Do disk benchmarking tools reduce the live of SSD/USB drives

Transcendence72 · Jan 26, 2026

Crystal Mark Info is tool used to benchmark a drive's performance. Or to set a baseline for a SSD performance. However on the Crystal Mark Info Web site the following is mentioned

CrystalDiskMark may shorten SSD/USB Memory life.

Please see the screenshot

So my question is do running disk benchmark tools actually reduce the lifespan of a SSD? This is not specific to CrystalDiskMark tool alone.

Does it apply to other benchmark tools too like PCMark, etc?

Try3 · Jan 26, 2026

All use of any disk uses up some of its [unknown-in-advance] lifespan.

Denis

SIW2 · Jan 26, 2026

Transcendence72 said:
Crystal Mark Info is tool used to benchmark a drive's performance. Or to set a baseline for a SSD performance. However on the Crystal Mark Info Web site the following is mentioned

Please see the screenshot

So my question is do running disk benchmark tools actually reduce the lifespan of a SSD? This is not specific to CrystalDiskMark tool alone.

Does it apply to other benchmark tools too like PCMark, etc?

Yes. One example is samsung magician wrote 32gb to disk in a basic test. They have to if you want write speeds measured.

Transcendence72 · Jan 26, 2026

So if only read or seek tests are carried out then that should be non destructive?

And if running these tests require 32gb to be written onto a SSD then does it mean that test ssd benchmark tests should be run only say once a year?

The reason of running the tests is to find out how much wear-leveling has occurred on the disk. And whether getting a new SSD would boost things up. These days not just upgrading RAM but also upgrading the SSD is one of the go to steps for prolonging the life of the hardware.

Try3 · Jan 26, 2026

Transcendence72 said:
So if only read or seek tests are carried out then that should be non destructive?

Try3 said:
All use of any disk uses up some of its [unknown-in-advance] lifespan.

Since the read capability of solid state devices generally exceeds their write capability by an order of 10 or more, you might never suffer as a result of excessive reading.

Transcendence72 said:
The reason of running the tests is to find out how much wear-leveling has occurred on the disk.

Reading a disk's Smart attributes ought to give you that info without any writing being necessary.
I have CrystalDiskInfo & HDS. I have never figured out if one is better than the other.

Denis

Quandary · Jan 26, 2026

Transcendence72 said:
So my question is do running disk benchmark tools actually reduce the lifespan of a SSD? This is not specific to CrystalDiskMark tool alone.

Does it apply to other benchmark tools too like PCMark, etc?

Yes it does as others have stated, but the degradation is very minor. A more significant issue with SSD's is a phenomenon known as "bit rot". This is the loss of charge in a sector that has not been written to for an extended period of time (this could be as short as 6 months). When this happens the drive has to spend extra time in retrieving the data resulting in the loss of performance. Many people experience this a slow boot of their PC's. A rewrite of those sectors will restore performance, but the drive does not do that on its own. There are tools designed to perform that function or you could make an image copy of the drive and then do a complete restore. Yes, this process will reduce the lifespan of the drive but so does using the drive on a daily basis.

HD Tune Pro is similar to CrystalDiskMark, and graphs the read speed by sectors. I check my drives every 6 months with this tool and will perform a refresh if there are any slow performing areas.

Have a look at this SpinRite tool for further information.

Helmut · Jan 26, 2026

It is not a question of destruction or non-destruction. Obviously read or seek tests have less wear than tests involving writes.

Running write/read tests (benchmarking) on an SSD or indeed any HDD should not be done too often, it is not necessary. Just tests for the manufacturers claimed speeds.

Transcendence72 said:
The reason of running the tests is to find out how much wear-leveling has occurred on the disk.

Wear levelling is just that, levelling up the wear on each memory cell does not relate much to performance.

Bree · Jan 26, 2026

Transcendence72 said:
The reason of running the tests is to find out how much wear-leveling has occurred on the disk. And whether getting a new SSD would boost things up.

Try3 said:
Reading a disk's Smart attributes ought to give you that info without any writing being necessary.
I have CrystalDiskInfo & HDS. I have never figured out if one is better than the other.

Anything that can display the SSD's S.M.A.R.T data will do. I have both too, CrystalDiskInfo is easier to read and how it displays the data more configurable, Hard Disk Sentinel shows green (or red) marks alongside the most critical S.M.A.R.T data for indicating remaining SSD life.

Exactly what information is stored varies a lot between manufacturers, but all will have an indicator of the remaining life.

'Percentage Used' is the total writes to date as a percentage of the manufacturer's specified Terabytes Written (TBW) capability of the SSD. This is usually a conservative estimate, most SSDs will exceed their TBW.

'Wear Levelling Count' is the average number of times each block of cells has been erased.

Transcendence72 said:
if running these tests require 32gb to be written onto a SSD then does it mean that test ssd benchmark tests should be run only say once a year?

The manufacturer's specified endurance is measured in Terabytes. A typical 500GB SSD will have a TBW of 300. A test that writes 32GB is about 1/10,000th of that, the effect on lifespan is negligible.

Anibor_11 · Jan 26, 2026

Bree said:
The manufacturer's specified endurance is measured in Terabytes. A typical 500GB SSD will have a TBW of 300.

