Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 45

Thread: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    30,061
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,940 times in 681 posts

    WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    WD Red drives will use SMR, but WD Red Plus and WD Red Pro SKUs will stick to CMR tech.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,674
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    78 times in 69 posts

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    So basically they're releasing 'an upgraded' version which I'm sure they'll happily charge more for....

    God I hate extra models for absolutely no reason other than making something that should be standard in the sector cost more...

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    164
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    9 times in 8 posts

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    That isn't any clearer.
    RED has been the NAS product range.
    And SMR is not suitable for that.
    Keep SMR out of the RED range, full stop.

  4. Received thanks from:

    ik9000 (10-07-2020)

  5. #4
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,934
    Thanks
    583
    Thanked
    1,174 times in 1,000 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Quote Originally Posted by ByteMyAscii View Post
    That isn't any clearer.
    RED has been the NAS product range.
    And SMR is not suitable for that.
    Keep SMR out of the RED range, full stop.
    Agree they could have done with a new colour for these, but they are not a cold storage drive. If you are only using a cheap consumer NAS where most of these end up, then these drives will be acceptable and better value.

    You aren't always writing to SMR, they have a large area of conventional recording which is written to. When you stop writing, it moves data from CMR cache out to a shingled region.
    If you are doing large file writes, like video files or machines backups, then shingled recording doesn't hurt so running out of cache isn't a problem.

    If, like me, you run a VM farm off your NAS drives then you want to steer well clear. But then if you care that much, perhaps you need Enterprise drives not NAS drives. Those are so expensive, perhaps an SSD would be better.

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    348
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    14 times in 13 posts
    • simonpreston's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Prime X370 Pro
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 7 1700
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3000mhz
      • Storage:
      • A lot.
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM850x
      • Case:
      • Zalman MS1000
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 / Kubuntu 20.04
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2x Dell 2412m
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    If you are only using a cheap consumer NAS where most of these end up, then these drives will be acceptable and better value.
    Isn't ZFS, which many consumer NAS boxes use, not playing nicely with SMR part of the problem, though?

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,707
    Thanks
    103
    Thanked
    225 times in 161 posts

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Quote Originally Posted by simonpreston View Post
    Isn't ZFS, which many consumer NAS boxes use, not playing nicely with SMR part of the problem, though?
    It's the fact it's DMSMR which is Drive Managed. ZFS has the ability to work with Host/Hybrid managed SMR as far as I know so ZFS can work with the technology properly because it can't be worked with like a norm CMR drive.

    WD are in the wrong here and with the except of very basic NAS uses, using DMSMR drives in their range of NAS drives is not acceptable.

    Even with the higher potential failure rate, I am glad I kept our business in Seagate realms.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • EasterEEL's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte X58-OC
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7 930 @ 3.85GHz
      • Memory:
      • G.Skill 3x4GB Ripjaws RLF3
      • Storage:
      • Samsung - SSD830 256GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI GTX680 Core1058MHz
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic X 760W 80+ Gold
      • Monitor(s):
      • Hazro HZ27 IPS 2560x1440

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Regrettably I purchased early 2020 2x 6TB WD RED NAS with undocumented SMR which I would never had done if they had been marketed as SMR drives. As I intend to use ZFS with my Qnap NAS, should I go back to WD and insist they replace as not fit for purpose as that is what I am inferring from this?

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    156
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked
    8 times in 7 posts

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    On price: the 4 and 6tb EFAX Reds are pretty much price matched with the Seagate Ironwolfs. If there's a significant price saving they're making, the consumer isn't getting it.

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Agree they could have done with a new colour for these, but they are not a cold storage drive. If you are only using a cheap consumer NAS where most of these end up, then these drives will be acceptable and better value.
    Until you need to rebuild, at which time the SMR drive takes 10x as long and you're vulnerable to data loss for a whole lot longer, or the rebuild fails because the drive becomes so slow it's assumed bad.

    If you are doing large file writes, like video files or machines backups, then shingled recording doesn't hurt so running out of cache isn't a problem.
    As long as you don't run out of CMR cache, I guess? How much do you get? How long does it take to empty the cache? What does your controller do when the drive takes too long to respond because you've flooded the cache?

    Quote Originally Posted by EasterEEL View Post
    As I intend to use ZFS with my Qnap NAS, should I go back to WD and insist they replace as not fit for purpose as that is what I am inferring from this?
    Worth a try! They've not really admitted fault at any time so you're probably out of luck though.

  10. #9
    Senior Member Spreadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    an island in the south
    Posts
    1,777
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked
    327 times in 234 posts
    • Spreadie's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ickle tiny fing
      • CPU:
      • six corrs, 12 freds
      • Memory:
      • sixteen gigglebytes
      • Storage:
      • four terribads
      • Graphics card(s):
      • yep, got one o' them
      • PSU:
      • big & smol
      • Case:
      • NCase M1
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 32 throbbing inches with a slight curve
      • Internet:
      • two tin cans and some wet string

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    All my Reds are CMR, but I won't be buying WD again - Red already carries a premium, and I'll be damned if I'm paying even more for what should be standard. I'm sure I won't be the only one.
    Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes; after that, who cares?! He's a mile away and you've got his shoes!


  11. Received thanks from:

    [GSV]Trig (25-06-2020),neonplanet40 (26-06-2020)

  12. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    10,835
    Thanks
    654
    Thanked
    374 times in 261 posts

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Red's have always been NAS drives, that means SMR is just not good for Reds.

