Western Digital - Mislabeling specs on drives

[wanderingfool2]

WD initially got a lot of press regarding the SMR snafu, and not to shy away from another controversy WD has apparently had their Elements drives labelled as 5400 RPM actually running at 7200RPM.  In short, the drives were running hotter and louder which lead to some people to question why.  They discovered that despite the 5400RPM being reported by SMART and the drive specs, the drives were actually running at 7200RPM.  While there doesn't appear to be any posted acoustical evidence yet, this may also be the case for some RED drives (based on power consumption and latency)

 

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/09/western-digital-is-trying-to-redefine-the-word-rpm/

Quote

Recently, redditor /u/Amaroko set out to prove or disprove earlier netizens' findings. For each of several drive models, Amoroko placed a sample of that drive on an empty cardboard box, with a Blue Yeti mic held directly above it, then powered the drive on. Spectral analysis of the recorded audio using Adobe Audition showed a baseline frequency of 120Hz for two models of WD 8TB "5400 RPM class" drive.

 

WD Response

Quote

For select products, Western Digital has published RPM speed within a “class” or “performance class” for numerous years rather than publishing specific spindle speeds. We also fine-tune select hard drive platforms and the related HDD characteristics to create several different variations of such platforms to meet different market or application needs. By doing so, we are able to leverage our economies of scale and pass along those savings to our customers. As with every Western Digital product, our product details, which include power, acoustics and performance (data transfer rate), are tested to meet the specifications provided on the product’s data sheet and marketing collateral.

 

Honestly, using the term "5400RPM performance class" as a way to hide using 7200 RPM is ridiculous.  They made no mention of how they define performance class, and if the RED's are using 7200 RPM.  If they wanted to create a class, don't tack it onto a metric that is already used in the industry.  At this point I have no faith in what a WD product is due to the ample amounts of stretching the truth through dropped information or misleading information on product sheets.  (That's not to say the drives aren't engineered and might meet the remaining specs).

 

To be clear, I have no problem with 7200 RPM drives but listing them as 5400 RPM is just falsely advertising them (and for those nit picky, yes they are "performance class" and not strictly advertised as that...but they should outright not be allowed to mix terms without defining it)

 

Other Source

https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/09/04/what-madness-is-this-wd-5400-rpm-8tb-drives-sound-like-faster-7200-rpm-spinners/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/ikk0rv/psa_multiple_wd_5400rpm_drives_are_actually/

 

[Velcade]

"5400RPM drives turned up to 11!"  -Western Digital (probably)

[NumLock21]

If I remembered back then their drives are dynamic, where the RPM varies, it goes from 5,400RPM to 7,200RPM, depending on usage.

WD Red Pros are 7,200RPM.

 

Buys a 5400RPM drive and ends up with a more expensive 7200RPM. False Advertising!!!

The nitpicking is ridiculous.

 

[zeusthemoose]

Very uninformed about hard drives, but is there a reason this is bad? Doesn't a higher rpm mean it is faster? Are there downsides that I am unaware of?

[Beerzerker]

5 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

If I remembered back then their drives are dynamic, where the RPM varies, it goes from 5,400RPM to 7,200RPM, depending on usage.

WD Red Pros are 7,200RPM.

 

Buys a 5400RPM drive and ends up with a more expensive 7200RPM. False Advertising!!!

The nitpicking is ridiculous.

 

Yes it is.
That just means faster seek times across the disk, does not mean it's a problem just because it's spinning faster.
The only way it would be is for drives to start coming apart while in operation which is not mentioned in any quotes in the opening post.
The above post says what is probrably the only drawback from it and even that is up to the user whether it's a real problem or not based on personal preference.

 

To me:
It's just someone (Not the OP) trying to make something from nothing and run with it.

[NumLock21]

6 minutes ago, zeusthemoose said:

Very uninformed about hard drives, but is there a reason this is bad? Doesn't a higher rpm mean it is faster? Are there downsides that I am unaware of?

Some complain it's loud and hot. But if your system have front case fans that draws in cool air and blows over the HDD, you'll be fine, no matter if it's 5,400RPM and all the way up to 15,000RPM. The person who did that dumb test is nitpicking to the extreme, so don't take that article seriously.

[LAwLz]

14 minutes ago, zeusthemoose said:

Very uninformed about hard drives, but is there a reason this is bad? Doesn't a higher rpm mean it is faster? Are there downsides that I am unaware of?

It depends on what you use them for.

In general, 7200 RPM drives have better seek times than 5400 RPM drives, so some might even say this is a positive thing. But that depends on how the drives perform.

 

Those saying this is bad are probably using these drives in applications where seek time doesn't matter. For example these are NAS drives and in NAS:es you generally want low power consumption, low heat and low amounts of vibrations (because vibrations can damage hard drives).

 

 

All this is based on the assumption that the drives perform like 7200 RPM drives though. If the drives spin faster but still only get "5400 RPM class performance" then WD might just be selling drives that have the drawbacks of a 7200 RPM drive (heat, power and vibrations) with none of the benefits (faster speeds).

