Flash Destroyer: Dead at 11.49 million

Posted on Monday, June 7th, 2010 in Flash Destroyer by Ian

Some time between 8:00 and 9:00 UTC the Flash Destroyer reached 11.49 million write cycles and detected a verify error. The final count is 11,494,06X, the last digit is X because we won’t know what it is until we read it from the PIC over USB. The destruction started at 8:11 UTC on May 25, and it took almost exactly 13days to reach the first error.

The verify error will be live on ustream for the next day, then we’ll do some analysis to determine where the error occurred, how many cells it effects, and if it persists after a reset.

You guessed the final count when the EEPROM died. DavE got the closest (11,500,000), followed by Tagno25 (11,527,253), and Jason (11,700,000). Dave, Tagno25, and Jason will each get a couple free PCBs. If we made a mistake and missed your guess, please let us know. Thanks for participating, we had a blast with this project.

You can preorder the Flash Destroyer ‘I like to solder’ kit for $30, including worldwide shipping.

This entry was posted on Monday, June 7th, 2010 at 8:28 am and is filed under Flash Destroyer. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

9 Responses to “Flash Destroyer: Dead at 11.49 million”

  1. Sjaak says:


    When will the memorial service be held?

  2. DrF says:

    Lasted quite well then, im interested in just how much damage was done :D

  3. jnd says:

    After the analysis is done you can put the dead eeprom on ebay :p

  4. ericwertz says:

    You should send one to Steve Jobs — he’s been trying to destroy flash for a few months now.

  5. DavE says:

    OMG i can believe i won!

  6. Michal says:

    Shouldn’t the count be half of the value ?:) … you are writing just half of one byte at time (odd bits or even bits)

  7. tagno25 says:

    I received two Bus Pirate boards. One is v3.1SE and the other is v4. I posted some photos at

Leave a Reply

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

Recent Comments

  • Daniel: Do I comment here or on FB?
  • Craig B: Shouldn't the default be 00xxx010? Note that bit 0 appears out of order in the documentation. In that case I think the initial value is...
  • JJM: From the datasheet extract you are showing, the power up status should be 00xxx010, not 000xxx01. Bit numbering is misleading since 'measurement resolution' is apparently...
  • Jan Ciger (@janoc200): Hmm, that could actually explain why the three sensor IMU breakout I have bought a few years ago had all sorts of issues - I...
  • Travis: Is it preset to the windows 3 fingered salute?