PCWorld Forums

PCWorld Forums: Is It Okay to Run ChkDsk Regularly - PCWorld Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Is It Okay to Run ChkDsk Regularly

#1 User is offline   Slik 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 05-August 09

Posted 22 September 2009 - 03:31 PM

Is there any reason not to run CheckDisk (chkdsk) from time to time. I am running Vista Home Premium 64-bit on a 320Gbyte HDD, Toshiba laptop w 4Gbytes of SDRAM. Thanks in advance.
0

#2 User is offline   coastie65 

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 20,651
  • Joined: 02-April 07
  • Location:Henrico, Va.

Posted 22 September 2009 - 04:18 PM

Hey slik, I don't know of anyone who runs it as a routine. It wouldn't hurt anything, but may be unnecessary if there is no indication of Hdd problems and it does take a while. To be honest, I may run it once every 6 months or so. Mostly, I just do a disc clean and defrag at various times. coastie
Coolermaster HAF 912 Case....ASUS Z87Pro MOBO.....Intel Core i7 4770k Haswell ( OC'd to 4.6 Ghz ) .... Gelid Tranquillo cooler.... Samsung 830 256 GB SSD.... Primary HDD- WD 1TB Caviar Black SATA III /6.0 .... SECONDARY HDD - WD 1TB Caviar Black SATA II / 3.0....16Gb GSkill Ripjaws Series X 2133 Mhz Memory....Corsair AX850w PSU....EVGA GTX 680 Super Clocked Signature 2 Gb GDDR5 Video Card....Samsung CD/DVD RW, DL, DVD-Ram, w/ Lightscribe Optical Drive....Samsung SyncMaster 2243BWX 22" Monitor..... Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit OS




______________________________________________________________

Gateway FX6800-01e----Intel Core i7 960 ( 3.2 GHz)---- Seagate Barracuda 750 Gb SATA II / 3.0 Hdd---- 6 Gb Crucial 1066 Mhz memory, running in Tri Channel conf-----Corsair TX650w PSU----- EVGA Nvidia GTX 560Ti 1gb GDDR5 Vram ----DVD +/- RW / CD ,RAM/DL Optical drive w/ Label Flash-----Gateway TBGM-01 Motherboard.... Vista Home Premium 64 bit OS w/ SP2; Samsung Synch Master 2243BWX 22" Monitor.
0

#3 User is offline   mphenterprises 

  • Elite
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12,259
  • Joined: 19-February 07
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

Posted 22 September 2009 - 04:27 PM

View PostSlik, on 22 September 2009 - 03:31 PM, said:

Is there any reason not to run CheckDisk (chkdsk) from time to time. I am running Vista Home Premium 64-bit on a 320Gbyte HDD, Toshiba laptop w 4Gbytes of SDRAM. Thanks in advance.






Hi Silk. I split your post from the previous thread and placed it in its own thread. Please do not latch onto another person's thread. That can take attention away from the original issue. Creating your own thread gives your issue the full attention it deserves.

Now personally, I never run chkdsk unless there is an eminent issue with the hard drive or the Operating System. Remember, Chkdsk is reading the entire hard drive for errors. If this is done on a regular basis, that could shorten the lifespan of the hard drive.

This post has been edited by mphenterprises: 22 September 2009 - 04:29 PM

Posted Image
0

#4 User is offline   tek101 

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 542
  • Joined: 05-April 09
  • Location:UCF

Posted 23 September 2009 - 06:15 AM

View PostSlik, on 22 September 2009 - 03:31 PM, said:

Is there any reason not to run CheckDisk (chkdsk) from time to time. I am running Vista Home Premium 64-bit on a 320Gbyte HDD, Toshiba laptop w 4Gbytes of SDRAM. Thanks in advance.



The anwser is "Yes" if you go to the doctor everyday ...."Just for the check-up" ......LOL Posted Image

Seriously .....NO ..... I don't need to check 'Time to time" .....

Like MPH said ...It will wear out your HDD ..."Mechanical thing" .........

Wouldn't hurt if you have SSD though .....IMO
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein.
0

#5 User is offline   istanbul 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 369
  • Joined: 23-January 08

Posted 23 September 2009 - 07:22 AM

That's odd,on a Microsoft website 'Optimize your computer for peak performance'it is recommended to run Check Disc Once A week.There was no mention that it could shorten the lifespan of the Hard Drive.Maybe i missed something.
0

#6 User is offline   mphenterprises 

  • Elite
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12,259
  • Joined: 19-February 07
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

Posted 23 September 2009 - 07:32 AM

View Postistanbul, on 23 September 2009 - 07:22 AM, said:

That's odd,on a Microsoft website 'Optimize your computer for peak performance'it is recommended to run Check Disc Once A week.There was no mention that it could shorten the lifespan of the Hard Drive.Maybe i missed something.




