDD expertise), and it seems my reluctance was well founded.

 

[Elixer]

The way WD handled support for their wireless router range was a real eye opener for me: roughly one year after launching their shiny new routers they simply halted software updates, retired the entire product line, and made the firmware source code public.

Props for them for making the firmware source public!
That is what every company should do when they stop supporting a product.

 

[coercitiv]

Props for them for making the firmware source public!
That is what every company should do when they stop supporting a product.

Then that's what they should do with their SSD Dashboard then... maybe some poor customer will decide to put in the time and fix it.