Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 12,096
I can't see it mattering much whether a WD Blue is SMR or not. It isn't a drive you'd want to be using in a RAID environment in the first place.
WD selling SMR drives as WD Reds
- Thread starter HungryHippos
- Start date
Soldato
It is SMR, but it's a Blue, so possibly yes if you wanted to put it in RAID, but for archiving it shouldn't be a problem.
The full list of WD drives (that WD has so far admitted to) with SMR is as follows:
- WD Red 3.5" - WD20EFAX, WD30EFAX, WD40EFAX and WD60EFAX
- WD Blue 3.5" - WD20EZAZ and WD60EZAZ
- WD Blue 2.5" - WD10SPZX and WD20SPZX
- WD Black 2.5" - WD10SPSX
They haven't had mine back yet - they have stopped all Advanced RMA's until the current crisis is over.
we have temporarily suspended all Advanced Replacement RMAs due to logistical limitations.
As to what they would do with them once returned (and the new ones in stock), depending on how they are manufactured, I would imagine that they could possibly:
- Update the drives firmware to work as CMR drives (I don't know if it is even possible to change from SMR to CMR)
- Re-label them as WD Blue (with a possible firmware update)
- Call them "SMR Super" and say they were designed as a solution for a specific problem (a problem that no-one has even thought of yet)
Last edited:
Another update:
I am now on my third support incident and second RMA request with WD.
This time, they have sent me a shipping label for returning the drive to WD and an assurance that I will be provided with a brand new drive (not a refurbished drive nor a recertified drive).
Fingers crossed.
I am now on my third support incident and second RMA request with WD.
This time, they have sent me a shipping label for returning the drive to WD and an assurance that I will be provided with a brand new drive (not a refurbished drive nor a recertified drive).
Fingers crossed.
Western Digital have updated their website to identify all Blue/Black/Red drives as either (SMR) or (CMR) adjacent to the models numbers as necessary.
Also, since I last looked, Western Digital have added a blog post with an overview of their Device-Managed Shingled Magnetic Recording (DMSMR) architecture and it's benefits. The comments at the bottom of the blog clearly disagree with Western Digital.
See here:
Also, since I last looked, Western Digital have added a blog post with an overview of their Device-Managed Shingled Magnetic Recording (DMSMR) architecture and it's benefits. The comments at the bottom of the blog clearly disagree with Western Digital.
Last edited:
Associate
Western digital have clearly misled their customers here. I had to check the drives in my NAS as I relatively recently had to replace a failed 4Tb Red, Thankfully the drive was still the CMR type.
Based on the testing provided by 'serve the home' and other reputable sites I'm guessing my 15 hour array rebuild would have taken over 10 x more if the drive had been SMR based.
There's nothing wrong with SMR in the right place, I have an 8 Tb seagate archive drive I use as a one drive, once a month, mirror of important data from my main array using rsync. Yes it's slow, but when it only synchronising relatively little changed data once in a while, it's fine (and great value per Tb). As an example of the speed limitations of SMR technology, the 4Tb or so of data transferred to the Seagate archive drive the first time I synchronised took days and dropped down to around 10MBs or less transfer rate at times. Fine for archive, just not acceptable in an array.
Anyway, all that aside, OCUK I think you should at least note this issue on your product listings or preferably remove this item completely as if used in an array these just aren't acceptable. In no way should they have been sold as NAS drives.
Based on the testing provided by 'serve the home' and other reputable sites I'm guessing my 15 hour array rebuild would have taken over 10 x more if the drive had been SMR based.
There's nothing wrong with SMR in the right place, I have an 8 Tb seagate archive drive I use as a one drive, once a month, mirror of important data from my main array using rsync. Yes it's slow, but when it only synchronising relatively little changed data once in a while, it's fine (and great value per Tb). As an example of the speed limitations of SMR technology, the 4Tb or so of data transferred to the Seagate archive drive the first time I synchronised took days and dropped down to around 10MBs or less transfer rate at times. Fine for archive, just not acceptable in an array.
Anyway, all that aside, OCUK I think you should at least note this issue on your product listings or preferably remove this item completely as if used in an array these just aren't acceptable. In no way should they have been sold as NAS drives.
I couldn't agree more - the affected WD-Red EFAX drives are still described as "Optimal compatibility for NAS systems" on their respective OCUK pages.
The fault lies with Western Digital, however, a comment (and link to additional information) on their respective OCUK pages would assist customers in making a decision.
Update:
WD in Poland received my WD60EFAX (SMR-type) this morning.
They have said that they will try and send me a WD60EFRX (CMR-type) in exchange subject to stock availability, otherwise they will send me an alternative drive.
