# Run chkdsk on SSD?



## KNRover

Should you ever run chkdsk on a SSD?


----------



## Masterchiefxx17

There is no need. You can run one but it won't do much.

SSDs have leveling technology meaning they fix themselves as they see an issue.


----------



## jenae

Hi, windows seven has a built in optimizer for ssd's it's called Trim and windows is supposed to detect a ssd and activate it, doesn't always happen. Go to start search and type:- cmd, right click on the returned cmd.exe and select "run as administrator" at the prompt copy paste:-



Code:


fsutil behavior query DisableDeleteNotify

 press enter, if it returns a 0 then Trim is active, (you do not see it running) if it returns a 1 then at a cmd as admin(as shown) copy paste:-



Code:


fsutil behavior set disablenotify 0

 press enter, this will enable Trim... you do not need to run chkdsk.


----------



## Solidify

Chief, can you re-explain to my why checking the file system for errors is not required on an SSD but it is required on a Hard Disk Drive? I don't quite understand from the information I've looked up, as well as your post.


----------



## Masterchiefxx17

Stephen Bowles said:


> The following quotes/sources are from books/forums that discuss this. It does seem that opinions originally (which I remember thinking as well) had to do with wasting read/writes rather than causing damage. That said, and in favour of balance, there are posts out there that states it can cause damage, but do not say what damage... useful.
> 
> *Turbo Windows® - The Ultimate PC Speed Up Guide*,
> by Liz Cornwell and André Coolfix,
> Published 2011,
> Quote from Page 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check Disk (CHKDSK) is a built-in Windows utility that can scan your hard drive for errors and bac sectors, repair logical errors, prevent further deterioration by moving data to the healthier parts of the disk and make sure new data is not saved to the bad sectors. This way Check Disk can improve thestability of your PC. Generally speaking, it's good to run CHeck Disk on a regular basis, like once a month
> 
> 
> 
> *Thoughts:* The authors also wrote a "How to maximize SSD performance" (Page 129)..., with no mention of avoiding CHKDSK (or similar activities that cause lots of read/writes). As they did not connect the dots, did they not consider this topic, or did they avoid it, because they are not sure? Conjecture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shawn Keene [MVP said:
> 
> 
> 
> ]It's okay to run, but not really necessary because the drive controller will take care of bad sectors automatically. If you do run it, I would only use the most basic scan (no scan for bad sectors. In other words, only use it to find/fix file system problems.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Source: Is CHKDSK Advisable on a SSD?.
> 
> *Thoughts:* The answer implies do not use /r and only /f, but I am wondering if that is because /r is seemingly pointless on a SSD, rather than it could cause damage?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crucial_Junket said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi jackjackffm and front360,
> 
> *I have tested chkdsk on an M500 drive in our computer lab today using both Windows 7 and Windows 8. It worked no problem at all on the drive.*
> 
> The problems you are having running chkdsk could be down to problems with your SATA controllers, can you try and connect the SSD to a different SATA port in the system and try again?
> 
> If this does not work I would recommend you check to see if you have the most up to date SATA drivers for your motherboard.
> Junket, Crucial Moderator UK
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Source: Re: Why is chkdsk on boot ssds disallowed (win7) ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jakjak said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK. FINAL ANSWER...
> Here are the results of 2 tests Running CHKDSK on an Intel 320 in XP with NO errors (thus there were NO writes to correct file system or corrupt file errors), using both /F and /R flags.
> 
> CHKDSK DOES NOT WRITE TO DISK SIGNIFICANTLY with ANY FLAG SETTING if there is nothing to fix. There was NO change in the write count (within the significance of the SSD Toolbox display (IE, less than .01 Gb = 10 Mb)). Read counts show the difference in what was looked at.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uploading a picture as I don't have a convenient image server for a link:
> 
> Cheers, CHKDSK away if it makes you feel better..... however, I still recommend a secure erase and reinstall or full restore if you need the CHKDSK /R fix.
> 
> - jak
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Source: Is running CHKDSK Safe on an SSD? - Page 3
Click to expand...


----------



## Rich-M

I am not quite sure why there is so much misunderstanding out there. Defragmentation is not needed on ssd drives and can even be troublesome because they store files differently but checkdisk works perfectly well on these drives though doing checkdisk on any drive once a month is not desirable. Run that when there is a problem or once a year if you really want to.


----------



## jenae

Hi, in a sense Rich is right the chkdsk cmd runs on the file system which in this case is NTFS, so regardless of HDD the file system is the same, there have been instances when the drive has been flagged as dirty and a chkdsk is scheduled to run even on a ssd drive, however we have not been able to determine if this is actually of any use OR more importantly if it does any harm, the situation is mute in 8 where the trim cmd has been enhanced.

From my notes:-



> In Windows 7 - we turned off defrag for SSDs as you mention in your entry; but in Windows 8, we have changed the defrag tool to do a general optimization tool that handles different kinds of storage, and in the case of SSD's it will send 'trim' hints for the entire volume;
> SSDs are storage devices made of flash memory; flash memory unlike hard disks are block erasable devices - they can be written to at a byte level but need to erased at a block level; Trim is a storage level hint that was introduced in the Windows 7 days to indicate that Windows is not using certain regions of the storage device; NTFS will send these trim hints when files are deleted or moved from those regions; SSDs consume these hints to perform a cleanup in the background called as 'reclaim' that helps them get ready for next writes. The SSD may choose to perform the optimization immediately, store the information for later optimization or throw away the hint completely and not use it for optimization since it does not have time to perform this optimization immediately.
> In Windows 8, when the Storage Optimizer (the new defrag tool) detects that the volume is mounted on an SSD - it sends a complete set of trim hints for the entire volume again - this is done at idle time and helps to allow for SSDs that were unable to cleanup earlier - a chance to react to these hints and cleanup and optimizer for the best performance. We do not do a traditional defrag (moving files to optimizer there location for space and performance) on SSDs.


----------



## KNRover

jenae said:


> Hi, windows seven has a built in optimizer for ssd's it's called Trim and windows is supposed to detect a ssd and activate it, doesn't always happen. Go to start search and type:- cmd, right click on the returned cmd.exe and select "run as administrator" at the prompt copy paste:-
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> fsutil behavior query DisableDeleteNotify
> 
> press enter, if it returns a 0 then Trim is active, (you do not see it running) if it returns a 1 then at a cmd as admin(as shown) copy paste:-
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> fsutil behavior set disablenotify 0
> 
> press enter, this will enable Trim... you do not need to run chkdsk.


_It returned '0', so it's active. So, despite the other posts following yours, I assume there is never any need to run chkdsk on a SSD. Yes?_


----------



## Masterchiefxx17

Yes, CHKDSK is not needed for SSDs.


----------



## Rich-M

Well I just am not going to accept that as I have cleared up issues with an Ssd drive by running checkdisk. So each to their own a this is only my opinion.


----------



## greenbrucelee

I have also run chkdsk on SSD's and never had an issue.

It's the defraging and moving segments of files from one area to another and deletion of the first area that should be avoided.

CHKDSK should only be used when there are problems.


----------



## KNRover

greenbrucelee said:


> I have also run chkdsk on SSD's and never had an issue.
> 
> It's the defraging and moving segments of files from one area to another and deletion of the first area that should be avoided.
> 
> CHKDSK should only be used when there are problems.


I would only run chkdsk if there were a problem AND if it would do any good. I'm not concerned with it causing an issue; don't see how it would regardless of drive type. I am just curious if doing so is ever *beneficial*/would solve a problem. . . or does "trim" actually take care of problems in the background without user intervention?


----------



## Rich-M

Totally agree.


greenbrucelee said:


> I have also run chkdsk on SSD's and never had an issue.
> 
> It's the defraging and moving segments of files from one area to another and deletion of the first area that should be avoided.
> 
> CHKDSK should only be used when there are problems.


----------



## jenae

Hi, from discussions among my colleagues it appears the consensus is the chkdsk util runs on the file system (ntfs) and as such would also run on an ssd, most likely the /f, /r switch's would not be effective so run chkdsk only. More importantly is to turn off indexing on the drive.


----------



## Corday

If you're sure the drive isn't really dirty and chkdsk keeps running at startup, in Command Prompt run CHKntfs /X C:. Add additional drives if necessary. If on the other hand the drive is really going, better backup quickly.


----------



## jenae

Hi, just to add to Corday's post, windows will flag a drive as dirty and set a chkdsk to run at boot, the chkntfs /x cmd tells windows not to do this, however it does not remove the dirty flag, to do this you either have to run a chkdsk OR modify the autochk entry in the registry. To check your drive (file system) status windows has a cmd util called fsutil, open a cmd as admin and run fsutil dirty query c: ( or whatever the drive letter is) will return a "is dirty" or "not dirty".


----------



## greenbrucelee

Agree with Jenae, Disk indexing should be turned off just as defrag should be, its also a good idea to move temp files and app data to a mechanocal drive if you have one but not a neccesity.