That would be bad.

[wanderingfool2]

34 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

Buys a 5400RPM drive and ends up with a more expensive 7200RPM. False Advertising!!!

The nitpicking is ridiculous.

It's about product accuracy.  Yes, it might be a bit nitpicking but it seems as though WD is having a habit of not properly specing a drive.  (I've mentioned back when the SMR thing hit, it's about preventing a slippery slope).  What skeletons might lay within the HDD's that aren't advertised (or wrongly attributed).  For myself, this is about the bigger picture of things.  Informed consumer choice, rather than hiding details in non-public definition of a term.

[goodtofufriday]

I wouldn't want 7200rpm drives in my companies NAS. I imagine for server farms this is actually a critical distinction. 

[porina]

This is one of the more nonsensical things I've heard in a while. The spindle speed is a physical property of the device, not a performance property by itself. It is what it is, no more, no less. If it were variable (other than during spinning up/down) then it could be understandable if there was a range.

 

Personally if I had to buy a HD, I'd ain for a 7200rpm where available. Performance of slower models is painful even when you think you don't care about performance.

[silberdrachi]

A lot of people seem to be assuming that "faster must always be better" but that isnt always the case. For example:

 

What if you have a specific amount of vibration tolerance in your system and a 7200rpm drive is over that?

 

Or you have a power budget, and spinning at 7200rpm is over that?

 

Or what if you already have an array of 5 disks at 5400rpm and add a new one thinking it is the same thing, but it turns out the manufacturer lied to you?

 

Or how about straight up the manufacturer lied to you about what they were giving you and that should be a good enough reason to sue them for false advertising. Specifications are there for a reason, and lying on them deserves backlash and punishment. Calling something a 5400rpm "class" drive is purely there to deceive and misdirect people. There is no reasonable way someone could look at "5400rpm class drive" and understand that it runs at 7200rpm.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

i'd still not recommend seagate though, what other main HDD companies are out there? 
 

 

[Sakkura]

27 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

i'd still not recommend seagate though, what other main HDD companies are out there?

Toshiba is the only other option. Samsung left, Hitachi got bought. And Toshiba is fairly small in the HDD space compared to WD and Seagate.

[dalekphalm]

5 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Toshiba is the only other option. Samsung left, Hitachi got bought. And Toshiba is fairly small in the HDD space compared to WD and Seagate.

On a side note, my FreeNAS build is filled with 6x 3TB Toshiba drives. They work great.

 

On topic: I was under the impression that a lot of WDC's HDD's used variable RPM technology that can scale between 5400 and 7200 RPM. If that's the case, I can see why they would call it "performance class".

 

But if in actual operation, it's called a "5400 performance class" but is constantly spinning at 7200 RPM? I can see why that could be considered false advertisement. I quite like WDC HDD's, and in most cases, someone getting a 7200 RPM drive instead is going to be a benefit rather than a drawback (especially those who buy external HDD's and shuck them). But there are cases where this could potentially be a back thing.

[RejZoR]

Generally getting free performance is great. And higher RPM generally brings that. Problem happens when these "mislabeled" drives end up being compared to other actual 5400 RPM drives and acing all benchmarks. Except noise levels. Which is the other problem, if you're looking for something quiet and you then get a 7200 RPM drive when you actually wanted 5400 RPM one...

[wanderingfool2]

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

I was under the impression that a lot of WDC's HDD's used variable RPM technology that can scale between 5400 and 7200 RPM. If that's the case, I can see why they would call it "performance class".

...if they document it in the specs there isn't a problem.  My biggest gripe is that they use wording without defining it (when it's not clear what they mean).  I thought the variable was on green drives (could be wrong, just going off of memory on this).

 

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

someone getting a 7200 RPM drive instead is going to be a benefit rather than a drawback (especially those who buy external HDD's and shuck them). But there are cases where this could potentially be a back thing.

For myself I target 7200 RPM drives as a search, so something like that would benefit myself.  Doesn't make it right though; product data sheets are meant to be accurate (and not playing fast and loose with terminology).  [Like all other major HDD makers, they even put the footnote that 4TB isn't 4 TiB)

[rcmaehl]

This is great for those that care about performance over power/acoustics, means the 8TB external drive you get is more than likely a 7200RPM 8TB drive that'll get a major bump once shucked.

[dalekphalm]

14 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

...if they document it in the specs there isn't a problem.  My biggest gripe is that they use wording without defining it (when it's not clear what they mean).  I thought the variable was on green drives (could be wrong, just going off of memory on this).

I too recall the Green's being variable.

 

I don't disagree that they should be upfront about physical specs. Particularly variable drives - I want them to list if the drive is variable. I also want to know the lower and upper RPM limits of it too. If they want to list what "class" it is on top of that (say, because of some new tech that allows a slower drive to perform like a faster drive), that's fine. But it should be a separate spec.

 

I'm not fully versed in every detail about this, so I'm not sure how "in the wrong" WDC is here. I will reserve judgement beyond what I've said already.

[rawrdaysgoby]

Western digital caught lying again?! wtf Going with Seagate at least I will know what I am getting

 

Welp another lawsuit heading to Western Digital.

[includenull]

I specifically do not buy WD's externals or Red drives because they are advertised as 5400RPM.

Now I need to know which of their Reds and white label Reds are actually 7200RPM (and not SMR) because that could save me a lot of moneys.
Shucking a 12TB WD Elements is way cheaper than seeking out actual 7200RPM 12TB drives.

[Athan Immortal]

On 9/8/2020 at 4:33 PM, wanderingfool2 said:

Western Digital has published RPM speed within a “class” or “performance class” for numerous years rather than publishing specific spindle speeds.

Oh FUCK OFF WD. This is such a political answer. Like an "Aha, but we worded it like this."

 

What the hell is the problem just labelling the drives as what they are. 5400rpm, 7200rpm, SMR, CMR.

 

I bought two 4tb WD RED Drives last year then had to go through all the worry of checking if they were SMR when that story broke.

 

I just bought a 14tb Elements drive about a month ago after a couple of weeks of research making sure I wasn't going to accidentally buy an SMR drive and now this. Sure 7200rpm instead of 5400rpm, it's not as big a deal as SMR, but the point is Western Digital is being dishonest... again!

 

The 4 drive failures I've had in the last 8 years are all Seagate. Drive failures are an anecdotal and personal thing (usually because of what's lost being important to the person), because I'll hear the same thing about WD from other people, but for the moment they've been the only spinning disk I trust, but their company is working really hard to erode that it seems.

 

I wish there were more players in this space.

[WereCatf]

On 9/8/2020 at 6:59 PM, NumLock21 said:

Some complain it's loud and hot. But if your system have front case fans that draws in cool air and blows over the HDD, you'll be fine, no matter if it's 5,400RPM and all the way up to 15,000RPM. The person who did that dumb test is nitpicking to the extreme, so don't take that article seriously.

You are really trying not to understand what the complaints are about, are you? 7200RPM drives consume more power and run hotter and that matters in e.g. NAS-use, because you don't want a hot, noisy NAS that draws more power than it needs to. It also gets worse the more drives you have in it, the effect compounds rather quickly!

[Mateyyy]

51 minutes ago, includenull said:

Now I need to know which of their Reds and white label Reds are actually 7200RPM (and not SMR) because that could save me a lot of moneys.

Spoiler

Red Pro is 7200RPM, Red is 5400RPM, idk about Red Plus

[dalekphalm]

8 hours ago, WereCatf said:

You are really trying not to understand what the complaints are about, are you? 7200RPM drives consume more power and run hotter and that matters in e.g. NAS-use, because you don't want a hot, noisy NAS that draws more power than it needs to. It also gets worse the more drives you have in it, the effect compounds rather quickly!

Let's be clear though - you can run 7200 RPM drives inside a NAS without problem. The Red Pro drives are specifically 7200 RPM drives, for example, and those are still "rated" for NAS usage - particularly larger NAS installations, which kind of refutes your last point.

 

Plus, almost all Enterprise grade 3.5" drives are 7200 RPM (granted they almost certainly get better QA).

 

Now, power consumption is definitely a measurable difference - and while some people may specifically be looking for lower power drives, looking at the Spindle Speed doesn't (and never did) tell the whole story. Anyone power consumption conscious should have been reading detailed reviews that actually measured idle and in-use power consumption.

 

WDC is wrong because they lied. This is a fact. However, many of the reasons people are complaining about don't have much real world impact.

 

With that in mind, WDC lying should be enough - no need to make up points that aren't logical to try and convince people - lying should be enough.

[wanderingfool2]

3 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Now, power consumption is definitely a measurable difference - and while some people may specifically be looking for lower power drives, looking at the Spindle Speed doesn't (and never did) tell the whole story. Anyone power consumption conscious should have been reading detailed reviews that actually measured idle and in-use power consumption.

 

Actually one can look at the data sheet to get power draw (assuming WD isn't playing fast and loose with those numbers).  The only real world argument could potentially be the tone of the drive and loudness (I would assume a 5400rpm drive would create a 90hz tone, which to me is gentler on the ears than a 120hz tone)  *Either way though, you are correct the biggest thing here is WD stretching the truth.

 

With that said the added heat/noise can't be 100% overlooked if that was the reason why people were initially looking into this.

 

To those saying it's things like nitpicking though, what is preventing them from starting to do 7200rpm class drives but actually using 5400 rpm?

  

8 hours ago, Mateyyy said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Red Pro is 7200RPM, Red is 5400RPM, idk about Red Plus

See and this is where it gets interesting...how do you know Red's are 5400RPM?  (If the real RPM isn't listed, and as WD put it, "5400 RPM class" you cannot accurately say which drive runs at what RPM.