Hi istanbul. Can you provide a link to that site. I know defragmentation is "recommended" every so often. Windows Vista defragments the hard drive, behind the scenes, every week. However, chkdsk is a whole different ball game. I see absolutely no reason to run chkdsk until there is an issue with the computer. Running it every week seems a bit like overkill to me.
Posted Image
0

#7 User is offline   istanbul 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 369
  • Joined: 23-January 08

Posted 23 September 2009 - 07:44 AM

View Postmphenterprises, on 23 September 2009 - 07:32 AM, said:

View Postistanbul, on 23 September 2009 - 07:22 AM, said:

That's odd,on a Microsoft website 'Optimize your computer for peak performance'it is recommended to run Check Disc Once A week.There was no mention that it could shorten the lifespan of the Hard Drive.Maybe i missed something.




Hi istanbul. Can you provide a link to that site. I know defragmentation is "recommended" every so often. Windows Vista defragments the hard drive, behind the scenes, every week. However, chkdsk is a whole different ball game. I see absolutely no reason to run chkdsk until there is an issue with the computer. Running it every week seems a bit like overkill to me.


Hi,it's http://www.microsoft...ze.mspx?pf=true All that is written at the end of the page,which i printed out.
0

#8 User is offline   mphenterprises 

  • Elite
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12,259
  • Joined: 19-February 07
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

Posted 23 September 2009 - 08:14 AM

View Postistanbul, on 23 September 2009 - 07:22 AM, said:

That's odd,on a Microsoft website 'Optimize your computer for peak performance'it is recommended to run Check Disc Once A week.There was no mention that it could shorten the lifespan of the Hard Drive.Maybe i missed something.




Okay, a couple of points:

- One major statement was left out of your post, "Whenever a program crashes, or you experience some power outage, your computer may create errors on your computer's hard disk."

Basically, this goes back to my point that it is not necessary to run chkdsk if the computer is not experiencing issues.

- Just because it is not specifically state that the hard drive life would be shortened does not mean it is not the case. Anything one does which accesses the hard drive will shorten the hard drive's life. This includes disk defragmentation and chkdsk.

Obviously, hard drives are built to last for years. I still have the same hard drive I bought 5 years ago. The point is that running a process on a hard drive just because it is "recommended" is not the best idea. If your computer is not experiencing issues, chkdsk is not necessary. Now, since files are always fragmented over a hard drive, running a defragmentation regular is, for the most part, a necessary evil.
Posted Image
0

#9 User is offline   istanbul 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 369
  • Joined: 23-January 08

Posted 23 September 2009 - 08:17 AM

Thank you for checking this out.İt's appreciated.
0

#10 User is offline   mphenterprises 

  • Elite
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12,259
  • Joined: 19-February 07
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

Posted 23 September 2009 - 08:30 AM

View Postistanbul, on 23 September 2009 - 08:17 AM, said:

Thank you for checking this out.İt's appreciated.




With pleasure. :D
Posted Image
0

#11 User is offline   Foxylady48180 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 261
  • Joined: 06-November 06

Posted 23 September 2009 - 02:50 PM

View PostSlik, on 22 September 2009 - 03:31 PM, said:

Is there any reason not to run CheckDisk (chkdsk) from time to time. I am running Vista Home Premium 64-bit on a 320Gbyte HDD, Toshiba laptop w 4Gbytes of SDRAM. Thanks in advance.

I run mine on a regular basis also, (once a month or so) and don't see any difference from that and running a virus scan or spyware scan, except the are looking for different things. However, I am not an expert. You would think that if there was a danger runing it too often, it wouldn't let you.
0

#12 User is offline   mphenterprises 

  • Elite
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12,259
  • Joined: 19-February 07
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

Posted 23 September 2009 - 04:29 PM

View PostFoxylady48180, on 23 September 2009 - 02:50 PM, said:

I run mine on a regular basis also, (once a month or so) and don't see any difference from that and running a virus scan or spyware scan, except the are looking for different things. However, I am not an expert. You would think that if there was a danger runing it too often, it wouldn't let you.





Hi Foxy. Please take a look at the bold quoted statement. This goes back to something mentioned earlier, "Anything one does which accesses the hard drive will shorten the hard drive's life." I believe "danger(ous) is too strong of a word. There is no "danger." Feel free to run chkdsk as often as your heart desires. However, I personally see no benefit in running chkdsk unless there is an clear and present issue.

If I may use your example. Running a security scan is something I would also consider a "necessary evil." Will scanning the hard drive for malicious files shorten the life expectancy of a hard drive? Yes. Should one run security scans on a regular basis in order to ensure safe usage of one's computer? Yes. This would be my definition of a "necessary evil."

Same thing with defragmentation. Will running the defragmentation utility shorten the life expectancy of a hard drive? Yes. Should one run defragmentation on a regular basis to ensure that the data on the hard drive is more efficiently accessed? Yes. Again, a "necessary evil."