As long as it has TLC cells. Some 500 GB SSDs with QLC cells have a TBW of 150, when they specify it. Still "good enough" for normal 5 years use.

gunrunnerjohn · Jan 26, 2026

While technically the benchmark tools would reduce lifespan, in the real world it most likely will have very little noticeable effect on longevity. Obviously, if you run a benchmark every hour, you'll significantly reduce the lifespan of the drive. However, in a real-world setting where you might do a benchmark once in a while, I can't imagine you could even measure the impact!

cheaterslick · Jan 26, 2026

gunrunnerjohn said:
While technically the benchmark tools would reduce lifespan, in the real world it most likely will have very little noticeable effect on longevity. Obviously, if you run a benchmark every hour, you'll significantly reduce the lifespan of the drive. However, in a real-world setting where you might do a benchmark once in a while, I can't imagine you could even measure the impact!

I totally agree. I don't see how running benchmarks once in a great moon would have any effect on it. I do mine maybe two or three times a year, at most. I'm not worried about it.

Transcendence72 · Feb 17, 2026

Anibor_11 said:
As long as it has TLC cells. Some 500 GB SSDs with QLC cells have a TBW of 150, when they specify it. Still "good enough" for normal 5 years use.

Apologises for such a late posting. How can I check whether a ssd has TLC cell or QLC cells? Is there a command or smart attribute that can provide this information?

Transcendence72 · Feb 17, 2026

Quandary said:
Yes it does as others have stated, but the degradation is very minor. A more significant issue with SSD's is a phenomenon known as "bit rot". This is the loss of charge in a sector that has not been written to for an extended period of time (this could be as short as 6 months). When this happens the drive has to spend extra time in retrieving the data resulting in the loss of performance. Many people experience this a slow boot of their PC's. A rewrite of those sectors will restore performance, but the drive does not do that on its own. There are tools designed to perform that function or you could make an image copy of the drive and then do a complete restore. Yes, this process will reduce the lifespan of the drive but so does using the drive on a daily basis.

HD Tune Pro is similar to CrystalDiskMark, and graphs the read speed by sectors. I check my drives every 6 months with this tool and will perform a refresh if there are any slow performing areas.

Have a look at this SpinRite tool for further information.

Which are the tools that can detect a "bit rot" and then prevent further writing/reading from it? Also is there a way to move the data that is stored in these cells to other cells?

If we were to take a Windows drive image using say wmic and then apply the same, then probably it may write to same cell which has bit rot. How can that be prevented? Or do we have to use specialized tools to create image backup and then while restoring the image, the tool takes care not to write to the cells which have "bit rot"?

I will have a look at the SpinRite tool.

Quandary · Feb 17, 2026

@Transcendence72 "Bit rot" is the loss of charge to a cell. This is not permanent, and rewriting the cell restores its charge. That should address your concerns.

Bree · Feb 17, 2026

Transcendence72 said:
How can I check whether a ssd has TLC cell or QLC cells?

Look up its specs. Your screenshot says it's a Samsung SSD 9100 PRO 4TB. Here is the spec sheet for the 9100 PRO series. For the 4TB version the manufacturer's specified endurance is 2,400 Terabytes Written.

NAND Flash Memory - Samsung V-NAND TLC
Warranty - TBW 2,400 TB

https://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/UM/202512/20251203103717377/Samsung_NVMe_SSD_9100_PRO_Datasheet_Rev.2.0.pdf

Transcendence72 · Feb 18, 2026

Bree said:
Look up its specs. Your screenshot says it's a Samsung SSD 9100 PRO 4TB. Here is the spec sheet for the 9100 PRO series. For the 4TB version the manufacturer's specified endurance is 2,400 Terabytes Written.

https://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/UM/202512/20251203103717377/Samsung_NVMe_SSD_9100_PRO_Datasheet_Rev.2.0.pdf

~~Thanks for the link to the specifications of the drive. However the drive does not list whether it is a SLC or TLC or QLC. Since it is "V-NAND" can I take it to mean that it will be a TLC drive?~~

Sorry for the earlier post, please ignore it. According to the specs, screenshot given below, it is a TLC drive. So does this make it better than QLC but not better than SLC in terms of endurance and sustained write and read speeds?

Bree · Feb 18, 2026

Transcendence72 said:
According to the specs, screenshot given below, it is a TLC drive. So does this make it better than QLC but not better than SLC in terms of endurance and sustained write and read speeds?

Because it stores less data in each cell TLC has greater TBW endurance than QLC by about a factor of two. SLC is the most expensive, mainly used these days in enterprise servers. TLC is by far the most common client SSD technology these days, with a TBW that will outlast most users' needs.

For speeds, see the comparisons here:

TLC vs. QLC SSDs: What are the differences?

We’ve talked about how we can use SSD cache to reduce latency and accelerate transfer speeds. We’ve also explained the...

blog.synology.com

Do disk benchmarking tools reduce the live of SSD/USB drives

Member

Attachments

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Well-known member

My Computers

Member

My Computer

Member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers

Member

My Computer

Well-known member

My Computers