Back in April, news broke that the major hard push sellers were all shipping and delivery hard drives based mostly on shingled magnetic recording (SMR) engineering into the buyer channel relatively than standard hard drives. SMR drives give considerably a lot less overall performance than CMR drives in a lot of benchmarks, and none of the businesses were becoming fully sincere and clear about which product or service traces employed SMR drives and which did not.
When all a few businesses were providing SMR drives to consumers without the need of fully disclosing it, Western Digital was the only firm providing them to NAS prospects. Seagate and Toshiba the two restricted their use of SMR to particular buyer drives.
WD Crimson is Western Digital’s NAS hard push brand name. These are practically the hard drives that Western Digital tells NAS users to get, which implies you’d assume them to be fantastic at executing the points a NAS is envisioned to do.
ServeTheHome ran a full suite of benchmarks on the 4TB WD Crimson NAS WD40EFAX (SMR) as opposed to the 4TB WD Crimson NAS WD40EFRX (CMR). If you operate typical storage benchmarks on the push, it seems very fantastic — slower than the EFRX, but not way too poor.
If you essentially push the push with anything like a 125GB file copy or a RAIDZ resilver test, put together to choose a holiday vacation while you wait around for the rebuild to comprehensive:
1,009 minutes is 16.8 hours. 13,784 minutes is 9.57 days.
The lawsuit, filed by Hattis Regulation, alleges that Western Digital shifted to SMR drives to save money with no regard for the overall performance affect this would have on its prospects or the fact that it would render the drives “fully worthless for their supposed purpose” (emphasis authentic).
Hattis Regulation alleges that SMR drives categorically fall short in RAID arrays by reporting excessive timeouts to the NAS product when requested to accomplish maintain random writes. SMR drives reportedly are unable to accomplish RAID scrubbing. When the WD Crimson challenge initial broke, numerous NAS RAID users stated they were not able to integrate an SMR push into a RAID array crafted with CMR disks due to overall performance difficulties and excessive timeouts. The Hattis Regulation lawsuit aligns with what we observed RAID users reporting at the time.
ServeTheHome’s exams clearly show that the EFAX push may get the job done in a desktop context, but it has no place in a RAID array. The fact that Western Digital is explicitly advertising and marketing the SMR-equipped EFAX relatives as appropriate for this function is tantamount to untrue advertising and marketing. It may not matter if you use an EFAX push as storage for a video digital camera feed, but these drives evidently have major difficulties in RAID arrays.
Western Digital has not commented on the scenario, but it continues to sell SMR WD Crimson drives into this area. We recommend keeping away from any goods in the WD Crimson line-up with the EFAX design number — use EFRX drives if you’re setting up a RAID array on these goods.
It is feasible that these drives accomplish sufficiently in some kinds of RAID array, but the STH exams exhibit that there are real-entire world instances the place they very considerably do not. That is not becoming communicated to Western Digital prospects. If you have acquired an SMR WD Crimson push and really feel you have been defrauded, you can sign-up as portion of the course action fit listed here.
Function picture of WD Crimson HDDs, not the unique types reviewed listed here.
Toshiba Clarifies Which of Its Buyer HDDs Use Shingled Magnetic Recording
Western Digital Comes Clean up, Shares Which Tricky Drives Use SMR
Western Digital, Seagate Are Shipping Sluggish SMR Drives Devoid of Informing Clients: Reviews [Updated]