What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

WD (and others) sneaking SMR drives into their NAS Drive Lineup

Bond007

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
7,963
Location
Nova Scotia
I think this sucks, however, neither wd or seagate made any mention in any documents that these drives were cmr/prm...not did they say smr. Many people just made assumptions that were wrong.
 

sswilson

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
24,652
Location
Moncton NB
No, they didn't specifically lie about what technology was being used, but it's on par with the bad old days of memory manufacturers swapping out decent chips for less expensive ones without changing the product name/sku.

That's the real issue here... it isn't that they've started using this technology, it's that they've made significant changes to the specs on a particular line without changing the name.
 

Marzipan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
11,955
Location
Prince Rupert, British Columbia, Canuckistan
I see SMR as a step backwards for spinners even if they didn't try to sneak it in. Bean counters...blah!
yeh...but when you see how much profit 5 cents over 60 million shipments a year makes, it's understandable. what they don't seem to know how to quantify is the bad press it can cause. had they brought it as another model / part, no issues, but sneaking it in like they did...look at how many people are swearing off of WD now. how much is that going to cost them?
 

Bond007

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
7,963
Location
Nova Scotia
No, they didn't specifically lie about what technology was being used, but it's on par with the bad old days of memory manufacturers swapping out decent chips for less expensive ones without changing the product name/sku.

That's the real issue here... it isn't that they've started using this technology, it's that they've made significant changes to the specs on a particular line without changing the name.
ou see how much profit 5 cents over 60 million shipments a year makes, it's understandable. what they don't seem to know how to quantify is the bad press it can cause. had they brought it as another model / part, no issues, but sneaking it in like th

Agree.
 

gingerbee

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
10,033
Location
Orillia, Ontario
companies need to stop this kinda BS. Personally I use smr drives, loads of them there great to archive things. I almost never get the slow write speed some are talking about but I use smr drives accordingly "write once reading lots" this I bet is why.
Any places I have lots of changing data I don't use smr its that simple for me. doesn't mean these kind of practices don't piss me off it total bs
 

Marzipan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
11,955
Location
Prince Rupert, British Columbia, Canuckistan

sigh...WD won't own up to the mistake and tells you to buy a different drive for NAS and RAID arrays...despite the fact the drive with issues is for NAS and RAID array's. >.<
 

Entz

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
1,878
Location
Kelowna
Yup PR response. Downplay and deflect.

I have 10 2TB reds, all CMR. They have, as millions have, worked perfectly fine. Now if I get a Red to upgrade or replace I am playing russian roulette with my data. So their solution is to upgrade me to the expensive Red Pro line (which are basically blacks ). F That.
 

Valkyrie

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
1,270
Location
Chilliwack...Gone...Gone...Gone!
Interesting comment on a question re Seagate Ironwolf drives on Reddit data hoarders forum. It seems to spell it out well.


level 1
stoatwblr

8 points · 15 days ago · edited 15 days ago

There's no such thing as "Parallel Magnetic Recording"(+)
BEWARE - HERE BE DRAGONS
- The preferred marketroid term for "normal" drives is now "CMR" - Conventional Magnetic Recording. BE VERY CAREFUL TO USE IT WHEN ASKING QUESTIONS
- PMR stands for "Perpendicular Magnetic Recording" (the way the magnetic domains are packed on the platter, vs Longitudinal magnetic domains of yore)
- Shingling (SMR) is Shingled PMR. It's built on top of PMR
- TGMR is a head technology needed for PMR and is the same for SMR or CMR
- TDMR( Two Dimensional Magnetic Recording ) is a weaselly way of saying "zoned media" and the only reason you have zoned media is.... because it's SMR (you need the zones to be able to do rewrites)
- Helium does not imply CMR or SMR. You can get squeaky drives in both formats,- HOWEVER you can infer probable SMR for air-filled drives above 4TB/3.5" 2TB/2.5"

So:
- If you are told a drive is PMR, therefore not shingled.... BZZT: see above.
- If you are told a drive is TGMR technology, therefore not shingled, see above
- If you ask "is this drive SMR or PMR?", the correct answer is "yes"
(All mechanical drives on the market use PMR, whether CMR or SMR and regardless of speed. This is because all 3 makers use the same platters and heads - each made by only one manufacturer)
Some other points:
- Drives whose datasheets show them as being substantially lighter than their predecessors are likely to be SMR
- Drives with large cache (256MB+) are extremely likely to be SMR - they need it to work (there are data tiering functions in Drive Managed SMR drives (DM-SMR) akin to those found in TLC/QLC SSDs - but much MUCH slower....)
- Drives reporting "trim" functions _ARE_ SMR, even if they don't report zoned media (Reporting zoning is a ACS-4 function - whilst that was codified in 2016, many drives are still only ACS-3 which doesn't support this reporting function.... hmmmmm... I wonder why that might be? Nothing suspicious to see here citizen, move along!)
- HOWEVER - Not all SMR drives report trim functions and the only way to find out is to benchmark the things - (Seagate barracuda ST3000DM003 being a good example)

- PAY ATTENTION TO THE SUFFIXES, READ THE SPEC SHEETS.
- COMPARE WITH PAST MODELS
- a generational change (from 003 to 004, or from EFRX to EFAX) may well mean a change has been submarined into the channel. Check the drive mass. Losing a platter at the same size is a sure sign of it having happened.

Above all: Complain loudly to your local marketing regulators about this misleading behaviour. WD and SG KNOW we don't want SMR, which is why they're going out of their way to keep it off their datasheets (European and Chinese regulators should be especially receptive to fraudulent marketing and cartel behaviour complaints)
(+) see the IEEE article below. The only references to "Parallel Magnetic Recording" anywhere on the web are on review sites and it's 100% clear they're a result of an utterly clueless reviewer guessing what the initials meant, then that guess spreading meme-style amongst other cluess reviewers who apparently don't know how to read tech documents (ie: You can pretty much surmise that such reviews are paid-for, as anyone independent will be doing their homework - and murketers aren't going to be falling over themselves to correct such an error)
(there ARE reference to lab work for recording calibration and sync tracks in parallel, but what THAT means is that they're activating multiple heads at once instead of the normal sequential switching between individual heads. (Attempts at parallelising heads in-service have never worked well due to differing thermal expansion of platters due to slight temperature changes across the case internals))
EDIT: This IEEE article is worth reading. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=4694034
 

Entz

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
1,878
Location
Kelowna
Whelp it looks like WD is finally coming clean here is the official list:

1587661228843.png


Even some of the notebook drives are SMR including blacks (FFS). Just to make things extra annoying some blues are CMR (4TB) some are SMR (2+6) ...

1587661269913.png


Source: https://blog.westerndigital.com/wd-red-nas-drives/ via tomshardware

Edit: Table didn't copy right, using picture
 

Latest posts

Top