what is smr and why should I care?

>>106724239
OP Please help a retard out here. I want two buy two HDDs for my NAS. Will be running them as a redundant BTRFS or ZFS or Raid 1. I just want a place to store my Data.

Options:
> Seagate Exos 22-28TB, Recertified
> Toshiba Cloud-Scale Capacity MG10F AFA 22TB
> Seagate IronWolf Pro NAS HDD

Which is the one I should be to not be retarded please.

sweet the schizo is back

>>106724250

SMR is basically a SSD firmware shoehorned into a HDD and it doesn't work. CMR HDD does everything linearly and evenly filling the tracks one after another unless it's fragmented after modifying/deleting intermediate data.

SMR writes data like this Host -> SMR Translator fragments data into random different ABAs, then a second layer translator scatters the fragments across random LBAs and randomly decides which of the heads will be responsible for the data. In short - it's the worst fucking thing imaginable. It can only work on SSD because it's 10x faster and can do 10 different things simultaneously while a HDD has only a couples of heads max. SMR has to work 10 times as hard as CMR for the same kind of operation and it's 100 times less reliable even for cold storage.

It's also impossible to defragment a SMR.

>>106724309

Seagate Exos, WD Ultrastar/Gold/Black, Toshiba MG. Either should do fine. WD Reds and Ironwolves are no longer what they used to be, now they're all hybrid SMR. Also, all Pro versions are basically reskinned enterprise versions (if they have 5 year warranty) and some shitty firmware on top like excessive head parking.

File: FvJu_5vWcAM-Er-.jpg (73 KB, 998x899)

73 KB JPG

Very kind of you, thank you!

What's the purpose of HDD except porn?

>>106724497
I need to store my 40gb soundfont from archive.org

>>106724497
Ownership vs Corporate Slavery

>>106724239
idgaf. It stores data. For speeds I have ssds or ramdisks.

>>106724250
Exotic way of storing more data, with drawbacks that writing and reading is a bit more troubled. Much like how erasing an SSD requires effort, SMR drives try and defer overwriting data.

>>106724497
I run Emby for TV shows so I don't have to subscribe to a bunch of different shit. Movies I would rather pop a Blu-ray in.

>>106724309
If you aren't using parity RAID, you can use whatever you want.

>>106724594
Well I'm most likely going to be using BTRFS because that's the easiest. Essentially I want a RAID 1 like setup.

>>106724598
Then you're fine. Get whatever fits your price point. Make sure you have backups. if you're using like 5 or 6, then it becomes more difficult.

>>106724577
>right click drive
>format
>uncheck 'quick format'
>?????
>PROFIT!

>>106724619
Ok...? I have cheap SMRs that I keep for archiving. I've had to fix up my incremental snapshots which meant sending multi TBs to them. They still work fine and they were cheap as hell. Would I use them for anything other than backups or relatively cold storage? No.

File: 1737574066813089.png (156 KB, 512x384)

156 KB PNG

>>106724239
God even hard drives are getting enshittified
In 10 years we'll be hyping up 2018-2022 8-16TB enterprise hard drives, "last good HDDs they made".

>>106724497
I use them for my 24/7 ip cams.

>>106724239
What about Toshiba MG drives? How can they afford to be $100 cheaper than WD/Seagate drives if they are truly enterprise too?

>>106724239
There is no way this isn't an automated post. This has been well known for years and was discussed for months when people found out.
Is the 4chan so dead and its staff so desperate to attract users that they resort to reviving old discussions like this to generate traffic?

>>106724497
4K movie rips

daily reminder that shitgate is still shittier by default.

>>106724366

No problem, I noticed that people still complain about low transfer speeds in RAID systems (not as slow as these dreaded SMR Reds but still much slower than genuine CMRs) but they simply don't realize that WD and Seagate didn't stop releasing SMRs disguised as CMR that work a bit faster that their earlier models.

>>106724695

It's done intentionally. Just think about - an ordinary drive (not SMR) can handle constant writes for days, handle random extra small block writes, handle OS operation and store data reliably for up to 15 years (decades when unpowered, just turn it on at least once in a year to make sure that mehanical parts don't get seized along with lubricans not losing its properties). Why would modern greedy manufacturers ever give us easy access to such amazing technology? They probably regret that they ever made HDDs so accessible back in the day.

>>106724771

Yes, these are good. Many Toshibas share the same platform with Hitachis which were bulletproof.

I fill my drives with stuff and then occasionally read something. Couldn't really give a damn.

>>106724878

Well, here's the problem.

SMR has a well known bug among data recovery specialists known as "READ DEFRAG". Even time you read a file it becomes more fragmented, so despite what they tell what's SMR good for, SMR when you just read stuff on it. You can test it yourself. And it's impossible todefragment a SMR drive. Check the amount of fragments before doing many reads and then check it again, you'll be surprised.

There's only one way to temporarily fix it, but it must be done regularly. Here's the program that "refreshes" SMR and SSD drives without deleting data https://www.puransoftware.com/DiskFresh.html

>>106724940

>SMR when you just read stuff on it

*SMR fragments data when you just read it.

Sorry for the typo. But you should get the idea.

>>106724695
hdd's aren't a consumer item anymore, what did you expect?

Just to be clear skitzoanon, if I throw 6x Exos X20 20tb SAS drives in a ZFS parity array I'll be good? Those drives are CMR right?

>>106725982
>exos x20
>coomsoomer level drive
Gee anon, what do you think?

File: lilguy.png (708 KB, 680x1040)

708 KB PNG

>>106724239
>HDD's are relevant and should matter if CMR
pic related
I work in the enterprise space
we only use HDD's for cold storage
even warm storage is flash based
ever recovered a 20TB drive?
I have, you're looking at days of downtime
ever rebuilt an array of 16TB drives?
days of degraded state
Every recover arrays of 8TB SATA SSD's?
2 hours degraded
hours not days
pic related is the workhorse above 8TB's

>>106726029
>Exos is consumer
It is literally seagates enterprise drives line, barracuda, ironwolf, and skyhawk are their coomsoomer level drives
>>106726061
Sorry I don't have >$50k to fit my homelab with 100tb of redundant storage, nor do I have the 40gb/s lan/san to take advantage of it

>>106724497
Cheaper storage
SSD only serves the purpose of faster boot time for me

>>106726061
99.99% if not plain 100% of consumer machines are sold with ssd's now, only ssd's or with the expectation at worst that only backups/archives are done to hdd's. and enterprise/commercial users did that even quicker.
why people expect to see fast hdd's today is just funny. i still use hdd's myself but i'm under no illusion as to why they don't sell things like raptors or even just regular performance drives anymore. any kind of application where performance is a concern was taken by ssd's.. years ago..

>>106726166
also-- keep in mind, you with your dozens of terabytes of storage at home are the exception. most people won't use more than about 2TiB of space, a 2TiB SSD is not expensive. most people do not need to use hdd's for anything. this leaves only cost/space-optimised hdd's, not performance ones.

>>106724309
>Will be running them as a redundant BTRFS or ZFS or Raid 1.
Just get MDD NAS or Enterprise drives if that's your use case, they're reskinned recertified Exos and much cheaper than non reskinned recertified ones.

>>106726061
how do I purchase on of these. I want 120TB hdd.

File: 1653417067693.png (111 KB, 659x692)

111 KB PNG

>>106724239
It's time to move to SSD and never look back.

>>106726236
Go ahead, make a 20TB SSD array

KYS schizo of the steppes

>>106726224
it's not the kind of item that has a publically available price, that's how you know you can't afford it. also it's an ssd, not a hdd

>>106724239
What seagate drive should I buy if I want CMR and what's so bad about SMR drives?

>>106724780
unfortunately the guy who spammed those threads had schizophrenia

>>106726256
you make it sound like it'd be super expensive, but i made a 16TB hdd array in 2010 which cost about the same amount as it would be to make a 16TB ssd array now

>>106724339
>it's 100 times less reliable even for cold storage.
That has to be incorrect.

It's not even clear if gold drives are any more long lasting in cold storage. I can't recall any very long cold storage tests eg you write to the drive and store 1000 for 5 years off and in hot & humid conditions ie basically a simulated garage or low cost industrial storage space. get them out and scan for any errors.

>>106726322
(gold drives are designed to work HARD, not necessarily last many years)

>>106726311
>i made a 16TB hdd array in 2010
Take a seat son

>>106724619
Formatting a drive erases literally none of the data in it. I wouldn't expect a windows user to know this stuff anyway but when you're "deleting" files or "formatting" drives, any idiot can recover all of it with barely any effort. You need to securely erase it (or shred it in case of HDD) which isn't as straight forward as clicking a button.

File: G01iPaNXwAABKEH.jpg (10 KB, 359x358)

10 KB JPG

>>106724339
huh i was always wondering why defraggler was detecting some of my HDDs as SSDs for the longest time...
Eh it's whatever I can still defrag em in there and I do every x amount of months anyways.
But at least that question is answered.

>>106726456
Unchecking quick format means the drive is fully formatted which means it was written over and zero'd
You need actual recovery hardware to get the drive to report back anything but the zero'd sectors

>>106724239
>even Toshiba ones
Fuggggggg

>>106724239
>Nearly all consumer level WD, Seagate and Toshiba drives are hidden SMR.
Hold up, where's the proof for Toshiba? You just said WD.