That all being said, chkdsk is not something I would consider a "necessary evil." It is not needed to maintain a stable working computer. It is however needed to make sure that a computer that shows signs of failure is working properly. Coming directly from the link that istanbul offered, "Whenever a program crashes, or you experience some power outage, your computer may create errors on your computer's hard disk." Have you ever seen a screen such as this:

http://www.raymond.c...dsk-at-boot.png

If Windows deems that a chkdsk scan is necessary, it will run a scan at startup.
Posted Image
0

#13 User is offline   mjd420nova 

  • Expert
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,340
  • Joined: 05-August 06
  • Location:Fremont, California

Posted 23 September 2009 - 06:56 PM

I was dumbfounded by the statement that running CHKDSK too often could cause a premature failure of the hard drive. Doing a checkdisk on a hard drive only checks that the FAT(file allocation table) matches up with the files on the drive and there are no open ended files that aren't closed or have no EOF(end of file) marker and comparing cross linked sectors. If your hard drive is at a point of imminent failure, it is possible that driving the heads to their extreme limit could cause them to get stuck and thus destroying the drive, but only if there were files on those sector and track locations. If you do a lot of file manipulations as is normal for a video or graphics editor, check disk would insure that things are getting stored properly. Also, running check disk would give you an indication of a serious failure in the offing, such as finding a bad sector one day and another a day later and then a couple more after that, it's time to think about backing things up and getting a new drive.
0

#14 User is offline   KStrawn 

  • Expert
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,589
  • Joined: 28-October 08
  • Location:Lake Forest, California

Posted 23 September 2009 - 07:47 PM

View Postmjd420nova, on 23 September 2009 - 06:56 PM, said:

I was dumbfounded by the statement that running CHKDSK too often could cause a premature failure of the hard drive. Doing a checkdisk on a hard drive only checks that the FAT(file allocation table) matches up with the files on the drive and there are no open ended files that aren't closed or have no EOF(end of file) marker and comparing cross linked sectors. If your hard drive is at a point of imminent failure, it is possible that driving the heads to their extreme limit could cause them to get stuck and thus destroying the drive, but only if there were files on those sector and track locations. If you do a lot of file manipulations as is normal for a video or graphics editor, check disk would insure that things are getting stored properly. Also, running check disk would give you an indication of a serious failure in the offing, such as finding a bad sector one day and another a day later and then a couple more after that, it's time to think about backing things up and getting a new drive.


Did anybody mention SSDs here? One other member did, but he/she was the ONLY one, and I have to join in on that subject. Yes, running chkdsk regularly can eventually cause the motor to burn out and the drive to brick. But an SSD has no moving parts, so that's not an issue on them. SSDs, therefore, have a much loner lifespan than conventional hard drives. Perhaps HUNDREDS of times longer. Thousands, maybe millions. SSDs can only brick if they overheat or something like that. If you actually have a solid state drive, I would certainly recommend running chkdsk every week. Conventional hard drives? Not so much. But chkdsk is no different than antivirus as far as how strenuous it is on the drive. However, in Windows 7 RTM there is a fatal NTFS driver flaw where if you run chkdsk /r on ANYTHING BUT the system drive, chkdsk allocates your whole system memory bank to itself, leaving you with a Blue Screen of Death. So if you're doing one or more of the following:
  • Running Windows on a conventional hard drive, NOT an SSD
  • Running Windows 7 RTM
I would be concerned. Otherwise, I don't think anyone needs to be worried.
Best regards,

-Kenny Strawn
0

#15 User is offline   mphenterprises 

  • Elite
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12,259
  • Joined: 19-February 07
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA

Posted 24 September 2009 - 12:22 AM

View Postmjd420nova, on 23 September 2009 - 06:56 PM, said:

Doing a checkdisk on a hard drive only checks that the FAT(file allocation table) matches up with the files on the drive and there are no open ended files that aren't closed or have no EOF(end of file) marker and comparing cross linked sectors.




Hi MJD. Thanks for this information. I did not know this.





View Postmjd420nova, on 23 September 2009 - 06:56 PM, said:

I was dumbfounded by the statement that running CHKDSK too often could cause a premature failure of the hard drive.






I think this situation may be as polarizing as the discussing we had about defragmenting the hard drive. As a matter of fact, there were those that said defragmenting was pointless while other said defragmenting was a necessity.

Please do not misinterpret my statements for what I have placed in bold text. I never indicated that chkdsk would cause a premature failure of a hard drive. As mentioned previously, that is a pretty strong phrase. I simply stated that the life expectancy of the hard drive would shorten. By how much, the world may never know. I really do not even know the true life expectancy of an average hard drive anyway. However, even after learning something new, I still believe that running chkdsk on a healthy drive is unwarranted.