----------



## spike6479

greenbrucelee said:


> I have also run chkdsk on SSD's and never had an issue.
> 
> It's the defraging and moving segments of files from one area to another and deletion of the first area that should be avoided.
> 
> CHKDSK should only be used when there are problems.


This is correct. chkdsk to check/repair file system errors is as necessary on an ssd as a hdd. Defrag and BB checking is not required.

The trim command tells the drive about sectors that are not in use by the file system. This allows the drive to use these sectors for over provisioning and tends to reduce write amplification.


----------



## KNRover

jenae said:


> ...More importantly is to turn off indexing on the drive.


This thread keeps revealing additional property settings for SSDs. One would think that the manufacturer of my new desktop (Micro Express) would have automatically turned indexing off. They didn't; I just did. . . but wonder if they didn't turn it off, is it a significant contributor to shortening the life of the SSD? My perception of indexing is that it creates a file with "pointers" to files, but does not move the files. If it doesn't move files, does it have any impact at all on drive life?


----------



## spike6479

I don't believe that indexing is extra detrimental to an ssd. What shortens the life of an ssd the most are writes; although mlc flash does exhibit some issues with reads. 

That being said, I turn off indexing on all my drives as I don't see the payback for what seems like a high overhead of indexing.


----------



## greenbrucelee

This is a guide which is pretty good for optimizing your ssd. Sean's Windows 7 Install & Optimization Guide for SSDs & HDDs


----------



## KNRover

greenbrucelee said:


> This is a guide which is pretty good for optimizing your ssd. Sean's Windows 7 Install & Optimization Guide for SSDs & HDDs


Very long and thorough posting. I went thru it and made essentially all of the changes he suggested. . . and at the end, per his suggestion, ran Windows Experience Index, which correctly told me I had made changes and needed to 'refresh' it. It was 6.7 before the changes. . . and 6.7 after the changes. IOW, all the changes made 0 difference in that index. However, the performance of the "primary hard disk" (the SSD) is 7.9 -- the highest any item can be. Stupid me, I neglected to note what it was before making the changes, but my recollection is that it was already 7.9.


----------



## greenbrucelee

The windows score doesn't mean anything, it's a pointless waste of time.

The things in the guide are to prolong the life of the ssd and to make it still run fast all the time.

You can check the lifespan and health of your ssd by using SSD life - tool for solid state drives health and endurance monitoring


----------



## Rich-M

I have to agree with brucegreenlee here and I pay little attention to the The Windows Performance score.


----------



## satrow

greenbrucelee said:


> You can check the lifespan and health of your ssd by using SSD life - tool for solid state drives health and endurance monitoring


If SSDLife doesn't read/translate the stats from your SSD (it fails on my Plextor, for example), try HD Sentinel: Hard Disk Sentinel - HDD health and temperature monitoring


----------



## KNRover

greenbrucelee said:


> . . .You can check the lifespan and health of your ssd by using SSD life - tool for solid state drives health and endurance monitoring


Just installed it. It says it's health is "100%" and projects the drive will last until November, 2022 :dance:. 

Geeeez. My dad died of a heart attack at 82. I have his genes, and am 75. . . so I may not even be around then :sad:.


----------



## greenbrucelee

nothing lasts forever.


----------



## Rich-M

Yeah I think those drive life predictions are a bit suspect!


----------



## greenbrucelee

I think 8-10 years is likely if treated correctly anything after that is a bit suspect.


----------



## Rich-M

Really, if that's right it is a great justification for higher prices.


----------



## greenbrucelee

Rich-M said:


> Really, if that's right it is a great justification for higher prices.


I basically think they are just bigger flash drives that get used more. If they don't last that long then the higher prices are not justified.


----------



## Rich-M

I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Hitcho

spike6479 said:


> This is correct. chkdsk to check/repair file system errors is as necessary on an ssd as a hdd. Defrag and BB checking is not required.
> 
> The trim command tells the drive about sectors that are not in use by the file system. This allows the drive to use these sectors for over provisioning and tends to reduce write amplification.


Thanks for this thread everyone. I am not technical and had been getting a message on startup that my D: drive had errors etc etc, and I let it run its check but it kept happening.(my D:\ drive is also an SSD and is not the primary drive).
I checked trim and it was running. Ran chkdsk /f and restarted the PC - problem is now fixed. Thanks again for this thread.


----------



## KNRover

greenbrucelee said:


> I basically think they are just bigger flash drives that get used more. If they don't last that long then the higher prices are not justified.


What I've read/heard about SSDs is that the flash memory in them is of MUCH higher quality than what's used in a thumb drive. And the same resources also say that recently-produced SSDs will last well beyond the technology of the computer they're in. IOW, the rate of change in computer technology (new CPUs, graphics, etc.) is moving faster than the life span of an SSD. For example, the SSD in my current desktop will probably still be working fine 6 years from now. . . but I won't care because the computer will be obsolete relative to what's available then, and I will buy a new computer. . . with a new SSD.


----------



## KNRover

spike6479 said:


> . . .
> The trim command tells the drive about sectors that are not in use by the file system. This allows the drive to use these sectors for over provisioning and tends to reduce write amplification.


Spike: I missed this when reading messages in this thread last year. What is the "trim command" and how do you use it when doing a chkdsk?


----------



## Masterchiefxx17

KNRover said:


> Spike: I missed this when reading messages in this thread last year. What is the "trim command" and how do you use it when doing a chkdsk?


Trim Command is a built in CHKDSK with the SSD. The moment it detects a bad sector of the drive, it can mark it as dirty and not write to it.


----------



## Rich-M

Not exactly Chief. Trim allows the drive to realize which blocks of data are no longer considered in use allowing the drive to delete those internally. Many early Ssd drives BTW did not have this feature added and you can do so as firmware if you have one of those.


----------



## jcgriff2

It is very important to keep SSD firmware updated.

I see many BSOD epidemics solved by SSD firmware updates.


----------



## KNRover

jcgriff2 said:


> It is very important to keep SSD firmware updated.
> 
> I see many BSOD epidemics solved by SSD firmware updates.


JC: Until I read your message above, I had never even thought about the firmware on my now almost 1.5-yr.-old desktop's SSD. Went to Samsung's site, found that they have "Samsung Magician" software that keeps tabs on the SSD. Installed it, and it IMMEDIATELY said that a firmware update was available. Installed it. I have no idea what the update changed, but at least the drive now has the latest-n-greatest firmware.

This is my first SSD. It has created only one problem: I have become frustrated :facepalm: with every other computer I use (I provide tech support to several families, none of whom have SSDs). Me thinks there should be a warning on the box about the emotional stress that SSDs cause when using other computers !


----------



## Rich-M

Be careful KNRover it is habit forming. It wasn't long after my first one when I went through the addictive phase of catching all the other pcs up in here as I had to have them all with Ssd drives.


----------



## jcgriff2

KNRover said:


> This is my first SSD. It has created only one problem: I have become frustrated :facepalm: with every other computer I use (I provide tech support to several families, none of whom have SSDs). Me thinks there should be a warning on the box about the emotional stress that SSDs cause when using other computers !


How very true.

I just got my very first SSD about 2 months ago.

The SSD has given new life to my Vista era HP Core 2 Duo laptop -- <20 secs boot time to Desktop! The SSD in that laptop gives my Core i7 HP laptop (which has a 5400 rpm SATA HDD) a run for its money, even though it has 8 cores + 12 GB RAM.

p.s. Glad you got the firmware upgrade done. If anything, it will hopefully prevent a potential problem(s).


----------



## greenbrucelee

yeah, whenever I see a pc boot now, if it is longer than 12 seconds I start getting worried.


----------



## KNRover

greenbrucelee said:


> yeah, whenever I see a pc boot now, if it is longer than 12 seconds I start getting worried.


This tread is "devolving" into a chat room, but before the administrator shuts us off, I will leave y'all with one additional thought. I suspect I'm MUCH older (76) than the majority of posters on TSF, so most have probably not experienced what I did when switching from dial-up (do any of you know what that is?) to cable. I watched a demo of cable at Staples many years ago, and was blown away by the speed. But there was a guy behind me who had gotten cable several months before. And as I ooood and ahaaaad, he leaned forward and whispered in my ear, "Be forewarned; once you have it, you can never go back." For me, switching from an HDD to a SSD has been déjà vu all over again!


----------



## jcgriff2

Great analogy!

Yes, I do remember the 55k dial-up and you're right - a package to go back to it would have to include psychiatric counseling for extreme anxiety (& probably anger management too!).


----------



## Rich-M

I had a customer go back from Verizon DSL to dialup and I do not remember why but I must have said something strange because after that service call she never called me again.


----------



## jenae

Hi, been in this game from the beginning 9.6, to 14.4, next was 28.8 (whoopee!!) then to the zenith 56 (max for dialup). I remember having shots from mars parthfinder (1996) and a room full of fascinated people, this was 28.8.


----------



## MPR

I'm sure some others here recall when a modem meant 300 baud, the brand to look for was Hayes and Computer Shopper had pages and pages of BBS listings.


----------



## greenbrucelee

I remember quake death matches at college on dial up.


----------