>>106724940
>smr drives fragment data just by being read
The worst of niggerjew timeline

>>106726061
I get downtime but what is degraded state and why is days of it bad

>>106726889
Why would you buy any other Toshibas but the MG line?

File: Selector_Guide_2880x2305.jpg (361 KB, 1500x1201)

361 KB JPG

>>106726061
THIS SHIT IS QLC LMAOOOOO

File: 1734378506369976.png (209 KB, 2243x1144)

209 KB PNG

>>106726224

SBFPF2BV0P12OP1

This is 122.88TB
It is £14,338.39 with VAT

IMO?
Buy this.
Free Shipping.

>>106726982
X300 is pretty good, still CMR

File: 1730019756570567.png (205 KB, 1214x591)

205 KB PNG

Or there is this one on Amazon that is cheaper but smaller

>>106724239
you still didn't open a single drive, if you truly care about your cause try bothering gaymers nexus since they are always looking for fresh scamdals

File: 1731968835233793.jpg (95 KB, 1200x628)

95 KB JPG

TAKE THE DRIVES TO A FACILITY AND PROVE IT

File: ebassy.png (172 KB, 460x460)

172 KB PNG

>>106724327
>>106724780
>>106726304
>>106726262
I remember this same thread being spammed here many times, one anon said it is known and discussed, then it's real? Or OP is just a bot or schizo?

>>106726959
>replace drive in raid array
>data in array is now incomplete
>raid array can use the data it still has to rebuild the data it lost and write it to the new drive
>the time between the old drive failing and the new drive having the data written to it is called a degraded state
>during this time the array hasn't lost any data, but it can't be used nor could it handle another failure
>and it takes days to write to a big HDD

>>106727252
if that was a concern for you you'd be using raid with more than 1 drive worth of redundancy. even my home NAS is raid6 (can handle two drive failures)

>>106727252
I see thank you for the explanation.

File: 1733937680568000.png (650 KB, 1024x518)

650 KB PNG

If Enterprise is moving all SSD and the SSDs are so 100TB huge why are they HDDs still in demand what do they want them for the prices keep going up reeeeeee

>>106724250
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shingled_magnetic_recording

>>106724239
wait till you learn about hamr drives

>>106727345
Hyperscalers are eating up HDDs
You don't need SSDs to store YouTube videos that no one watches or your 10gb of email spam

>>106727375
But WD said AI is why they had to raise the prices of them

>>106724877
Planned obsolescence is a cancer. We need to make this information more publicly known, and spread beyond the occasional thread on /g/. There should be riots in the streets until they bring back CMR for the masses. Fuck all drive manufacturers.

curious, couldn't you force the drive into cmr?
a low level format where you set the sectors as you want? probably lose some space in the process.
or is it embedded in the entire machinery or something.

>>106727144
yes, it's real. no, it's not a conspiracy. it's just enshittification.
smr drives are not the devil but they're only good for a single write. meaning cold storage. if you're constantly rewriting, they'll slow down to a crawl (50% of their original speed best case, less than 10% worst)
smr drives are also cheaper to produce. obviously every company is gonna pick smr over cmr because only a fraction of users is gonna notice.
the "good" news is that the technology is always playing catch with higher capacities. so if you want a cmr drive, just buy the largest one available at any given time. or the second, newest/biggest drives always have higher failure rates. I think 16tb drives are still "safe"
it's an open secret and there's not much anyone can do about it. a while ago segate was selling 10tb externals with mystery drives inside, it's a white label with zero information online and a seemingly unique firmware. someone tested it and maybe it's crm? who knows.

>>106728663
well since you say its real i'm convinced
but humor me for a moment, can you provide a single article from a reputable source instead of 2 year old forum posts?

>>106729132
about what, smr technology? because it's well documented on wikipedia and various other places
or about wd and seagate shitting out smr drives except for larger capacities? because I don't think there's a specific article, though all you have to do is check model numbers. that would be like asking
>proof intel is using x die size?
like, you could check for yourself, but there are better ways to go about it
there's nothing inherently nefarious about it, smr isn't illegal, it's just shit, most consumer grade parts are
and as technology advances there's no point in wasting money producing small cmr drives just like nobody makes 1gb sds anymore except for chinese sweatshops

>>106729301
>but there are better ways to go about it
no that's just speculating
>there's nothing inherently nefarious about it, smr isn't illegal
false advertising is a form of scam wich is illegal

>>106729423
so is saying that 2*2 = 4 but I doubt you'd bother checking the source
>false advertising
I don't think any of these companies advertise their drives as cmr or smr, that's the point
apple doesn't advertise what capacitor brand their phones use either, because that's not how it works
the box advertises the size, not the technology involved in making the drive
I'm not saying it shouldn't but that's a complaint you'd have to take up to the eu

>>106724239
>SMR has replaced it in nearly every capacity range up to 12TB
why would anyone buy hdd in anything less than 20TB in 2025
what would the purpose be?

Oh look another schizo thread

>>106727144
It's some idiot Russian who for some inexplicable reason was not shipped away to act as a bullet sponge in the Ukraine war, who keeps bitching that the 2TB $40 WD drives are no longer super duper high quality.

Here's a newsflash: read the product briefs, they'll tell you if a drive is SMR or CMR, whether they are noisy or not, whether they use helium or air.

File: CMRvsDHSMRvsSMR.jpg (751 KB, 1242x2507)

751 KB JPG

>>106727987

That's what I'm trying to do, but people call me a schizo instead.

>>106728368

>force the drive into cmr

Impossible they have different head structures, servo markings, firmware etc.

>>106728663
>>106729301

SMR is totally replacing CMR at least in user segment - that's a fact. For instance there are no more 2,5" CMR laptop drives, the same thing is happening with 3,5" drives but the manufacturer is blatantly lying about it when listing their Hybrid SMR drives as CMR.

>>106729872

You're fucking retarded, I did a proper research, I even asked people to test their drives and show the results and manufacturers are deliberately lying about drives' specs, they just want to cut costs for user segment.

Let me show you a difference between CMR (Toshiba MQ01) , Dynamic Hybrid SMR (Ironwolf which listed as CMR in datasheet) and SMR (W10SPZX). See the difference yourself, for instance this Seagate Ironwolf is Dynamic Hybrid SMR you can see it by these speed dips.

>>106730300
huh wow still not a single link to an article
really makes you think

>>106726576

Yes SMR basically works like a SSD on the firmware level, it's just it doesn't align with the mechanical nature of HDD and has inefficient read/write technology.

>>106726933

Exactly, people don't realize how shitty SMR is, it's not even suitable for cold storage and "Read only" because it has background FRAGMENTAION (yes not degragmentation despite what the manufacturers say). It's such a piece of shit technology that harms magnetic storage with its retarded untested firmware that can easily erase data without a chance to recover it. It suffer from "READ_DISTURB" just like SSD which wears out its cells each time you read it.

>>106726889

The ones with 64mb cache and MG are still good.

>>106726930

I didn't do enough research on Toshibas, but since Toshiba is under WD's control chances are that the're all the same.

>>106727366
Hahaha, holy shit why was i even born.

>>106726061
HDDs are pretty much relevant for non-critical or consumer systems.
Why would I use SSDs for warm storage if an HDD does the job at much higher capacities?
Not everyone is rebuilding arrays of 16TB drives. And how often does that happen anyway?

File: h42h543g3g4.png (296 KB, 800x800)

296 KB PNG

>>106730330

https://blog.westerndigital.com/dynamic-hybrid-smr/

They introduced Hybrid SMR in 2017 and started producing it in 2018-2019 (starting with Red EFAX). Of course they will hide this information and users must stumble upon all the underlying troubles themselves instead of blaming the manufacturer.

The funniest thing is that when they introduced Red Plus which were supposedly real CMR along with new Purples, they didn't change anything except concealing DH-SMR and locking the drive's tech mode to make it harder to detect T2 translator with a 190 module.

Random question: if trying to pick up used enterprise gear (HDD and SSD) are there any models in particular I should look out for or to avoid?

I know to generally avoid Intel SSDs and SAS anything because of power draw (electricity in my area is very expensive), but are Seagate drives completely untrustworthy due to all the counterfeiting that was going on, or are there specific vendor-branded models of SSDs it's a pain in the ass to upgrade?

>>106729508
>I don't think any of these companies advertise their drives as cmr or smr, that's the point
there's thinking and there are facts, here the WD red plus are explicitly listed as CMR so your point is bullshit
https://products.wdc.com/library/SpecSheet/ENG/product-brief-wd-red-plus-hdd.pdf
you didn't even bother checking

File: tellus.jpg (64 KB, 686x386)

64 KB JPG

Can you just tell us what drive brands and skus to buy instead of making these long confusing threads?

>>106730575
WD Reds aren't exactly coomsoomer drives, anon.
And further, WD was caught selling WD Reds with SMR.
For all I know, they still are - /g/ likes to shill for subhumans, scum and criminals, so it's plausible.