I am just going to leave it at that. This may be one of those topics that people agree to disagree and move on.
Posted Image
0

#16 User is offline   istanbul 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 369
  • Joined: 23-January 08

Posted 24 September 2009 - 03:53 AM

Quote

Did anybody mention SSDs here? One other member did, but he/she was the ONLY one, and I have to join in on that subject. Yes, running chkdsk regularly can eventually cause the motor to burn out and the drive to brick. But an SSD has no moving parts, so that's not an issue on them. SSDs, therefore, have a much loner lifespan than conventional hard drives. Perhaps HUNDREDS of times longer. Thousands, maybe millions. SSDs can only brick if they overheat or something like that. If you actually have a solid state drive, I would certainly recommend running chkdsk every week. Conventional hard drives? Not so much. But chkdsk is no different than antivirus as far as how strenuous it is on the drive. However, in Windows 7 RTM there is a fatal NTFS driver flaw where if you run chkdsk /r on ANYTHING BUT the system drive, chkdsk allocates your whole system memory bank to itself, leaving you with a Blue Screen of Death. So if you're doing one or more of the following:

1.Running Windows on a conventional hard drive, NOT an SSD
2.Running Windows 7 RTM
I would be concerned. Otherwise, I don't think anyone needs to be worried.


Hi KStrawn,thank you for the very interesting and useful information you provided,that's why i come here to this Forum everyday.Mph's points are valid as well.

This post has been edited by smax013: 14 October 2009 - 04:46 PM
Reason for edit: Added quote tags to quoted material

0

#17 User is offline   tek101 

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 542
  • Joined: 05-April 09
  • Location:UCF

Posted 24 September 2009 - 03:54 AM

View PostFoxylady48180, on 23 September 2009 - 02:50 PM, said:

View PostSlik, on 22 September 2009 - 03:31 PM, said:

Is there any reason not to run CheckDisk (chkdsk) from time to time. I am running Vista Home Premium 64-bit on a 320Gbyte HDD, Toshiba laptop w 4Gbytes of SDRAM. Thanks in advance.

I run mine on a regular basis also, (once a month or so) and don't see any difference from that and running a virus scan or spyware scan, except the are looking for different things. However, I am not an expert. You would think that if there was a danger runing it too often, it wouldn't let you.



The thing is .......No one cares for "how long your HDD will last" ... when it come down to write any program .....

This is somewhat a personal choice .... There will be time when you scrach your head and wonder why your HDD goes bad so soon ....?
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein.
0

#18 User is offline   Knifeblade 

  • Expert
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,045
  • Joined: 05-April 07
  • Location:MI

Posted 25 September 2009 - 01:44 AM

Now I wasn't aware of HDD wear and tear occuring from a chkdsk scan, much less a defragment. Hmmm, if I could think of a valid test, I'd try it on my HDD, and see if there's any shortening of life. But, it's original and around 7 years old. Since it has a weekly defragment, and a monthly chkdsk run on it, and has since I've had the Dell, I haven't noticed any "wear", but then how to measure wear??????????????? <_<
I refuse to take no for an answer~~~~~~~~~But I enjoy making them say Yes~~~~~~~~~~~Tam a.k.a. Attack Pig

Gateway DX4380G, AMD A6 5400K DualCore @ 3.8MHz, 6GB DDR3 1600, Integrated AMD HD 7540D graphics using Microsoft 8.1 64-bit with Dx11. 1TB 5200 HDD.
0

#19 User is offline   istanbul 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 369
  • Joined: 23-January 08

Posted 25 September 2009 - 04:02 AM

View PostKnifeblade, on 25 September 2009 - 01:44 AM, said:

Now I wasn't aware of HDD wear and tear occuring from a chkdsk scan, much less a defragment. Hmmm, if I could think of a valid test, I'd try it on my HDD, and see if there's any shortening of life. But, it's original and around 7 years old. Since it has a weekly defragment, and a monthly chkdsk run on it, and has since I've had the Dell, I haven't noticed any "wear", but then how to measure wear??????????????? <_<



İ think you answered all our questions Knifeblade,ha ha ha...
0

#20 User is offline   mjd420nova 

  • Expert
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,340
  • Joined: 05-August 06
  • Location:Fremont, California

Posted 25 September 2009 - 06:00 AM

One of the diagnostic programs I use often to troubleshoot failed drives is one that moves the heads from one extreme to the other, decrease the count by one and continue until it meets in the center of the platter. If this was detrimental to drive life, I'm sure it wouldn't be part of a diagnostic package. Normally I run checkdisk weekly, just after a disk cleanup and before a defrag if one is needed. Checkdisk is just a check of the data on the drive and not a hardware check however it can reveal a hardware fault and indicate an imminent failure if increasing bad sectors are found in subsequent checks.
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users