Out of interest, before I sent it back, I tried to fully erase it using Western Digital Data Lifeguard Diagnostic for Windows v1.37 but I was unable to carry out a full erase - it would only allow me to carry out a quick erase.
However, I did manage to carry out a full erase using Western Digital Data Lifeguard Diagnostic for DOS v5.27.
WD in Poland received my WD60EFAX (SMR-type) this morning.
They have said that they will try and send me a WD60EFRX (CMR-type) in exchange subject to stock availability, otherwise they will send me an alternative drive.
Out of interest, before I sent it back, I tried to fully erase it using Western Digital Data Lifeguard Diagnostic for Windows v1.37 but I was unable to carry out a full erase - it would only allow me to carry out a quick erase.
However, I did manage to carry out a full erase using Western Digital Data Lifeguard Diagnostic for DOS v5.27.
Last edited:
In very non-technical terminology the best way I can put it is this: SMR drives write 2 'lines' of data on each track, but the lines can't be re-written individually. So when one of the lines needs re-writing the other line has to be read into the buffer first, then written back into one line along with the overwritten data on the other.
For drives that change a lot this is a definite drawback. However it's not all bad, these drives are cheaper and I'm going to buy one for my steam library. As the games are downloaded the drive isn't going to be the bottle neck, my internet connection is. And once written the data won't be changed much, just read every time the game is loaded. An ideal WORM (write once read many) scenario. Also they have a much bigger cache, 256mb instead of 64mb for example.
I agree that this change to SMR should have been available to customers somewhere, but people are getting a bit hung up on this. For NAS use we should know what we're buying, however, I saw an SMR v CMR test on a Synolgy NAS where the tester replaced a drive and let the RAID rebuild. The SMR drive completed in under 6 hours where the CMR took 8 hours.
If a lot of writing is done to your NAS you should definitely use CMR drives, but I have a NAS as a media server thats written to rarely but streamed from a lot. I'd prefer SMR Red drives for this. And they are cheaper.
Don't jump on the bandwagon, but be aware of how you will use the drive before you choose.
Well it's an SMR drive but it depends on your usage. If you're going to fill it up with games or programs then it's a great drive to use. If it's going to be used for a lot of rewriting then it will be slower in some cases than a CMR. It depends if you're more interested in its write speed than it's read speed.
However, the warranty on this new WD Red Pro is not five years as it would be if I had bought it originally.
It is instead matched to the expiry date of the three year warranty for the original WD Red SMR drive that I returned (expires early 2023).
It is instead matched to the expiry date of the three year warranty for the original WD Red SMR drive that I returned (expires early 2023).
Don
And the SAGA takes another step...
https://www.servethehome.com/wd-red-plus-launched-with-cmr/
So not content with charging a premium for Reds in the first place, they now charge another premium to have non-shingled drives...
https://www.servethehome.com/wd-red-plus-launched-with-cmr/
So not content with charging a premium for Reds in the first place, they now charge another premium to have non-shingled drives...
The "newly launched" WD-Red-Plus are just the old CMR drives that have out for years with a "Plus" added on !
It would be more accurate if they had called them: WD Red +£
Cheeky buggers !
Has anyone here from the UK has any success dealing with WD to exchange SMR for CMR?
I tried to do it through the RMA process on their site but theres no way for me to tell them why im returning the disk so im worried ill receive a different SMR drive back, also they wanted to charge me £20 for it.
Tried to do online live chat but it seems to be US only, and the UK contact number doesnt work (Im guessing with it being 00800 number i have to ring from a landline which i don't even own anymore lol)
I've just tried doing a "support incident" on their site, hopefully i get some success like this.
This whole process has put me off WD for life, Seagate Ironwolfs all the way now.
I tried to do it through the RMA process on their site but theres no way for me to tell them why im returning the disk so im worried ill receive a different SMR drive back, also they wanted to charge me £20 for it.
Tried to do online live chat but it seems to be US only, and the UK contact number doesnt work (Im guessing with it being 00800 number i have to ring from a landline which i don't even own anymore lol)
I've just tried doing a "support incident" on their site, hopefully i get some success like this.
This whole process has put me off WD for life, Seagate Ironwolfs all the way now.
I called WD direct on 00 80055593733 which I got from here: https://support.wdc.com/contact_phone.aspx?lang=en
The number works on both landlines (free) and mobiles (chargeable)
From the above link:
Warranty and General Support
00800-27549338
WD Red / WD Gold
00 80055593733
Support Hours
Monday - Thursday
9AM - 7PM GMT
9AM - 7PM GMT
Friday
9AM - 5PM GMT
9AM - 5PM GMT
0080055593733 is what ive been trying, says number not recognised.
Im on Tesco mobile and have no safety buffer so should be able to ring chargeable numbers