File: yXmXEWFX66GY_640x360[1].jpg (24 KB, 640x360)

24 KB JPG

>>106730589

>>106730646
>https://blog.westerndigital.com/wd-red-nas-drives/
Now shut your oral sex hole. The grown-ups are talking.

>>106730659
not the schizo anon but WDs red plus are infamously known to be hybrids specially below 12tb, that's why
>>https://blog.westerndigital.com/wd-red-nas-drives/
says "(CMR)-based" instead of just CMR like the red pros
and the regular reds it literally says right there that they're SMR

>>106730443
nobody is saying SMR drives don't exist
you're implying they aren't including this on datasheets
if they were selling SMR drives labeled as CMR that would be a huge lawsuit
you still haven't any proof of them lying about what type of disk they are

>>106730694
>not the schizo anon but WDs red plus are infamously known to be hybrids
I never heard of someone claiming that other than the russian schizo

OP, your own link to reddit shows this is a nothingburger

> EDIT 2: I contacted the maintainer of HDAT2 and provided a debug file for the drive. The maintainer confirmed that this is a false positive. Since there is no universal failsafe way to test this, HDAT infers SMR using device data and heuristics. In the case of this drive, it is indeed CMR.

>>106730694
>they said CMR-based instead of CMR!!!!
This is literal schizo talk

>>106730443
>The funniest thing is that when they introduced Red Plus which were supposedly real CMR
They also stopped using helium instead of air on the plus, WD are a bunch of kikes.

Is this you OP?
https://hddscan.com/blog/2020/hdd-wd-smr.html

>>106730300
So a simple performance test exposes even the most sophisticated SMR trickery?

>>106724239
will this make hdds cheaper?

File: j254h545.png (297 KB, 663x571)

297 KB PNG

>>106730716

>you're implying they aren't including this on datasheets

Then why does this "CMR" WD Purple drive has TRIM? What's the purpose of adding TRIM to a CMR drive?

>>106730734

>> EDIT 2: I contacted the maintainer of HDAT2 and provided a debug file for the drive. The maintainer confirmed that this is a false positive.

Ahahaha, it's like detecting high radiation level with a geiger counter and then the maintainer calls you and says that it's false positive.

Do you know why HDAT2 detected WD Red Plus as a SMR drive? Because it detected the second layer translator, media cache flushing and 190 translation module.

>>106730716

Data recovery specialists say that these drives that belong to Avalon RP Family (8TB Red Plus, Elements, Purple) are SMR with CMR emulation.

https://forum.hddguru.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=44377

Another WD40EAAZ
https://forum.acelab.eu.com/viewtopic.php?t=11217

"This is a CMR-emulation drive not an SMR drive, meaning that 190 does not change during drive's normal operation."
"Yes, WD increased the number of SMR zones, so the drive can re-write them much faster, performing very similar to a CMR drive."

It's basically SMR without dynamic 189 module which works a bit better when not under heavy loads or writing tons of small files.

>>106730976
SMR makes it cheaper to manufacture drives of a given capacity, there's literally no other reason to use it since its slower

>>106730895

No. This data is outdated and doesn't inbclude new EFPX/PURZ models. Also they don't tell which drive family these models belong to which is the most important part. For instance SMR Red EFAX belongs to Venice Family just like new Red Plus EFPX or Purples.

>>106730793

Yes, they also killed Hitachi, stole their tech and riddled it with their shitty Marvel firmware not to mention turning some of them into SMRs. Seagate did the same with Samsungs. Now they're complaining that they cannot keep up with production, delivery and they're forced to raise the prices.

>>106730976

Ahaha. Did you read the recent news? The worst part hasnt even begun.


https://www.trendforce.com/news/2025/09/15/news-western-digital-raises-hdd-prices-amid-soaring-demand-shipping-delays-of-up-to-10-weeks/

>>106730998
WD40EAAZ is an OEM drive with no datasheet available
Where is it being sold as a CMR drive?

>>106730998

maybe trim is for buffer memory why could not 64MB? 256MB? have trim

>>106730905

Yes, but the manufacturers have acknowledged it and they will make their SMR work in a more "clever" way to bypass any smr detection tests. They already removed the 189 module which was a integral part of early SMRs firmware.

You can test it with r.tester or there's even a better way to do it:

1) Clone any OS to such drive
2) Fill it up to 90%
3) Try moving around large sized folders with lots of files (from desktop to my docs etc)
4) Delete intermediate files or replace them with larger ones
5) Find any intermediate files that can be easily modified (like some text file), increase its size drastically.

Or just copy like hundreds of thousands of small files to it. The speed dips in the graph will tell you more than everything I describe here.

I don't get it, why do you guys call the OP schizo? I remember glancing over these threads years ago and I did find some articles where (IIRC) WD admitted they had been selling SMR HDDs as CMR.
Tbh I gotta say that I have no clue what this means

>>106731056

It's a drive you can find inside early WD Elements Desktop externals.

>Where is it being sold as a CMR drive?

https://rml527.blogspot.com/2010/10/hdd-platter-database-western-digital-35_9883.html

>>106731086

No, such large bugger is to conceal SMR speed drops, TRIM helps SMR to find empty tracks faster while a CMR can work easily with 0mb buffer.

https://vexus.com.br/en/blog/the-trim-command/

Also TRIM makes it impossible to recover accidentally deleted data or if such drive has gone through chdks due to buggy firmware which automatically trims stored data and makes it unrecoverable.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DataRecoveryHelp/comments/1iazgrg/3_of_my_nonos_ssds_wiped_after_a_chkdsk_r_was_ran/

Such thing will never happen to a CMR drive even after several formattings.

>>106730300
>You're fucking retarded, I did a proper research, I even asked people to test their drives and show the results and manufacturers are deliberately lying about drives' specs, they just want to cut costs for user segment.

>CMR (Toshiba MQ01)
2.5" drive from 2014, goes for $15 on ebay. garbage.

>Ironwolf
Seagate consumer drive. garbage.

>SMR (W10SPZX)
2.5" drive from 2017, goes for $15 on ebay. garbage.

You are testing $15 drives. This is not the user segment. This is the "let's throw our surplus factory defects on the market" segment.
Of course they will be garbage, it's because they are meant to be cheap above all else; even if they function that's a huge plus.

Stop buying garbage and you won't end up with garbage performance. None of the Red Plus drives, the white labels, the Golds, and the Toshiba MG drives I bought were ever SMR. That's because I'm not an illiterate russian retard and I can READ THE PRODUCT DATA SHEET. All WD Blue, Red, Purple, Red Plus, Red Pro and Gold are clearly marked as SMR or CMR on the product sheets. Toshiba MG drives are as well. Seagate Ironwolfs were not the last time I checked, but Seagate is garbage.

besides who the fuck even buys 2.5" HDDs? Just stick a 50$ crucial 1tb SSD in there, it will by 10-50x faster. Stop spending on Vodka for a week and you'll have saved enough money to buy one.

>>106730300
>For instance there are no more 2,5" CMR laptop drives,

Those were replaced with SATA drives. It's not an SMR thing. Nobody just gives a fuck about 2.5" HDDs because they are completely fucking useless.

>>106731042
>Seagate did the same with Samsungs.

Samsung killed themselves, if you had used their F1/F2/F3 drives you'd remember this.

F1 drives had something like 60% failure rate. We threw out so many of them. Even the awful shit WD Greens with their 5 second head parking were godsends in comparison.

File: colors.jpg (216 KB, 1920x683)

216 KB JPG

>>106731234

Ahaha, you're even more retarded thatn I initially thought.

These color stickers and categories ala "nas, survelliance" don't mean shit. The only thing that indicates drive's recording technology is the disk family.

For instance take a look at Red Plus, Blue, Purple, Red. They're all the same drives with same internals and some slightly different fw settings. They belong to Venice/VeniceRP family which has SMR hardware. Some old Reds, Greens, Purples, Blue belong to Diablo3S family despite being seen as "different drives for different purposes".

>This is not the user segment. This is the "let's throw our surplus factory defects on the market" segme

Again, you're a fucking retard. There's no such thing as user/enterprise segment just like there's no "nas/survelliance" drive, all CMR drives read and write exactly the same say. WD Ultrastar/Gold uses ancient Hitachi drives that belong to Vela platform, back in the day these drives weren't considered as "enterprise" level, they were simply presented as ordinary very well built drives. Same goes to Toshiba MG which are based on Hitachi's Mars platform. The only difference is that what was considered ordinary back then is now considered "enterprise/server grade". They will tell you 500tb/year workload, shock/vibration sensors, 5 year warranty, - that's what an ordinary classic CMR drive could do (even some WD BLue EZEX or Green) easily back in the day.

>I can READ THE PRODUCT DATA SHEET. All WD Blue, Red, Purple, Red Plus, Red Pro and Gold are clearly marked as SMR or CMR
>Stop buying garbage

So is Red Plus garbage? Of course WD would never deceive their customers again like theiy did when first introducing smr reds?

>buys 2.5" HDDs? Just stick a 50$ crucial 1tb SSD

Good luck storing or recovering data on flash. Also Crucial MX500 and 870 Evos are TLC garbage with high failure rates. Good luck finding any MLC/SLC SSD for a reasonable price.

>>106731165
>It's a drive you can find inside early WD Elements Desktop externals.
Oh, so it wasn't advertised as CMR
Go figure

>irrelevant link that doesn't answer the question

>>106724940
>Even time you read a file it becomes more fragmented
How is that even possible?

File: hd204ui.png (113 KB, 688x788)

113 KB PNG

>>106731285

Seagate Grenadas were even worse, oh and that dreaded ST3000DM001 and Seagate is still around. Samsung did have some bad drive models, but overrall Samsung HDDs were very solid. I loved their F3, F4 Ecogreen drives (HD103SJ, HD204UI). Some of them lasted until 130k+ hours and they were much colder than other drives of that era.

File: 1755894938479111.png (126 KB, 992x872)

126 KB PNG

>>106730976
>>will this make hdds cheaper?

no

File: ZRdJieWi.jpg (771 KB, 2400x1200)

771 KB JPG

>>106731396

SSD's "read disturb" bug carried over to SMR HDD.

https://www.transcend-info.com/embedded/technology/read-disturbance

Instead of wearing out cells it fragments the data on the platter because logical and physical adresses are not aligned unlike in CMR due to different level translations. File fragments are scattered all over the place causing the head to sweep like crazy and wear out faster.

>>106731390

It's a rare model with no datasheet, but it's based on VeniceRP like SMR EFAX, you can see it yourself. Modern "CMR' Red Pluses and purples look exactly the same (you can see the image 3 posts above)

>>106731396
he made it up

>>106731524
>The high voltage applied on the neighboring transistor gates attracts electrons to the floating gate, slightly raising the cell threshold voltage with each read, and “disturbing” the cells in the process. Over time, the threshold voltage of a cell in an “un-programmed” state, which means that it stores a 1, increases and accumulates enough to eventually shift to a “programmed” state, which means that it stores a 0.
how does this affect hard drives? article is explicitly nand

File: j624qh54h54.png (210 KB, 640x360)

210 KB PNG

>>106731533

>he made it up

Here a pic and a video from a ukrainian data recovery specialists how shows how does a SMR work and how it fragments data during read/write.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV0nJLOruxM

If you have the patience you can watch it with subtitles and see the scheme yourself.

>>106726992
>he unironically thinks qlc is worse than an hdd
reddit brain

>>106731554

Watch the video below your post or take a look at the picture attached. I already said that SMR is basically SSD firmware forcefully attached to a HDD with all the drawbacks, bugs and overrall instability. SSD firmware thinks that it can chaotically scatter data on platters just like it does on flash blocks (for SSD it doesn't matter because it works 10 times faster) but it doesn't register that drive heads cannont move as fast and do 10 different things at time at such fast rate. Hence all these freezes, slowdowns, data losses, firmware/head damage.

>>106724771
Toshiba's tech is rather dated for the most part. So I heard. It's not a terrible thing.

>>106724239
this is not good
at all
>>106731572
>during read
how can that be?

also, sata ssds are not being made anymore it seems, due to 'look how clean my build is' npc retards
so now i am forced to use hdds again

what other horror schemes will they come up with

>>106730998
>Data recovery specialists say that these drives that belong to Avalon RP Family (8TB Red Plus, Elements, Purple) are SMR with CMR emulation.
and he's literally the only person on the internet talking about CMR emulation he might as well be your roommate in a mental asylum

>>106724239
send this to gaymersnexus

If only you had proof that CMR drives are actually SMR, but so far I have yet to see any.

>>106731653
>sata ssds are not being made anymore it seems
what
unless you're looking for high ends drives, sata ssds are still plentiful
some good shit too like samsung evos
unless you really are looking for high end stuff, in which case you should get an nvme already

>>106731794
I think op is just a moron
yes, 90% of all drives smaller than 16tb are going to be smr, but that's just how it is
also I think every company lists smr vs cmr in their datasheet

>>106731510
>even more price hikes
JFC. fuck these jews...

The funny thing is this schizo posts his thread here and most people just make fun of him and his mental illness but he never posts this somewhere where people would actually provide evidence that he's wrong like r/DataHoarders

>>106731809

i has 2.5" wd 7200rpm in usb3 aluminium case thats nearly perfect

File: u7n01vS.jpg (718 KB, 2570x720)

718 KB JPG

>>106731730

>how can that be?

Look at the pics. Here's another video of the same ukrainian data recovery specialist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67arwgtTyxA

He performed a read test to a SMR drive and after the read test the amount of fragmentation has increased from 42837 to 45958. Read test doesn't differ from reading and it doesn't do anything to data or file structure.

Also he did a cell refresh to a SMR drive (which is designed for SSDs) and it reduced fragmentation from 32386 to 299 which prooves that SMR works just like SSD but 10 times slower than SSD and 10 times less reliably than CMR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZSZ8I5pg3U

>>106731371
>So is Red Plus garbage? Of course WD would never deceive their customers again like theiy did when first introducing smr reds?
Not him but the funny thing about WD fucking people over with Reds is that they never actually claimed those SMR Reds were CMR in product sheets, they just started shipping new SMR Reds and people just assumed it was CMR because the idea of SMR NAS disk is retarded. It was absolutely scummy from them and even thought they never directly lied they still got sued for it.
What you are claiming however would be QUITE LITERALLY the biggest scandal in HDDs ever. And you have been claiming this crap for months now without a shred of evidence and exclusively on /g/.
You refuse to contact anybody that would actually do any form of real investigation with your "evidence" you refuse to post about in communities like r/DataHoarders that would also be very interested in this. You just come here shitpost about for a few days, gets called a retard and a schizo and samefags asking yourself questions and then cry about it.

Either actually do something or stop shitting up this board with your mental illness

>>106731828
>>106731846

You' re a retarded bootlicker who would gladly accept shady companies sell their shady untested shit such as hidden SMR. I posted mountain of evidences (write speed graphs, buffers size, trim function, disk families). The reason why I can't find anything in english speaking website because google is hiding desired results and westerners are ok with taking it up in their asses from companies fucking people over.

>90% of all drives smaller than 16tb are going to be smr, but that's just how it is

You dumbfuck, there are still genuine CMR 1-8TB models, just need to be sure they either have no trim or a 256mb buffer. It doesn't matter what these shady fucks write in their datasheets, practice shows that they still sneak SMR drives into drives that are intended to work in NAS, RAID which is fucking criminal.

If anyone wishes then he can duplicate my posts on reddit or other forums because I have no reddit account and I hate reddit. I'm pretty sure that you will reveal made unpleasant surprises deliberately hidden by manufacturers.

>>106731952
see >>106731944
You're full of shit and you have been full of shit since you started shitposting here in back in April.

>>106731952
>he actually thinks anything with big cache means SMR
Please do the world a favor and go die in the war you're involved in

>>106731944

>Either actually do something

I have no power to do anything.

Even if WD gets caught red handed they will not stop fucking us over. WD is a monopoly that doesn't have any competitors, they can do whatever kind of evil that comes to their mind.

I read posts on WD support forum and other forums and WD refuses to explain why are they introducing new disk families with trim and 256mb buffer that behave differenly from older CMR models. They even delete some invonvenient questions. I saw users complaining that these new "CMR" work slower in RAID, NAS than some ancient CMRs.

I can only spread the word here, I did post on some foreign tech forums and people tend to agree with me, but not in the western part of the internet, where people trust companies more that anything else.

My last point will be - don't trust the data sheet, buy server drives with 5 year warranty while you can and take care of your older pre-2020 drives because even used small capacity ones will be worth their weight in gold.

>>106732014
you're just doomposting for the sake of it then, if we had actual proofs we could make the normisphere aware and trigger a class action against them
graphs and random posts from forums are not enough for that
WD is not a monopoly, Seagate and Toshiba would gladly take a bigger slice of the market given the chance, they can lose a lot of money and customers from this I don't really have to explain it

>>106724327
Corporate cutting corners to save pennies is a tale as old as time, you little tard.

>>106732072

If I could I'd ask WD themselves to provide random small block write tests of their new "CMR" drives. I wish I was a hallucinating schizo, but I'm afraid that reality is much worse than my worst imagination.

There are proofs or you can reveal it by yourself.

Take two hard drives for instance HUS726T4TALE6L4 (True CMR) and WD40EFPX (Pseudo-CMR) and test them with via r.tester using smr detection scripts I listed above.

Another way would be via Victoria 5.37 by choosing DDD write test "Data Distortion Detection". This mode writes a pattern (AA 55 AA 55).

Or copy about 3,5TB of 1000000 files to both drives and compare the speed graphs, delete the intermediate files and see how long it'd take to delete them for each drive.

I personally don't want to waste money on shady stuff unless I'm 100% sure that the product corresponds to its specs.

>>106732072

>Seagate and Toshiba

Toshiba is under WD control and uses Marvel firmware. Seagate has cartel agreement with WD. They're all the same.

>>106728368
low level formats haven't been possible on consumer drives in a very long time

>>106731600
buddy you're insane saying the same shit over and over. What you said had nothing to do with voltage gates in a nand flash memory cell being relevant to HDDs.

>>106732224
If you can prove any of this (which would be trivial to do if it were true), you'd be rich and famous by Tuesday week.
Instead, you're repeating the same thing over and over like Tay before she euthanized, on an anonymous schizophrenia circlejerk imageboard.
Reflect on why that is. We have.

>>106732240

I didn't say that HDD having memory cells. I said that SMR HDD has "read_defrag" issue during LBA to CHS command which works just like in any SSD (SSD unlike HDD doesn't require defragmentation). SSD firmware (which is present in all SMRs) cannot write or read data on SMR HDD without fragmenting it first.

>>106732256
>If you can prove any of this (which would be trivial to do if it were true), you'd be rich and famous by Tuesday week

Yeah just like one of those Epstein victims and witnessess who mysteriously died or dissapeared while attempting to provide the evidence.

There's no point, companies have the power to silence anyone. And it's getting tiring. Unfortunately, I'm only one person, not a team. Looks like everyone's ok with getting scammed so far we're running circles. I'm tired and this will be my last post. Do whatever you want with the information I provided or ignore it. Time will tell if I was wrong.

Is a WD Gold drive like this safe to buy? Or do I need to hunt down some refurbished shit from 2018 if I want CMR?
https://www.newegg.com/gold-wd8005fryz-8tb-enterprise-nas-hard-drives-7200-rpm/p/N82E16822234563

>>106731952
show me the datasheet then nigger
both wd and seagate quite clearly list which drives are smr and which drives are cmr
yes, smr drives suck but most companies will go for them regardless because they're cheaper to produce
unless they can't which is why larger capacity drives are still cmr

>physical data compression
it was supposed to be a joke

>>106732299
you're a fucking retard

File: 56.gif (1.58 MB, 240x202)

1.58 MB GIF

>>106724239
i have a 12TB version of that HDD and it just disappeared from my win10 installation. first i got access denied errors and then after reboot it was gone.
first time WD has let me down.

(i haven't had time to check the cable yet but it was new)

>>106732454
wd drives are usually good but they're responsible for the worst line of drives ever: spyglass
look it up, their smaller drives are absolute trash
I don't think 12tb drives are spyglass but still

>>106731809
Wat?

>>106731809
evos with those firmware problems have been sitting on shelves for many years now
nobody will buy that

not using that even if you give it for free
let alone buying evos

>>106724505
based

>>106727391
AI is never the real reason for anything.

>>106730587
The ones that end in Pro. That's literally it. The only people having problems are the ones trying to scrounge the discount bin without understanding what they're buying.

>>106730587
buy ultrastars and enterprise drives, not prosumer crap like wd (color). do not buy cmr or smr drives, try to wait for hamr drives next year if you can. make sure you have a huge ssd cache, ideally some kioxia or samsung or crucial enterprise nvme in raid.

>>106731096
are these raw block writes or are you blaming an aspect of almost every pre-CoW filesystem on the secret smr they apparently want to get you with

>>106732014
>take care of your older pre-2020 drives because even used small capacity ones will be worth their weight in gold
Poorcope, hard drives are not an investment.

>>106733880
I mean WD "color" is not all "prosumer". WD Gold is enterprise. I think my WD8004FRYZ is actually just a Hiatchi Ultrastar model.

>I boughted a white label external drive and it was SMR D: The Thread

>>106732390
Ahh yes, all the thousands of alleged victims all turned up dead.
Narcissistic personality disorder at its finest. You're not important, your persecutory delusions aren't real, and what the walls are telling you to post is delusional.

>being mad about cheaper storage
It reads at same speed as CMR and that's all that matters.

>>106733953
The only enterprise drives I've ever seen fail were WD Golds.
It's why I almost exclusively buy Exos, occasionally substituting in Ironwolf Pros when the $/TB ratio is especially compelling.

>>106734252
if you haven't seen a particular drive brand fail you haven't worked with enough drives for your opinion to matter
all drives fail

>>106734393
>every other drive lasts its 5 years in service except wd golds
>"n-no that doesn't count because i hate seagate"
Consider suicide, NEET.

File: DiskInfo64S_2021-03-12_23(...).png (560 KB, 1002x752)

560 KB PNG

>>106734252
Then you haven't seen any enterprise drives that aren't WD Golds. All enterprise drives fail.
Also lasting long isn't exclusive to enterprise drives either. A consumer drive without "fail on demand" technology is gonna last too.

>>106734405
See >>106734404

>>106734416
Maybe you should look in the mirror, retard.
>n-no that doesn't count because I hate WD
All drives regardless of manufacturer can fail. If you're not buying SMR garbage then the chance of failure is going to be low.
I don't have a single drive in the past 20 years that has failed in less than 5 years regardless of brand. That includes Maxtors and IBM Deathstars. I have WD drives too, but obviously none of mine are SMR garbage nor do I have head parking enabled on any of them.

>>106734454
You post like you expect SSD longetivity from a cheapest HDD.

>>106734454
>accuses others of being unable to read
>cant see >>106734404
See >>106734404.

File: deathstars.png (81 KB, 1262x552)

81 KB PNG

>>106734472
You get "SSD longevity" from the cheapest HDD unless you're comparing some top shelf SLC SSD to dogshit SMR drives with head parking. I mean what the hell is SSD longevity? Both mechanical drives and SSDs last maybe 5-10 years in constant use realistically. At that point you should be backing up your data either way.
Also what the fuck does that have to do with anything? All I said was that WD isn't a brand unique in their enterprise drives failing. If we started talking about anecdotes then I've only owned a single Seagate drive since around 2000 and that drive failed in less than 2 years. I don't go around saying Seagate is shit because of my anecdote. Maybe it is, but I only had a single drive lmao.

>>106734517
That's funny. I did not accuse you of being unable to read, I accused you of being what you accuse other people of being. Which is a blind hater for a brand. You apparently are unable to read, though. That's the funny part.

>>106734545
ok retard, I have SSDs that are older than you still running

>>106734555
Feel free to post the power on hours for one.

>>106734561
power on hours mean nothing when unlike a HDD, it can power off every second.

>>106734578
That's one way to say you were lying all along.
I have HDDs that are over 20 years old in cold storage that I could attach to a computer right now and they'd work and I could get access to the crap on them.
Power on hours don't matter after all, because they can power off.

>>106734596
Glad you figured out how to use SMR drives, you can fuck off now.

>>106731371
>Ahaha, you're even more retarded thatn I initially thought.
>These color stickers and categories ala "nas, survelliance" don't mean shit.

Yeah I stopped reading there because you completely miss the fucking point.

Feel free to keep bitching about your 15$ drives being garbage. I probably have more SSD space in my machine than you have HDDs because I'm not a cheap russian fuck.

>>106734610
What are you trying to cope with here lol

>>106732014
>I have no power to do anything.

Because you have fucking nothing except a mental illness. Do proper fucking research on the drives, correlate your data and publish it in a paper, then send it over to legitimate hardware testers to verify. Even if a fucking youtuber like gamernexus covered it, it would create a stir in the industry. That's a power you do have, or would have, if you weren't a retard.

bitching about it on /g/ non stop won't do anyone any favors, you'll just get banned for spamming the same schizo garbage over and over.

File: wd8-toasty.png (56 KB, 674x765)

56 KB PNG

>>106733953
>I think my WD8004FRYZ is actually just a Hiatchi Ultrastar model.

Not all Golds are the same. Your WD8004FRYZ is a US7SAN8T0 which is a very very garbage product line. Picrel is one of my old white label drives, also a US7SAN8T0. It's a helium drive they put into air case, as a result it gets more air friction than it can handle and it will run extremely loud and extremely hot.
You can spot these on the datasheet by looking at their idle sound level. If a drive is some 34dB at idle when all the ones in the same family are 20dB (helium) or 24-30dB (air) then that's one of the trash WD drives that will run way too hot.

The replacement WD8005FRYZ is a 3VAHA2 drive which uses denser platters so it doesn't have that issue... but it's also SMR.

Honestly any drives not using helium is bound to be garbage nowadays (you can spot them on the datasheet by them having 20db idle sound). But those are all 7200rpm so under load they'll get very loud and clicky. I can hear my 12TB helium drives from the other room when they start doing random reads.

>>106734545
>You get "SSD longevity" from the cheapest HDD
>unless you're comparing ... dogshit SMR drives with head parking.

The cheapest HDDs are dogshit SMR drives, so you just argued against yourself basically.

>>106734596
>I have HDDs that are over 20 years old in cold storage that I could attach to a computer right now

If they spent 20+ years in cold storage then you'd most likely couldn't attach to your computer because they'd still use IDE. SATA connector only really started becoming a thing just then (and SATA 1.0 really just used IDE emulation, it only became good with SATA 2.0), so they'd have to be at most 20 year old, not 20+.

And yes I too still have 1990s drives that still work but I also have an Intel 330 SSD here that works fine, none of this means nothing.

>>106724239
>CMR-emulation drive
the industry needs to crash

>>106724339
>SMR is basically a SSD firmware shoehorned into a HDD and it doesn't work.
Can they stop putting fucking overcomplicated microcontrollers into everything?

>>106734850
I have IDE, the only thing I seem to be lacking is IDE cables... not sure where they are. Only found a single working cable when I did a quick browse just now.

>>106724239
The bullshit started a few years ago when WD started selling SMR WD Red models, basically drives unsuited for NAS usage labeled as drives for NAS, I see this has progressed further now.
What's even more bullshit is that QNAP doesn't even list WD Red as recommended anymore and try to steer users towards the more expensive gold ones

>>106724339
My HDD has 16 heads, why do you need to lie like this?

>>106734802
It's certainly not quiet but not a single one of my WD Gold drives is, and temperature is only 36C which is comparable to WD103KRYZ and every other drive I've ever owned. Much lower than my NVME SSD that's for sure. I've never seen a mechanical HDD that is reporting temps below 36C, so I wouldn't call that extremely hot. I'm used to seeing 40C.

>>106731596
Leave SSD unpowered for a few years, all data gone.

>>106732014
> I have no power to do anything.
There is a way, but it requires one to follow in the footsteps of saint Luigi.

>>106724541
All mime started crapping out after months or in the last case weeks of use.
None of my old ones have died.
I guess this is why.

>>106724239
If they switched WD Purple drives to SMR, I will lose my shit for not buying one in 2019 for my home surveillance.

>>106731371
>Again, you're a fucking retard. There's no such thing as user/enterprise segment just like there's no "nas/survelliance" drive, all CMR drives read and write exactly the same say. WD Ultrastar/Gold uses ancient Hitachi drives that belong to Vela platform, back in the day these drives weren't considered as "enterprise" level, they were simply presented as ordinary very well built drives. Same goes to Toshiba MG which are based on Hitachi's Mars platform. The only difference is that what was considered ordinary back then is now considered "enterprise/server grade". They will tell you 500tb/year workload, shock/vibration sensors, 5 year warranty, - that's what an ordinary classic CMR drive could do (even some WD BLue EZEX or Green) easily back in the day.
Big if true. I got two 14TB MG drives and I found it curious how they remind me of older SATA HDDs in operation.

>>106735356
>it's this retard again
shut the fuck up

>>106731879
This isn't proof of anything, it could just be outdated software or software with outdated values. Where is the actual physical proof?

>>106731846
If only he had proof.

>>106732495
my google-fu on the duck is too weak to find any good video talking about why spyglass hdds are bad

>>106727273
Adding more parity doesn't mean rebuilds are faster. Larger disk arrays are only going to get slower to recover from degraded.

File: One Smug to Ring them all.jpg (10 KB, 325x325)

10 KB JPG

>>106731371
>just like there's no "nas/surveillance" drive
Sure there is. It's when you run purple drives in a nas. It's what the NSA does for their surveillance archives.

>>106736627
i didn't mean that to suggest it would be faster, just that losing one drive in a raid6 doesn't result in it becoming degrated. it'll still potentially take days to become fully intact again, but in the mean time another drive can fail without data loss, unlike raid1/5

>>106731510
What happened to the 3d optical disks?

>>106724239
I hate SMR, the people who made it ,and especially the people who sell it without labeling it as such
While on vacation I needed a hard drive to clone my SSD since wangblows corrupted itself.
First got a portable HDD. Was running at the expected speed for a minute and then became SLOWER THAN A SD CARD.
Returned that shit (somehow managed to convince the retarded cashiers it's garbage and borderline fraud), then found the one shop on the island that sold HDDs that were CMR (ofc had to check online since they don't say that anywhere else).
Cloning went just fine with this, constant 300-400mbps.

File: Dread.jpg (96 KB, 840x700)

96 KB JPG

>>106736759
>wangblows corrupted itself
Why don't you carry a live OS usb with you at all times like a normal person?

>>106736806
kek
In the end, I had an old backup so I did manual surgery and used system files from the backup
It worked but it was not happy about what I did. Didn't matter since most of the shit that broke was windows shitware apps.

File: 1f1415402c47b5d064d622c7c(...).jpg (32 KB, 736x736)

32 KB JPG

SMR stores more porn per dollar and play them back just fine. I don't know why people mald this hard.

>>106736866
it stores porn slightly slower so it's le bad o algo

We've had HDD vs SSD threads every week for months now.

What is the verdict?

SSDs if you care about noise?

>>106736954
high quality SSDs for everything if you have the money
CMR HDDs if you just want bulk storage that is still quite fast
SMR HDD or low quality SSD if you are a poorfag or don't care about low speed or reliability

>>106736969
A decision tree could be made for this.

I don't like the flowchart in pcbg.

>>106736969
storage capacity > all

>>106736676
Too slow.

>>106735524
NVR is a reasonable use case for SMR drives assuming you test and it can actually sustain your write requirements long term. Or just use Red Pro / IronWolf Pro in everything. Bitching about 'the last good hdd' is retarded. HDD is fine. Stop getting ripped off by fake mid grade consumer slop.

File: 1526076467981.png (304 KB, 646x595)

304 KB PNG

Is this the reason I haven't seen any 16 - 18TB Exos drives popup at reasonable prices across various sites?
Either everything is sold-out, or it's some x14/x16 old-stock bullshit.

>>106737301
You don't determine what a reasonable price is.

>>106736866
>“There is no talent so ardently supported, nor generously rewarded, as the ability to convince parasites they are victims.” — Thomas Sowell
The problem is, it became self-sustaining: now parasites convince THEMSELVES that they're victims, always looking for ways to go "look at me im a poor victim" - and if they can't find one, they'll invent one.
When you realize that literally everything wrong with the modern world comes directly from this, it's impossible to unsee.

>>106737377
$210 - 250.
That was the going price for x18 Recertified/Refurbished Exos drives for a few months. Now they are all sold out, and most sites are pushing older x14/x16 drives for $250 - 290.

>>106724239
Lmao. Didn't they already get sued for selling SMR as CMR like just a few years ago?
Their pricing hasn't dropped in years and they're still scamming us. Lol

General question about hard drives: What causes sectors to go bad? With SSDs I can understand the cell being worn out and unable to hold a strong enough charge but why would a section of a hard disk become unusable?

>>106737818
The magnetic particles of that section being worn out and unable to hold a strong enough magnetic charge. Same thing.

>>106737912
Oh. So excessive writes is the cause? Great, I thought I only had to worry about writing too much to SSDs.

>>106737818
There are more reasons than one, like for example a loose particle could be inside the hard drive, end up in the exact wrong place instead of the filter and damage the platters.

>>106724239
>Here are the proofs and how they conceal SMR
> contacted the maintainer of HDAT2 and provided a debug file for the drive. The maintainer confirmed that this is a false positive. Since there is no universal failsafe way to test this, HDAT infers SMR using device data and heuristics. In the case of this drive, it is indeed CMR.

Jesus fuck Op, did you even read the links?

Reddit and their hunches are always wrong. I remember reading a thread freaking out about Vultr changing their ToS. It was a nothing burger, but everyone was hysterical.

Stop agreeing with reddit hysteria and think for yourself.

>>106738452
I mean what this guy is talking about is actually happening. I don't know if it's to the degree he's hysterical about, but originally WD Blues, for example, were decent drives. But seeing as WD Greens had a reputation for being dogshit, they got rid of the blues and replaced them with greens which they now called Blues. All of this is just a logical next down the road from there.

>>106724239
Wow, it's like they actively want to be replaced by SSD storage instead.

>>106738561
cite your sources that don't have an "edit 122 guys... I was wrong this whole time (and paid by Crucial)"

Green becomes Blue, how?

Logically the next step? I guess you work in WD management and aren't just some nobody?

I'll buy WD and there is nothing you can cry about to stop me.

>>106738704
>I'll buy WD and there is nothing you can cry about to stop me.
This, except Seagate.

>>106731371
>Good luck storing or recovering data on flash.
I seem to be storing data just fine on my flash drives right now.

>recovery
Just restore your backup like a sane person.

>Also Crucial MX500 and 870 Evos are TLC garbage with high failure rates.
Crucial probably, 870 evos are fine.

>Good luck finding any MLC/SLC SSD for a reasonable price.
TLC is fine, they have so high write endurance that you could keep using them for 40 years and not run out of write cycles, and that's on consumer garbo drives. Enterprise TLC drives have 3+ petabyte write endurance.

>There's no such thing as user/enterprise segment just like there's no "nas/survelliance" drive, all CMR drives read and write exactly the same say.
The NAS/surveillance categories absolutely exist and they are based on firmware settings allowing for different error timeouts. A normal drive encounters a bad sector and will try to recover it for a minute, on a NAS setup this results in dropping out of RAID and on a surveillance drive it means a minute of camera footage lost. So they tweak the firmwares for less aggressive error recovers on NAS, and to ignore write errors almost completely on camera drives so they can just keep writing.

>They will tell you 500tb/year workload, shock/vibration sensors, 5 year warranty, - that's what an ordinary classic CMR drive could do (even some WD BLue EZEX or Green) easily back in the day.
Horse shit, Greens dropped like flies back in the day, it's why everybody instantly jumped on Reds when they came out because they were far more reliable. Greens were garbage even after disabling head parking.
There may be little performance **today** because they just use the same platform on all drive classes, on account of the only use for HDDs being "we can't afford/need SSD performance". But there used to be huge differences back in the 00s and even in the 10s.

>>106738704
>Green becomes Blue, how?
I recall one of the Blue series being a complete mishmash of random drives from all segments lumped together. But that was years ago.

File: 1747819116208974.png (75 KB, 1274x785)

75 KB PNG

>>106738704
Oh look, anon is wrong. WD Blues are still the 7200rpm CMR drives they used to be. The 2.5" mobile disks called WD Blue are the ones that are effectively Greens after the Green line got discontinued in the HDD market. I'd attach it but nooooo we can't have things like multiple images per post that would be a good code change.

>>106738907
That appears to be how it is now, split along 3.5" desktop drives and 2.5" laptop drives. Desktop drives are normal 7200rpm WD Blues, laptop drives resemble what used to be WD Greens, 5400rpm, a focus on power savings, and all that.

File: How Horrifying.jpg (59 KB, 600x595)

59 KB JPG

>>106737486
OP just wants CMR instead of SMR HDDs. Is that so wrong?

>>106739439
OP is a schizo who thinks SMR comes into their home at night and moves furniture around
A normal person just doesn't buy SMR drives

>>106739708
Yeah, but, like, what if HDD manufacturers are lying and making SMR hdds because it's cheaper to have the same stuff in both HDDs and SSDs they sell? Streamlining is a thing businesses try to do.

>>106739847
Then prove it
OP has failed to prove them lying about anything
I know WD has done some scummy stuff with swapping models in the past but it fell short of outright lying on datasheets
So prove it or fuck off

>>106739847
Your arguing with people who ultimately think WD is still making HDDs like it's 2010 and refuse to entertain the possibility that WD is putting out slop to a market that is long past it's prime.
It's amusing that people are pointing at spec sheets as if WD would never pull the wool over people's eyes.

OP is pointing out some weirdness as devices have firmware and feature changes but absolutely nothing is happening and could never happen

>>106737496
Yeah bro it's the storage cartel. They're going to get their interest rate cut money up front. Get a job if you don't like it.

>>106739203
>nooooo we can't have things like multiple images per post that would be a good code change.
fuckin rights bud

>>106739910
WD was doing that since at least the 80s. Recycling out of date / failed parts under lower tier products is just how the HDD business works. The only interesting touch here is they're inviting the anti-trust hammer by colluding to change the definition of 'CMR' to mean anything that isn't host managed zoned IO.

>>106740230
>The only interesting touch here is they're inviting the anti-trust hammer by colluding to change the definition of 'CMR
As long as it acts enough like "CMR" they can get away with it regardless of what is actually being written to platters
I'm not convinced WD is just going to stop trying to find ways to cost cut. The black and white thinking that there could only be the classic CMR and SMR is naive at best.

This constant finger pointing at spec sheets just seems super defensive IMO. Maybe you don't like that some Ukrainian is pointing shit out but they are also the fist ones I\d expect to find out shit like this.
About any time I look at what's on some random SSD, There is some Russian/Ukie forums discussing modding firmwares and discussing what's actually going on

>>106740436
>This constant finger pointing at spec sheets just seems super defensive IMO
That's not me. The spec sheets are 100% fraudulent as is nu-CMR. Of course it's a term they made up, so if anyone calls them on it they'll only have to settle for a pittance or draw out the trial into a friendly administration.

>>106739887
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7FIiYsVy3U

>>106740903
you have a funny way of presenting proof anon

File: Bruh.png (41 KB, 386x315)

41 KB PNG

>>106740952
I don't need proof. All I need to know is that an autists is loosing his mind about it and companies will company. Which means the autist probably has a point. This isn't schizophrenia, this is pattern recognition. And you, Anon, are a lemming for refusing to even consider the possibility of WD lying to everyone.

>>106726576
>defraggler
The problem is defraggler since it hasn't been updated for years. Its been an old bug for years where it reads SSDs as HDDs.

File: image.png (51 KB, 548x677)

51 KB PNG

>>106741002
I want to see competition
I want there to be a big exposé
I want to see their stock value drop for anti-consumer behavior
But I want to see proof
All you have given me is WELL THEY ARE GREEDY SO THEY MUST BE LYING schizo talk
Good day sir

File: proof.png (338 KB, 1375x691)

338 KB PNG

>>106741073
>All you have given me is WELL THEY ARE GREEDY SO THEY MUST BE LYING schizo talk
>imagine living in a world where this sentence alone is somehow not enough to condemn a conglomerate
Im guessing the fact they got sued for this exact same reason is somehow not a red flag at all?

>>106741180
"they did something kinda similar before" is not proof
Its just a reason to look for proof

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aztTf2gI55k
>>106724239
here's a vid for OP

>>106724239
I swear it feels like I've seen this exact same thread every year for the past 10 year now.

>>106724339
Never heard of this SSD random writing stuff. SMR just means the data tracks are crammed so close to each other that the neighboring tracks have to be rewritten when new data is written. Sounds like a recipe for worse data retention and 3x the risk of write errors.

File: smug whore.jpg (37 KB, 545x434)

37 KB JPG

>>106741227
>ah yes you see, the thing they were caught doing(and sued over) is not proof that they're doing it
>I need undeniable proof that they are doing it this very second
>so what if they hid smr drives in their NAS lineup without telling anyone
>why it's preposterous to even entertain the notion that they would be still doing it
Now, now, Anon, there is no need to engage in pilpul. Just admit you're a fanboy and walk away.

>>106741272
Now imagine if your porn collection in your nas is on unlabelled smr wd red drives. There's a reason we don't use SSDs for storage.

>>106741281
nice strawman
reality:
>schizo says they are doing thing
>rational person reserves judgement and asks for proof they are doing thing
>schizo responds with schizo rambling
>rational person disregards schizo rambling

if your that paranoid just source drives older than late 2019 (coronavirus) 2020 is when they started appearing iirc

File: Broly Sipping Coffee 2.jpg (35 KB, 425x319)

35 KB JPG

>>106741334
>be WD
>sell smr NAS drives because they break down faster and lemmings will buy new ones
>get sued after you've been doing it for years
>somehow manage to convince lemmings that you're a good boy now and don't that shit anymore
>lemmings will throw themselves infront of anyone questioning your honor
No, Anon, I will not dismiss the possibility that WD are still doing this shady shit just because they were sued in the past as said they won't do it anymore.

File: 6jh52j554.png (1.09 MB, 1277x629)

1.09 MB PNG

>>106734648

>Even if a fucking youtuber

Retard thinks that ytbers aren't controlled opposition or working for certain companies/agencies. You're so naive.

>>106735551

Exactly, people think that WD will ever be able to build create something that would match Hitachi hardware in terms of reliability. Especially considering that they're cutting costs like crazy. That's why they extorted Hitachi tech.

>>106738378

Did you read what he wrote next? His WD Red average speed was 90mb/s on average which is pathetic for such large drive. If he'd show he write speed graph I bet it'd look like a fish skeleton typical for SMR.

>>106738829

Fools will look at sticker colors, smart ones will look at the platform and disk family. Look at these 4 drives - they're all the same drives. I'll tell you the secret - reds are repainted greens with parking timer set to 5 min. Also TLER and parking timer can be changed or disabled on any earlier model. And Diablo3S greens were good.

>>106740230

>change the definition of 'CMR'

That's also what I'm trying to tell. They changed the definition of CMR. They consider Hybrid SMR as a genuine CMR. SMR has nothing in common with CMR. The last genuine CMR drive has 1.33TB/per platter, anything more will cause the separating gaps between the tracks to disappear or cause overlapping.

>>106741002
>I don't need proof
yes that's exactly how schizos work, maybe it's time to sage these threads and fuel his paranoia to the point of sperging out like the threadripper retard

>>106724239
>HUS722T2TALA604
Do you recall if RPM and cache size were factors in you choosing it to be used as a system drive?

>>106741486
>Did you read what he wrote next?
ya, he said it's cmr and he was wrong. What you're saying changes NOTHING

File: Confus.png (72 KB, 194x227)

72 KB PNG

>>106741603
>my clever ruse failed, now I must bury the dissent so daddy WD doesn't hate me for failing
Pathetic. I will never understand you retards. How can you accept it as gospel that they stopped doing the shit they were doing, just because they got caught doing it?

>>106741603
>the Threadripper [...]
Do you have links?

>>106726061
Let me guess, QLC?

>>106727366
>continuous writing of large amounts of data is noticeably slower than with CMR drives
>SMR drives behave much slower under some circumstances (such as random writes) than CMR drives
That article is confusing. Can any of this be measured in practice? If so, it could be used to identify the technology.

>>106741938
https://desuarchive.org/g/search/text/Janny%20is%20a%20corrupt%20biased%20shill/
courtesy of /pcbg/

>>106741242
And the schizo OP is based for doing that and enraging all the pajeet shills and WD fanboys.
WD are a bunch of scammers who already cheap out on helium before even getting to the smr/cmr discussion.

>>106742023
>WD; scammers who already cheap out on helium
Do you recall where you learned that?

This whole thread is filled with wd jeets.

>>106742148
nta but the newer red plus drives ship out without helium already and they conveniently omit to say they are filled with air instead, wd are really scummy but people focus and obsess over shitgate thanks to crappy blackblaze statistics and shills

File: read the datasheet dumbass.png (65 KB, 1420x577)

65 KB PNG

>>106742358

>>106742425
>IT'S ON THE DATASHEET SAAAAAAAR!
Go eat some cowdung, jeet.

>>106736954
enterprise u.2 nvme if you can
otherwise hamr if you're in 2026 somehow, cmr if you aren't

>>106742668
>HAMR if you're in 2026
Might you be a time traveler?

>>106741272
What he's describing is drive managed SMR, which is a clusterfuck but also all consumer SMR hardware. Normally the host computer has no awareness of how blocks are actually mapped. The drive just behaves like a very retarded SSD.

Colloquial explanations of SMR tech always treat it as if you're approaching from a host managed perspective, which is much more rational.

>>106724250
CMR stands for Continuous Magnetic Recording, and SMR stands for Shingled Magnetic Recording.
The heads that read and write data are not infinitely thin. On many drives, the write head is much bigger than the read head. On CMR drives, your data "track" is as wide as the write head's width, but on SMR, the write head overlaps part of the track, overwriting some of the track, but not enough to cause problems for the narrower read head. But, if you have a lot of data saved and have to overwrite data, and you have shingled tracks adjacent to the track you're rewriting, you will have to also rewrite those tracks, which kills write performance and is more mechanically costly.

>>106724239
If you need write speed you buy an SSD instead, right? The capacity is less, but you probably don't need massive capacity if you care about write speed, you can sync in the background. What am I missing here?

>>106724239
just buy ssds and forget this nerd shit

>>106739203
Are your eyes even working? Out of exactly 10 desktop SKUs for the WD Blue, 4 of them are 7200 RPM. Out of those 4 one is explicitly labeled as SMR and 2 others could be SMR. But that's not important, what is important is that this means 6 of them are 100% former low RPM WD Green SKUs.
The reason WD Greens were shit isn't SMR, it was the power management that couldn't even be turned off. Those drives destroy themselves very quickly so you need a lot of luck to get any years out of them. I guarantee you that you can't disable head parking on most of these.

https://www.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/collateral/brochure/brochure-wd-color-brand.pdf

I don't think the drive you posted is even being manufactured anymore. Nobody buys a 500GB mechanical drive at this point. You can get an SSD that's 500GB for like 30 bucks.

>>106724497
anime

>>106734555
>ok retard, I have SSDs that are older than you still running
I am older than 2 or 3 years

>>106741002
I will take the words of an autismo and trust them with all my being at anytime if the alternative is trusting a kike owned billion shekel company.

The storage/ram market is one big shit show in general. You can buy a SSD or ramstick and they have completely different flash and controller from the review samples unless you buy directly from the people who make them like Samsung or SK Hynix.

>>106745344
EU needs to step in and forbid such practice.

File: 1526076602944.png (309 KB, 646x595)

309 KB PNG

>>106740123
Guess I'll start sucking dick, I hear it pays more.
I'll bite the bullet and buy the overpriced drives and regret it later when the cheaper ones show up again. FUCK!

>>106742011
Yes, it's very noticable, do any large file operation and it slows to a crawl very quickly.

File: 1757922964655905.png (7 KB, 366x167)

7 KB PNG

glad i got an mg

File: Screenshot 2025-09-30 at (...).png (6 KB, 300x80)

6 KB PNG

>>106745328
This.
Weaponized autism has been proven to be more trustworthy.

>>106724497
Anime
Movies
Wiki backup
Booru
Music

File: j652h4h54.png (17 KB, 802x120)

17 KB PNG

I just asked a data recovery specialist and he indeed confirmed that all nearly new HDDs are hidden SMRs, including 8TB models based on HGST, especially those with 2TB/platter density and 256mb cache. So WD finally managed to ruin reliable HGST hardware by turning it into another SMR trash, well done.

I can officially declare that era of CMR hard drives is over.

>>106724497
rom packs

>>106724497
Porn uses so little space grandpa. I could store + backup all my porn on SSDs and it wouldn't even cost a good HDD. It's the optical disk backups and TV / movies that kill you.

My 18TB drive filled with 100% JAVs beg to differ. Not to mention the rest of the JAVs scattered towards multiple other drives. I didn't delve into the western pron and my HDD dedicated to H mangos.
It takes space, and it's fucking srs bsns.

>>106728663
>single write.
as in you boot it and do a continuous write and that's it or you just do a bunch of writes and never delete anything until u fill it ?

>>106748711
The latter. As long as old data is not touched, it's fine assuming it's not getting fragmented and forced to move data around.

>>106748584
...and if I went full data hoarder and downloaded everything that might be of interest off myrient and every TV show or movie I ever liked, I'd be in hundreds of TB. Even if you're a massive porn packrat there's only so much beating your dick can realistically take.

>>106745844
>the era of CMR hard drives is over
Might you be the OP? If so, for the 2 system drives (HUS722T2TALA604) you use, were the RPM and cache size additional reasons you chose that model for a system drive? Meaning, is 7200 RPM the minimum for system drives? Otherwise the desktop performance will be too slow? And for system drives, is a bigger cache size better?

>>106748584
18tb are still cmr I think

>>106745844
just get the larger sizes, holy shit
anything 16tb and above is probably cmr
the higher you go the most likely it is

>>106746051
10tb can hold everything up to the 5th gen
30tb extra for the 6th

just to be clear.. WD blatantly list CMR or SMR on the product page.. what is the issue ?

>>106749521
op is autistic and pretending that's not the case
probably because he wants smaller drives to be cmr
1tb wd drives from 10 years ago were already smr

>>106749500
>10TB can hold everything up to the 5th gen
>30TB extra for the 6th
Just console games (no PC games)? If so, would that be for all consoles? How'd you get that estimate?

>>106724239
Take your meds schizo.

>https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/14pzwz5/wd_smr_masquerading_as_cmr/
>EDIT 2: I contacted the maintainer of HDAT2 and provided a debug file for the drive. The maintainer confirmed that this is a false positive. Since there is no universal failsafe way to test this, HDAT infers SMR using device data and heuristics. In the case of this drive, it is indeed CMR.

>>106727028
>This Product Ships FREE (?)
At that price it fucking better.

>>106739203
>laptop drives resemble what used to be WD Greens,

Nobody cares about laptop drives. If you can't get an SSD in your laptop, you deserve for it to be complete trash.

>>106741486
>Fools will look at sticker colors, smart ones will look at the platform and disk family. Look at these 4 drives - they're all the same drives. I'll tell you the secret - reds are repainted greens with parking timer set to 5 min.
So they are not the same drives, because they are set to work differently.

>Also TLER and parking timer can be changed or disabled on any earlier model.
Only for Reds made in, like, 2010 or so. I tried disabling TLER on a later Red (it had it set to 1 minute or so) and all it did was break the drive, it started giving bad sectors in less than a month.
And again nobody gives a fuck about 15 year old drives. You might as well be bitching about new C64 models breaking the digital voice samples.

>And Diablo3S greens were good.
None of the greens were good. If you disabled TLER they were passable AT BEST. Reds were built to support higher tolerances and higher head parking count even from the beginning.

>>106749436
>18tb are still cmr I think

Toshiba MG line is CMR up to 22TB right now (technically MAMR+Helium but yeah).

They are noisy buggers but they work perfectly fine.

>>106745844
>I just asked a data recovery specialist and he indeed confirmed that all nearly new HDDs are hidden SMRs, including 8TB models based on HGST, especially those with 2TB/platter density and 256mb cache. So WD finally managed to ruin reliable HGST hardware by turning it into another SMR trash, well done.

This was well known already, anything with 2TB platter is either HAMR/MAMR/ePMR CMR or SMR. You simply CANNOT get the data density small enough with conventional recording, you can't get the magnetic grains to retain their polarity unless you use higher quality materials which you can't write without HAMR/MAMR/ePMR.

There's a blog out there which lists every drives platter count, you can use that to look up whether a drive is SMR or not. Any drive using more than 1.67TB platters is either SMR, or uses some form of assisted writing (HAMR - heat assisted, MAMR - microwave assisted, ePMR - energy assisted). Notably the latter are basically all Helium filled because the technology is expensive, new, and enterprise drive only for now.

>>106749800
consoles only (no-intro and redump) mainly nintendo, sony, microsoft, sega and atari
no arcade or "misc" stuff like triforce, pc88, cdi, etc.
10tb is enough for all of no-intro up to the 6th gen + nds and psp (psn) and redump (ngc, ps2, psp, stn, scd, sdc, jag)
ps2 alone is 16tb
current xbx is 16tb+
xbx without the dummy data is closer to 3tb
there's also 1g1r sets that are a lot smaller but I like having regional releases and those are only ntsc-u + imports
>how
my own cold storage, sizes are in 7z btw

Thank god this thread is joever

>>106749925
>Toshiba MG line is CMR up to 22TB right now
Do you know if those are the largest CMR HDDs currently available? If so, do you know if other companies are doing the same?

>>106724780
I wasn't on 4chan during that time so I appreciate OP's post.

>>106750054
WD Gold has CMR up to 26TB