Western Digital Red 4TB Review

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If you are looking for new drives for your NAS system, check out this review of the 4TB Western Digital Red at Hardware.Info today.

We were already very much convinced about the qualities of the Red disks from Western Digital we tested earlier. The same holds for de 4TB model. The disk definitely isn't the fastest around, but that's not what it sets out to achieve in the first place. It does, however, consume very little energy, which is very important for disks in a NAS device, which may be on 24/7. Noise levels are also well within the margins of what we consider to be acceptable, even though other disks in the Red line-up were even quieter.
Click to expand...
 
Hopefully the 5TB drives are also on schedule for release in the next 90 days.
 
Certainly not for performance application which is Black are for. This looks like a great replacement for Green though.
 
The 4TB drive just seems to be continuing on the same curve as the other 4TB drives, just at a lower RPM of course :D

Saw this in the ananad review...

The new drive also brings with it the NASWare 2.0 firmware platform, with updated features such as better error correction. Fortunately, the firmware on older Red drives can also be upgraded.
Click to expand...

But I haven't been able to find any download for this, either on WD site or anywhere else. Would be nice to know when it is coming, or if it is coming at all, no other site mentioned it :)
 
I think it is a tragedy the article doesn't revisit the fact the RED line autobalances the spindle every time it spins up, which is a major contributor to why it is so quiet.
 
BloodyIron said:
I think it is a tragedy the article doesn't revisit the fact the RED line autobalances the spindle every time it spins up, which is a major contributor to why it is so quiet.
Click to expand...

See this review:

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/476...red-4tb-review-4tb-nas-hard-disk-noise-levels

The noise level when the Western Digital Red 4 TB HDD is active doesn't seem to impressive to me at 33 dB(A). For example the 3 TB Red is at 29.4 dB(A) - that's a 3 TB HDD though so not directly comparable. But even the Western Digital Caviar Black 4 TB is more quiet at 31.8 dB(A), despite it being a 7200 RPM drive (compared to the Red which is 5400 RPM).
 
Think I'll stick to the 2TB Reds for workstations, and the 3TB Reds for NAS use.
 
The 3TB Reds apparently have 3x1TB platters, and the 4TB have four. More platters leads to more noise.
 
It is noisier because it has more platters.

EDIT: I should reload more often. Will the availability of 4 platter Reds also mean that WD will start to "cheap out" on the 3 TB type and use 4 platters with reduced density?
 
Last edited:
jabbernotty said:
The 3TB Reds apparently have 3x1TB platters, and the 4TB have four. More platters leads to more noise.
Click to expand...

Yes, but isn't it strange that the 4 TB Red is so much more noisy than the 3 TB in active state according to the review I linked to in my earlier post? 33 dB(A) vs 29.4 dB(A).

If you compare the 3 TB vs 2 TB Red the difference in active state noise level is not that much despite that the 3 TB model has 3 platters and the 2 TB model 2 platters, 29.4 dB(A) vs 29.1 dB(A). This according to the same review.
 
I don't think that is strange. I doubt going from the 3-platter version to the 4-platter version is as simple as adding some extra parts. I think some parts will have to be rearranged or replaced, for example with parts of a lesser height. I dont think it strange if that has an effect on the noise level.
 
I just got the 4TB SE. Faster than red, cheaper than RE. I wouldn't touch red for any media or game related application. It may make a good vault but I would never want anything slower than an SE.
 
I just bought 4 x 4TB SEs too (just before the price suddenly increased by 20%). I have 11 WD RE 2TB drives in that chassis too.

I do not understand why someone would pick a drive for NAS purposes based on completely irrelevant things in the long run like a couple of watts saved or some db's less. They are perhaps relevant parameters in your desktop computer or laptop, but a NAS can be placed out of sight and the power savings, even with many drives and over a whole year, will never be noticable as actual money saved on the power bills.

Performance and reliability for the expected usage scenario versus cost per gigabyte is the only thing of actual importance in a NAS. "Green and silent" drives are just an excuse to sell us low quality/performance drives that are cheap to manufacture.
 
marsboer said:
I do not understand why someone would pick a drive for NAS purposes based on completely irrelevant things in the long run like ... some db's less. They are perhaps relevant parameters in your desktop computer or laptop, but a NAS can be placed out of sight
Click to expand...

Some people live in houses or work in offices where a NAS cannot be placed out of sight, so noise can be important.
 
Where I currently live, I only have wired network connectivity in the living room. I can't run wires anywhere, except via the less-than-desirable 'over the floor and under the door' method.
 
jabbernotty said:
I don't think that is strange. I doubt going from the 3-platter version to the 4-platter version is as simple as adding some extra parts. I think some parts will have to be rearranged or replaced, for example with parts of a lesser height. I dont think it strange if that has an effect on the noise level.
Click to expand...

Then that ought to apply to e.g. the 4 TB WD Caviar Black too, which also is a 4 platters drive. But it only shows an increase from 31.1 to 31.8 db(A) when going from idle to active state. The 4 TB Red on the other hand increases from 30.3 => 33 db(A) when going from idle to active state! And the Red is as mentioned before a low RPM drive that is supposed to be designed to be quiet...
 
Blackstone said:
I just got the 4TB SE. Faster than red, cheaper than RE. I wouldn't touch red for any media or game related application. It may make a good vault but I would never want anything slower than an SE.
Click to expand...

So far how are you liking them?

When I replace my 2TB REs I`m thinking of going SE next :D
 
I hope the 5 TB reds are on schedule and will have acceptable quality and price. I think I have enough free space to wait for their arrival.

Right now I'm seeing 4 TB reds at significantly higher prices than seagate 4 TB nas drives, don't know if that's a local phenomenon or if the difference will drop soon.

To those who think that saving power isn't useful: My house has been noticeably cooler this summer, even if the weather has been warmer than the last couple of years.
 
Unless you have several tens of drives there is no chance in hell that using Reds in place of a standard 7200 rpm drive is the cause of your cooler house.

Lets say you have ten drives. Then you will be saving about 40-50W compared to SEs in a RAIDed 24/7 NAS build. In other words you are saying that turning off a light bulb is making your house noticable cooler in the summer.
A slightly noticeable difference in the room that the server is sitting in perhaps (with 10 drives), but nothing more.

If you compare that to adding a real modern gaming 3D card to your computer, it is just nothing (they use several 100 watts), and you see noone complaining about overly hot houses because of their gaming computer.

But of course, if you have 20-30-40 drives it will add up and it could become a more relevant issue in hotter countries as you need active cooling in the server room. I live in Norway with a much colder climate so all heat generated 90% of the year is actually equally saved in saved heating costs of the home.
 
I have more than 100 3TB drives in servers now. Usually not all online at the same time, but the watts add up. Even for people with a single 8-16 drive server it will make a difference. I also live in Norway, but even in the coldest periods of winter I have had to open the windows to my server room at times.
 
If you have 100 drives, then of course there is no doubt that you can feel a huge difference. Generating 500W of heat less 24/7 is a big issue in a home.

Nice system by the way. That must be one of the largest home setups I have seen :)
 
With the money saved by using 50 W less I can buy a new drive every year here in Germany, assuming 24/7 operation. While you can save more power by replacing other components like graphics cards, computers with high end graphics usually do not run all day.
 
I will save only about 170 NOK a year using 10 RED drives vs SE 4TB (50W) here in Norway (39 øre/kwh). That is about 1/13th of the price of a new WD SE 4TB drive that I currently use.

As most people that buy reds have less than 10 drives (except maybe on this forum :) ) this is a moot point for most if they actually do the calculations. One bottle of coke and you have spend the whole saving over a year for a single drive.

I guess power is much more expensive in germany?? Perhaps especially now that they have made the mistake of not going for nuclear power. I know Norway has cheaper power than most as 99% (actual number) comes from renewable hydropower.
 
Power is indeed much more expensive here and it still increases. 40% of the price is tax, however. I personally don't think that not going for nuclear power is a mistake in the long run. I'd rather pay more for power than having a large uninhabitable area in the neighborhood. The switch to renewable sources should have been slower. And we are not sitting on gazillions of tons of oil :)
 
From what I read the SE is designed for a backplane thus it does not have the sataIII locking connector.
They also use 800g/platters, I would assume for better tracking.
It appears the 1TB/platters have a higher failure rate, just look at Hitachi and Seagate drives that deploy them.
Both the RE and SE are at 800, WD could easy update these but appears not in any hurry.

As for the RED, the SE and RE 4TB are 5x800, 5 platters is the absolute max in a 3.5 chassis.

5TB is easily done, 5x1.

No idea why the blues are still stuck at 1TB.

Greens are useless, blacks are somewhat overkill for bulk storage, this is were blue is the middle ground.
 
I'm going to wait for 5TB Reds to hit the shelves before buying to 4TB. I picked up a 3TB on sale this week though :D
 
When the 5TB hit that will bump everything down in price as the new flagship, a win for anybody who really does not need 5TB.
I'd like to see the 3TB's drop to around $125 or so.

Seagate NAS seem to have better reviews so far over RED's but I simply gave up on Seagate when they moved operation to China, their reliability has been horrid.
Never had any issue with their PATA drives made in Singapore back in the day.
 
ep0x73 said:
5TB is easily done, 5x1.
Click to expand...
Yes, maybe WD's intention is to use 5x1TB platters for the 5 TB Red. Then perhaps that explains the high active state noise level in the 4 TB version, if they are going to use the same internal mechanics for the 5 TB version. I.e. that it must be capable of moving the heads in the 5 TB version too.

