WD Caught Swapping Inferior NAND In SN550.

travm said:
Unacceptable, I want butts.
Click to expand...
1629932412998.png
 
GotNoRice said:
Most good drives have DRam and/or SLC caches to support the TLC or QLC flash.
Click to expand...
Sure, but then I pay a cache penalty when I get a cache miss for read, or run out of cache on sustained writes. I would like 768GB of just SLC, maybe with a DRAM cache on top.

Z was correct that what I’m really looking for is Optane. If Intel hadn’t discontinued the prosumer line, I probably would have picked one up. I just didn’t feel right going with a several year old discontinued product line though.
 
I just bought two different models, a 250GB one and a 1TB. Is there a serial number to look for to identify the ones with cheaper chips?
 
wandplus said:
I just bought two different models, a 250GB one and a 1TB. Is there a serial number to look for to identify the ones with cheaper chips?
Click to expand...
I haven't seen any way to id them yet. Hopefully someone comes up with something like the adata software that identified the controller and the nand. Until then i would just keep checking forums.
Otherwise you have to write a file to the drive and exceed the slc then watch the speed.
 
MrGuvernment said:
pretty much only Samsung left...
Click to expand...
I've not heard of Sabrent doing more than halving the DRAM cache from 1GB to 500MB(ish), I now have 3 of those drives and they are great even with 1/2 the cache.
Have they done worse than that?
 
deruberhanyok said:
So the company with the ssd warranty process so difficult that people have had to write guides on how to get a replacement still seems okay. i guess that’s something.
Click to expand...
Is it? I did a warranty replacement on one recently and it wasn't any harder than a regular spinner drive.
 
IMO it's natural that a company might need to change flash chips or controllers over time, especially for an entry-level or midrange product, but it should be clearly marked on the SKU, or the packaging should say "WD SN550 V2" instead of "WD SN550 V1". The other problem that makes this issue worse is that the size of the SLC cache has stayed the same, it is around 12GB on the old SN550 and the new SN550, so both versions will run out of SLC cache at the same time.

I just got the Hynix P31 a few days ago and I'm glad that I don't have to deal with this stuff.

hititnquitit said:
Samsung shows the shitty ones how its done. Quietly but correctly nonetheless.

https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news/samsung-is-swapping-ssd-parts-too
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think Samsung did a better job because they didn't make the product worse across the board

+ SLC cache size increased from 40GB to 115GB, almost 3x larger.
+ Controller changed from Phoenix to Elpis (same as 980 Pro)
+ 4k q1 performance around 30-40% higher.
- Native TLC write speed decreased from 1.5 GBps to 0.8 GBps.
 
I don't know why WD would cripple the sn550 to the point of irrelevance!? Anyone that researches this drive will inevitably see an article showing the changes. That it performs no better than the sn350. No one is going to buy the sn550 now. They will either go with another brand (most likely) in their price range or go with the 750 or 350. They have effectively killed their drive.
 
hititnquitit said:
Anyone that researches
Click to expand...

Do most people research stuff before they buy? Most would just click on it because it's an amazon recommended pick or because it's 5% off that day. At least half the reviews out there are probably from reviewers who got free samples sent to them and don't want to ruin their gravy train - so there will be plenty of "good" reviews left regardless.
 
GotNoRice said:
Do most people research stuff before they buy? Most would just click on it because it's an amazon recommended pick or because it's 5% off that day. At least half the reviews out there are probably from reviewers who got free samples sent to them and don't want to ruin their gravy train - so there will be plenty of "good" reviews left regardless.
Click to expand...
Your probably right! 😂

Altho my experience as the tech guy, is to be asked ALL of the computer questions from family, friends, neighbors, clients etc. So i tend to forget my perception isn't the norm.
 
I don't have an issue with switching parts, this is understandable, but make it clear. Samsung did it right.
 
hititnquitit said:
Inyone that researches this drive will inevitably see an article showing the changes.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. If you just look at user reviews, Amazon lumps together old and new products on the same page, meaning most of the reviews are probably for the older model.

And if the model number is the same, this makes Google searches difficult (as how can you be sure which part was actually tested?). Which is probably what the company wants when they make this shady maneuver.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncjoe
like this
Well it looks like WD came to their senses but they shouldn't have handled it this way in the first place.

XacTactX said:
Yeah, I think Samsung did a better job because they didn't make the product worse across the board

+ SLC cache size increased from 40GB to 115GB, almost 3x larger.
+ Controller changed from Phoenix to Elpis (same as 980 Pro)
+ 4k q1 performance around 30-40% higher.
- Native TLC write speed decreased from 1.5 GBps to 0.8 GBps.
Click to expand...
It's not 100% ideal since performance does go down in some circumstances but overall it's the same and it's worth noting that they did change the SKU so online retailers should automatically have them as a separate product listing.
 
Ebernanut said:
Well it looks like WD came to their senses but they shouldn't have handled it this way in the first place.


It's not 100% ideal since performance does go down in some circumstances but overall it's the same and it's worth noting that they did change the SKU so online retailers should automatically have them as a separate product listing.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the heads up, Much appreciated!
Yeah its certainly not ideal but its better than nothing. Ideally they'd go back to TLC and retain the excellent price to performance but for whatever reason they have dropped the sn550 down a performance bracket. It doesn't make sense to me but im sure there's a bean counter somewhere rubbing his hands together and chuckling.
 
hititnquitit said:
It doesn't make sense to me but im sure there's a bean counter somewhere rubbing his hands together and chuckling.
Click to expand...
It's possible that it's legitimately because of the current shortages but they should have handled it better regardless.
 
Ebernanut said:
It's possible that it's legitimately because of the current shortages but they should have handled it better regardless.
Click to expand...
Right, it could be. I haven't paid attention to NAND reports. Which is terrible being that end of quarter reports are probably all over. I've been fixated on memory(ddr5 coming out) and ignore everything else
:(
 
travm said:
Why is it so hard to get proper disciplinary action whenever laws like this are broken.
Click to expand...
If I told you the truthful reason you would not believe it so why should I bother because you won't listen anyways? Just the fact you asked that Q tells me you live in the dark
 
It’s Western Digital, you should be grateful they arent using SMR NAND in it yet. They will find a way. Look for a new model, called SN550 Plus, to know it happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top