WD Sets the Record Straight: Lists All Drives That Use Slower SMR Tech

(Image credit: WD)
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • digitalgriffin
    Meanwhile I have two new 6TB Red Drives that I use in my UNRAID NAS (one as a parity) that I have to question if they will fail when they fill up. I guess I can pull them and return them but I have to order two new drives to replace them and that will be a mess. Or I'll have to buy a new Parity drive just to be on the safe side.

    Sure as hell won't be WD. I've been reading on reddit how people are having all kinds of problems with the ZFS Raid. This mess has drained them of my good will. I paid a premium for those drives over other brands ($150/drive) I'm sure an OS patch could fix it, if the OS realizes it's a SMR drive. The OS would have to trim, wait and retry after a couple minutes. That might work if you are rebuilding an array. But if you are dumping in new data from an outside source, that doesn't work so well. Try telling windows backup to wait 3 minutes before it can write another file.
    Reply
  • drtweak
    Yea think I'll be buying Seagate now. They are even a little cheaper.

    The thing I don't understand is that SMR is suppose to help increase density on large drives. I would think the 8+ TB Drives would be using this NOT 1-6TB Drives.
    Reply
  • GenericUser
    drtweak said:
    Yea think I'll be buying Seagate now. They are even a little cheaper.

    The thing I don't understand is that SMR is suppose to help increase density on large drives. I would think the 8+ TB Drives would be using this NOT 1-6TB Drives.

    It's because any given amount of storage they sell is going to be cheaper to make with SMR as opposed to CMR, regardless if it's 1TB or 8TB, because less material is needed to manufacture it.
    Reply
  • AtrociKitty
    digitalgriffin said:
    Meanwhile I have two new 6TB Red Drives that I use in my UNRAID NAS (one as a parity) that I have to question if they will fail when they fill up. I guess I can pull them and return them but I have to order two new drives to replace them and that will be a mess. Or I'll have to buy a new Parity drive just to be on the safe side.

    Check the model number and cache of your drives. I have four 6TB Reds in my NAS, and they're CMR.
    WD60EFAX - 256 MB Cache - SMR version
    WD60EFRX - 64 MB Cache - CMR version

    drtweak said:
    Yea think I'll be buying Seagate now. They are even a little cheaper.
    Seagate was doing the same thing: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/sneaky-marketing-toshiba-seagate-wd-smr-drives-without-disclosure
    Reply
  • digitalgriffin
    AtrociKitty said:
    Check the model number and cache of your drives. I have four 6TB Reds in my NAS, and they're CMR.
    WD60EFAX - 256 MB Cache - SMR version
    WD60EFRX - 64 MB Cache - CMR version
    EFAX unfortunately.
    Reply
  • Deicidium369
    digitalgriffin said:
    Meanwhile I have two new 6TB Red Drives that I use in my UNRAID NAS (one as a parity) that I have to question if they will fail when they fill up. I guess I can pull them and return them but I have to order two new drives to replace them and that will be a mess. Or I'll have to buy a new Parity drive just to be on the safe side.

    Sure as hell won't be WD. I've been reading on reddit how people are having all kinds of problems with the ZFS Raid. This mess has drained them of my good will. I paid a premium for those drives over other brands ($150/drive) I'm sure an OS patch could fix it, if the OS realizes it's a SMR drive. The OS would have to trim, wait and retry after a couple minutes. That might work if you are rebuilding an array. But if you are dumping in new data from an outside source, that doesn't work so well. Try telling windows backup to wait 3 minutes before it can write another file.
    Swore off of WD ages ago - aren't the WD Reds for small 8 drive NAS? - similar to the Seagate Iron Wolf - with the Iron Wolf Pro being for larger arrays and the Exos being for the largest arrays.

    Pretty crappy for Seagate and WD to not tell people
    Reply
  • 2Be_or_Not2Be
    I noticed that they didn't say they would STOP using SMR drives in the line that is supposed to be for NAS (the Red line) - just that you should know & buy the Red Pro line if you are concerned about it. Sheesh....
    Reply
  • hiryu
    drtweak said:
    Yea think I'll be buying Seagate now. They are even a little cheaper.

    The thing I don't understand is that SMR is suppose to help increase density on large drives. I would think the 8+ TB Drives would be using this NOT 1-6TB Drives.

    Unfortunately Seagate is also doing the same.
    https://www.tomshardware.com/news/sneaky-marketing-toshiba-seagate-wd-smr-drives-without-disclosure
    Reply
  • mitch074
    Lucky - back when I built my NAS I decided 8 tb was the sweet spot. It looks like they decided to use SMR on their big volume drives, and that was 6 tb and below... I'm hesitant to fill up my NAS now, if by chance they decide to implement DMSMR on 8 tb too...
    Reply
  • Vorador2
    Right now all (Seagate, WD and Toshiba) of the major manufacturers have been selling SMR without clearly branding them as such.

    And is really worrying. SMR have such a huge drop in writing performance than they had to advertise them as "archiving" devices before. Until all of them come clear and clearly brand SMR devices as such, i will try not to buy an HDD.
    Reply