In that case maybe it also explains why the 2 & 3 TB versions have similar noise level in active state, i.e. if they use a common internal mechanics for those two drives. But this is just guessing of course...
ep0x73 said:
blacks are somewhat overkill for bulk storage
Click to expand...
At least the 4 TB Black is less noisy than the 4 TB Red in active state according to this review... :)
 
Last edited:
Blackstone said:
I just got the 4TB SE. Faster than red, cheaper than RE. I wouldn't touch red for any media or game related application. It may make a good vault but I would never want anything slower than an SE.
Click to expand...
I'm currently using a 128GB Samsung 830 for my OS drive and a WD Red 2TB for all my programs, personal files, and games. There's also a second 2TB red in the same box as a backup drive.

Used to use a 1TB Caviar Black, but this 2TB Red is faster in every metric except random I/O (and even there, it's close). Not only that, but two 2TB Reds ended up being significantly quieter than the one 1TB Black they replaced.

So yeah, dunno what you're on about... I love the 2TB version of the WD Red for workstations.
 
Unknown-One said:
I'm currently using a 128GB Samsung 830 for my OS drive and a WD Red 2TB for all my programs, personal files, and games. There's also a second 2TB red in the same box as a backup drive.

Used to use a 1TB Caviar Black, but this 2TB Red is faster in every metric except random I/O (and even there, it's close). Not only that, but two 2TB Reds ended up being significantly quieter than the one 1TB Black they replaced.

So yeah, dunno what you're on about... I love the 2TB version of the WD Red for workstations.
Click to expand...


You must be the only one who has REDs that are faster than Blacks or REs....
 
ToddW2 said:
You must be the only one who has REDs that are faster than Blacks or REs....
Click to expand...

Dunno what to tell you, but my old 1TB Caviar Black couldn't get anywhere close to this kind of performance (again, aside from access time)

vw0L5.png


My guess is it has to do with the platter density in these new drives being significantly higher.
 
Last edited:
Was just going to say that Anandtech updated their review, it appears that WD says that drives (1,2 and 3TB) made before Aug 2013 cannot have the new firmware, and after that they don't recommend it for the new drives.

Question is, will the new firmware drives at 3TB size play nice with the old firmware drives at 3TB for example.

Or the new 4TB with the old 3TB in a hybrid raid system like Synology NAS use?
 
Greetings

John2000 said:
The noise level when the Western Digital Red 4 TB HDD is active doesn't seem to impressive to me at 33 dB(A). For example the 3 TB Red is at 29.4 dB(A) - that's a 3 TB HDD though so not directly comparable. But even the Western Digital Caviar Black 4 TB is more quiet at 31.8 dB(A), despite it being a 7200 RPM drive (compared to the Red which is 5400 RPM).
Click to expand...

Either of those dB values are still pretty inaudible, I was buying Samsung Spinpoints years ago with those sort of numbers, even the seeks were only detectable if you put your head near the PC case unlike the WD blacks back then where you could hear distinct clicking on head seeks, also on the Spinpoints you could further lower seeking noise by setting AAM with a lower value at the cost of slightly reduced performance.

ep0x73 said:
No idea why the blues are still stuck at 1TB.

Greens are useless, blacks are somewhat overkill for bulk storage, this is were blue is the middle ground.
Click to expand...

Using current hard drives prices in Australia at the moment

$142.00 Western Digital WD Green 3TB WD30EZRX
$142.00 Seagate Barracuda 3TB ST3000DM001
$145.00 Toshiba DT01ACA300 3TB 7200RPM
$195.00 Western Digital WD Red 3TB WD30EFRX
$239.00 Western Digital WD Black 3TB WD3001FAEX
$259.00 Western Digital SE 3TB WD3000F9YZ
$345.00 Western Digital RE4 3TB WD3000FYYZ
$419.00 Seagate Enterprise Capacity 3TB ST3000NM0033

The reason "blues are still stuck at 1TB" is because if they did produce a 3TB blue it would just be a "vanilla" 7200 RPM drive, hence they could only really price it similar to the Barracuda, better to "add value" (to the manufacturer of course, not to you the customer). This way they can sell you a slower drive like the Red and just by adding the CCTL/TLER feature they can charge you $53.00 more than the Barracuda. Blacks are similarly $97.00 more expensive, would the performance of the 3TB Black be significantly better than a 3TB Blue? I don't really know. RE4's and SE's are better performers probably because they have better (faster) and more expensive actuator motors which enterprise drives have resulting in much higher IOPS figures.

Anyway I choose Toshibas for my 10 drive ZFS Raid-Z2 array as this saved me $500.00 over the Reds, I believe the Toshibas also have TLER enabled as well (not that I need it with ZFS).

Greens probably would be OK drives in a NAS if you could permanently disable APM on them, since you can't then yes for non-ZFS uses I agree with you in that they are useless and Blacks are overkill primarily because of their much higher prices.

Cheers
 
Unknown-One said:
Dunno what to tell you, but my old 1TB Caviar Black couldn't get anywhere close to this kind of performance (again, aside from access time)

My guess is it has to do with the platter density in these new drives being significantly higher.
Click to expand...

How old is your black drive?
I have 3 AALS drives, they used 250/platter and they maxed out at 95mb/s and averaged only 75mb/s.
Course they are 4+ years old so this is expected compared to the latest drives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top