    Someone at WD made the conscious decision to make SMR drives Red's and not tell the customer, they are now battling uphill to try and limit the damage they have done.

    I for one will not use WD drives again.

  13. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,674
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    78 times in 69 posts

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Quote Originally Posted by [GSV]Trig View Post
    I for one will not use WD drives again.
    Sadly these days we've only really got 2 main hard drive manufacturers....Seagate and WD. Yes there's toshiba but lets be honest would you trust their drives?

    Personally if I had a choice I'd use hitachi drives (used wd, seagate and hitachi) but even they've been bought out by WD (well the good bits, toshiba has the rest).... it's now literally a case of picking the 'least evil' option lol. Luckily HGST branding is still in use on enterprise drives and everything seems to point as them being hitachi drives (maybe made in toshiba's factory weirdly) in all but name (and no unlabelled smr), so while slightly more expensive I think thats my likely direction.
    Last edited by LSG501; 25-06-2020 at 11:05 PM.

  14. #12
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,934
    Thanks
    583
    Thanked
    1,174 times in 1,000 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Yes there's toshiba but lets be honest would you trust their drives?
    Yes, the few hard drives I have bought in recent years have been Toshiba. They've been fine.

    I wonder from the update in this article if WD are planning to price the new Red Plus drives higher than existing Red. Although at this point I suspect most of us are disinterested in what WD do and they have probably hastened the demise of the spinning disk in general.

    https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020...r-hard-drives/

  15. #13
    The Irish Drunk! neonplanet40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Stirling
    Posts
    5,051
    Thanks
    789
    Thanked
    236 times in 158 posts
    • neonplanet40's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 Wi-Fi
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 7 2700X
      • Memory:
      • Patriot 16 GB DDR4 3200 MHz
      • Storage:
      • 256 Crucial MX100 +Kingston 256GB SSD and 500GB Samsung F3
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Palit nVidia 1070Ti Rockgamer
      • PSU:
      • OCZ 650W
      • Case:
      • Akasa Eclipse-32
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 27" U2715H & Dell 23" U2311H
      • Internet:
      • 60MB

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    I hope the lawsuits that are being brought against them win and force them to pay out for those affected. I have 5 of the impacted drives in my 12 bay NAS. I am not a happy bunny. Needless to say, I will no longer be buying WD. This is a shame as they were always my default for reliability and quality. Little did I know...
    Home Entertainment =Epson TW9400, Samsung 65" HDTV, Denon AVRX6300H, Panasonic DPUB450EBK Ultra HD Blu-Ray and Monitor Audio Silver RX 5.0, Monitor Audio CT265IDC(x4) Dolby Atmos and XTZ 12.17 Sub
    My System=Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 Wi-Fi, AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, Patriot 16 GB DDR4 3200MHz, 256GB Crucial SSD, Kingston 256GB SSD and 500GB Samsung F3, Palit GTX1070 GameRock Edition , Enermax Liberty 620W, Akasa Eclipse-32,Dell 2715H & Dell U2311H
    Home Server 2/HTPC - Ryzen 5 3600, Asus Strix B450, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte 1660 Super, Corsair TX550, Kodi with MadVR
    Diskstation/HTPC - Synology DS2415+ with 41TB
    Portable=Microsoft Surface Pro 4, Huawei M5 10" & HP Omen 15 laptop

  16. #14
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    35
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Yes there's toshiba but lets be honest would you trust their drives?
    Yes, my two main storage drives are Toshibas, and they've been more reliable than my Western Digitals over the years. One of those drives is 7 years old and still working well. I do have weekly automated backups, but I'm no more worried about my Toshiba drives failing than my WD or Seagate backups.

    Even though my WD Red is in a role for which the performance isn't critical, the lack of upfront disclosure on this drives me to buy Seagate or Toshiba in the future. I considered just replacing my 2 TB Toshiba with a 6 TB drive, instead of adding a second smaller one, and could have easily wound up with a Red with inferior performance for that role.

  17. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    10,835
    Thanks
    654
    Thanked
    374 times in 261 posts

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    Problem I've got is I'm retiring 2 of the drives in my server for age, a WD 2Tb Red and a 4Tb Seagate, going to swap them out for an 8tb or there about drive and drop a 500Gb SSD in there as a temp drive (Stablebit Drivepool's SSD Optimiser for those that care), I need to find a drive that'll fit the bill, the Seagates a run over from my old NAS and all of my other drives are WD, I would, historically gone for an 8Tb Red, only real choice is a Seagate after this kerfuffle..

  18. #16
    Senior Member Spreadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    an island in the south
    Posts
    1,777
    Thanks
    288
    Thanked
    327 times in 234 posts
    • Spreadie's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ickle tiny fing
      • CPU:
      • six corrs, 12 freds
      • Memory:
      • sixteen gigglebytes
      • Storage:
      • four terribads
      • Graphics card(s):
      • yep, got one o' them
      • PSU:
      • big & smol
      • Case:
      • NCase M1
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 32 throbbing inches with a slight curve
      • Internet:
      • two tin cans and some wet string

    Re: WD Red HDD naming convention makes SMR choices clearer

    8TB Reds are all CMR, but there's still the premium to consider.

    I just received a warranty replacement 8TB Red last week, but I re-jigged my storage setup in it's absence, so this is going in a cupboard as a cold replacement for my other one, which is pretty much a backup of my array now.

    Barring a drive failure, I shouldn't need another spinner for a long time but, even then, it's likely to be ironwolf drives or something similar.
    Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes; after that, who cares?! He's a mile away and you've got his shoes!


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •