All new WD models (even Red Pluses for NAS/RAID and Purple that are listed as CMR) except for maybe some enterprise class drives are based on cheap SMR platforms such as Carmel, Venice and Apollo (they all have 2TB per platter density, "static" 190 module with T2 editor which works like a hybrid SMR zoned device that emulates a CMR behavior). Some models such as WD63PURZ also have TRIM support and 256mb cache which is a dead giveaway. Write/read graphs show a typical SMR behavior (several speed dips at random points). If you have WD models such as WD20/80EFPX or WD23/64PURZ then you should test them and comfirm it yourself.If you remember WD once submarined SMR drives into Red NAS line and they're doing this again by selling inferior products as as a high quality. They're deceiving their customers again by cutting costs and I think it's important to spread the word and sue these greedy lying fuckers again.>>106724239>tldr WD list HDD as CMR but OP alleges it's SMRif this is true can't someone test drives in a lab and sue them?
>posted it againyes, all lower capacity drives are smrno, it's not a conspiracy, just cheaper to produceif you want cmr, get a large capacity drive16tb+ are most likely cmr, for now
>>106754968I really care to read all this shit, bc I Tyrone ALL my HDDs
>>106755005>lower capacity you're telling me anything less than 16TB are fucking SMR that "pretend" to be CMR. Look I get dirt cheap smaller drives, but if you're going to be selling people fucking 8TB+ drives they ought to be CMR or at very least not pretend to be unless you go through a level of detective fuckery to reveal their slimy bullshit. I'm lucky I picked up a bunch of shuck'd WD white label 8TB drives a few years ago, all of them confirmed to be basically WD Red Pro, WD Gold, or HGST He8 / He10 drives, all with the "Helium bit" present. I can only imagine what kind of garbage is in externals today.
>>10675500512TB+ are CMR.
>>106755052>pretendit says smr in the datasheet retard
>>106754968Oh noes
>>106755052Don't pay attention to that faggot. 12TB+ are proven to be CMR drives. All my Tyrone'd 12TB are CMR. i have proven this time and time again in previous threads
>>106755068Not the one I have
>>10675507112, 16, it doesn't matterthe point is get a larger driveyou're not getting 4tb cmr drives anymoreit sucks but it is what it isalso 10tb seagate externals are still cmr I think
>>106755071I guess the question is if those are recently made or not? If anon is suggesting that now they're doing this shit relatively recently, then those of us with 8/10/12/14 etc.. TB drives from a few years ago when those were guaranteed to be CMR may differ from those same sizes now?
>>106755094it's not recentdatahoarder posts from 5 years ago were already questioning whether x or y 16tb seagate/wd external was cmr or smr, still cmr today1tb drives from 10 years ago were already smrsmr technology is always playing catch so it's hard to tell but basically whenever they refresh a particular size it's probably because it went smr
>>106755005the issue is if they list drives as cmr but are smr someone should sue
>>106755068where is that datasheet? are you saying they list cmr on the web page and smr elsewhere?
>>106754968Are you the OP of this (>>106724239) thread?
>>106755162no, I'm saying they list it correctly as far I knowif it says smr, it's smrif it says cmr, it's cmrhttps://support-en.wd.com/app/answers/detailweb/a_id/50697/~/steps-to-determine-if-an-internal-drive-uses-cmr-or-smr-technology
>>106755249>https://support-en.wd.com/app/answers/detailweb/a_id/50697/~/steps-to-determine-if-an-internal-drive-uses-cmr-or-smr-technologyThe previous thread (>>106724239) was posted on 9/28. And the above article was updated on 9/30. I wonder if it was updated in response to the thread.
I have many WD40EFPX drivesAre they CMR or SMR?
>>106755395>Are they CMR or SMR?While I don't have the answer, you might be able to find out. Are any of your WD40EFPX drives loose? If so, are you able to check the date on the label?
>>10675543707 DEC 2024, but I also have older ones from 2023
>>106755589>07 DEC 2024If the Western Digital article is accurate, at first glance, your drives should be SMR since they were made after 2018. But if you wanna be thorough, check if the label has a color on it and if it has a product line name (ex: WD [color] [Pro/Plus] [inches]).
>>106755353the important part are the product sheets and those have been up for months, yearsyou can probably check with web archive if you're that paranoid
>>106755395>>106755589>4tb>2024it's smranything smaller than 12tb is going to be smr unless it's 5-10+ years oldonly exception I know is the seagate 10tb external
>>106755722
>>106755752> Implementation of SMR for the following products using SMR recording technology is device-managed SMR. huh?
>>106755752>(((cmr)))>*asterisk>small print>it's smrI will say, schizo anon almost has a point here, that is scummymore importantly, 12tb drives are not safe
>>106755395>Are they CMR or SMR?According to the data sheet, they're CMR. But that's if Western Digital is being honest. But according to the the OP of the threads below, they're not. Instructions for how to test if a HDD is CMR or SMR can be found in the 2nd thread, and possibly the 1st. The drive to be tested will need to be connected as a secondary drive since a separate drive will be the system drive where the OS and testing software will be installed. Check the drive to be tested for any data you wanna save. It might be necessary for the drive to be tested to be wiped before testing.>>105032250https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/105032250>>106459760https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/106459760>>106724239
>>106755106>datahoarder posts from 5 years ago were already questioningwe're now citing the biggest faggots on the entire internet as reliable sources of information? data hoarders are just as brain damaged as everyone ITT that thinks there is some SMR conspiracy with fake datasheets. jesus h christ
>>106755811WD shills out in full force again I seeI for once fully believe the schizo autistsI will only get 12TB+ drives for my next NAS
>>106755764>>106755702 this seems like a legalese to mask fraud
>>106754968>All new WD models (even Red Pluses for NAS/RAID and Purple that are listed as CMR)Liar.
>>106755824lmao it's in the data sheet why would they lie? this is WD, not some all-caps chinks on amazon. there would be a class action lawsuit if they got caught. i'd believe the data sheet before i believe some data hoarder and his made up "tests". these people would gargle their own jizz if they thought you could discern drive performance from doing so.
>>106755811you're the moron mixing my words from technological advancements to corporate fraudwhich is not to say new = better, which is why they were /asking/ whether 12tb+ drives were cmr or smr as far back as half a decade ago, because smr sucks and nobody wants it in their serverthere's no conspiracy here, that's just how it is for over a decade now. having said that, >>106755764 is definitely bullshit. not saying op has a point, I doubt wd, seagate, etc. are trying to pass off their smr drives as cmr, but hiding it behind a fine print is almost as bad.
>>106755799it's for blue red pro and purple don't have it
>>106755922yeah but it means they'll start rolling them out soonwatch out for a red or purple refresh
>>106755909the drives are whatever the data sheet says they are. how difficult is this for you to understand?
>>106755962read the fine print you stupid fuck>Implementation of SMR for the following products using SMR recording technology is device-managed SMR.it should be obvious too because there are no 1tb cmr drive anymore.
>>106755764>>106755799>>106755909>>106755922nvm I was wrong and did not understand ignore this
>>106755979uh no it's about the smr drives listed as smr thereit's all gucci
you should check your fridge too, there's a good chance it might be SMR
>>106756052
>>106755979>there are no 1tb cmr drive anymore.?
>>106755005it's not about that.it's about companies not communicating clearly the specifications of the product. especially when one is very inferior to the other.like selling a 4gb card when it only has 3.5gb. and while that outraged enough people, this hdd issue is a far bigger issue.
>>106754968Stop spamming this thread unless you have proof."If you have this drive you should check it yourself" is not proof.And SSDs are cheap enough that you shouldn't even buy anything smaller than a 16tb HDD.
>>106754968just use an ssd if you wanted speed you autistic creepthose doesn't make a difference as cold storage
>>106754968Can you please go kill yourself? WD-san doesn't give one shit you exist - and honestly, neither do we.
>>106754968Thanks for the tip yo
>>106756475thisif you can afford 10+TB HDDs then you can afford 4TB SSDs easily.
