WD Harddisk - Green? Black? Or Red?

WD Harddisk - Green? Black? Or Red?

  • WD Green

    Votes: 26 17.8%
  • WD Red

    Votes: 48 32.9%
  • WD Black

    Votes: 72 49.3%

  • Total voters
    146

i1magic

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
22,366
Reaction score
117
Dear all,

I am planning to get 2 x 3TB harddisk to run RAID1.

So would like to find out which of the harddisk to get.

Price from Bizgram (Dated 16 Feb 2013) :

Western Digital Green 3TB @ $173 (3yrs warranty)
Western Digital Red 3TB @ $237 (3yrs warranty)

Western Digital Black 2TB @ $195 / 4TB @ $408 (5yrs warranty)

Please advice.
 

Swiftbladez

Master Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
4,381
Reaction score
10
many people say green run raid may run in to problem. others now say the newer wd greens do not have such problems. you can google it up.
 

Asure7

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2009
Messages
5,170
Reaction score
276
Since you are planning to run RAID1, I reckon that the data is v precious to you (whose isn't anyway..).
Thus, I will go for RED. Based on technical specs, RED is of higher quality w/ longer MTBF.

2 ways to look at it. Marketing will tell you RED is built better than the "regular" hard disks that are "good enough".

But in my opinion, why should we settle for less? Our desktop/laptop harddisks should in the 1st place be as robust as RED. Our data there is as important to us too. Not just in RAIDs or NAS environment.

Marketing tells us WD Green is designed to "save power".
Business sense tell me the Green is of lower quality in the first place. Thats why it has to run at a 5400rpm limit, and powersave to lower the operating temperature. It cannot take the stress of a "regular" harddisk, otherwise it will fail easily.

One of the reasons why Green may fail more often in RAIDs that run 24/7 may be due to the Intellipark "feature". Agressively parking the drive's head after 8 seconds of inactivity can kill any hard disks fast in a normal RAID environment.
(Intellipark is removed in RED).

If you don't run in a 24/7 environment, or use them less than 8 hrs a day, you may get by with WD Green by disabling the Intellipark with WDidle3. IMO Black is also of better built quality than the Green.
 
Last edited:

i1magic

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
22,366
Reaction score
117
many people say green run raid may run in to problem. others now say the newer wd greens do not have such problems. you can google it up.

Don't need liao .... think I'll just give WD Green a miss liao ....

So it is now .... WD Red or WD Black.
 

i1magic

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
22,366
Reaction score
117
Since you are planning to run RAID1, I reckon that the data is v precious to you (whose isn't anyway..).
Thus, I will go for RED. Based on technical specs, RED is of higher quality w/ longer MTBF.

2 ways to look at it. Marketing will tell you RED is built better than the "regular" hard disks that are "good enough".

But in my opinion, why should we settle for less? Our desktop/laptop harddisks should in the 1st place be as robust as RED. Our data there is as important to us too. Not just in RAIDs or NAS environment.

Marketing tells us WD Green is designed to "save power".
Business sense tell me the Green is of lower quality in the first place. Thats why it has to run at a 5400rpm limit, and powersave to lower the operating temperature. It cannot take the stress of a "regular" harddisk, otherwise it will fail easily.

One of the reasons why Green may fail more often in RAIDs that run 24/7 may be due to the Intellipark "feature". Agressively parking the drive's head after 8 seconds of inactivity can kill any hard disks fast in a normal RAID environment.
(Intellipark is removed in RED).

If you don't run in a 24/7 environment, or use them less than 8 hrs a day, you may get by with WD Green by disabling the Intellipark with WDidle3. IMO Black is also of better built quality than the Green.

I am not using it for 24/7. Seriously ... I don't see why typical home user would need 24/7 NAS running.

Mine is probably 16/7.

For data ... I would classify it into 3 category :

1. Data which gone ... will result in $$ loss. Eg. Customer's file, etc.
2. Data which gone ... will result in heart pain. Eg. wedding photos, baby photos, etc.
3. Data which gone ... will result in heart pain but all this files can live without or download again from internet.

Usually most people has very little of Cat 1. Increasing of Cat 2. And tons of Cat 3.

So mainly the RAID1 is for Cat 1 & 2 and if got spare space left ... for selected Cat 3.
 

i1magic

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
22,366
Reaction score
117
Price from Bizgram (Dated 16 Feb 2013) :

Western Digital Green 3TB @ $173 - Price/GB : $0.058/GB
3yrs warranty : Price/GB/1yr warranty = $0.019/GB/1yr warranty

Western Digital Red 3TB @ $237 - Price/GB : $0.079/GB
3yrs warranty : Price/GB/1yr warranty = $0.026/GB/1yr warranty

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Digital Black 2TB @ $195 - Price/GB : $0.098/GB
5yrs warranty : Price/GB/1yr warranty = $0.020/GB/1yr warranty

Western Digital Black 4TB @ $408 - Price/GB : $0.102/GB
5yrs warranty : Price/GB/1yr warranty = $0.020/GB/1yr warranty

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From the above stats .... WD Black is ok to get leh.
 

davidktw

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
13,550
Reaction score
1,301
Since you are planning to run RAID1, I reckon that the data is v precious to you (whose isn't anyway..).
Thus, I will go for RED. Based on technical specs, RED is of higher quality w/ longer MTBF.

2 ways to look at it. Marketing will tell you RED is built better than the "regular" hard disks that are "good enough".

But in my opinion, why should we settle for less? Our desktop/laptop harddisks should in the 1st place be as robust as RED. Our data there is as important to us too. Not just in RAIDs or NAS environment.

Marketing tells us WD Green is designed to "save power".
Business sense tell me the Green is of lower quality in the first place. Thats why it has to run at a 5400rpm limit, and powersave to lower the operating temperature. It cannot take the stress of a "regular" harddisk, otherwise it will fail easily.

One of the reasons why Green may fail more often in RAIDs that run 24/7 may be due to the Intellipark "feature". Agressively parking the drive's head after 8 seconds of inactivity can kill any hard disks fast in a normal RAID environment.
(Intellipark is removed in RED).

If you don't run in a 24/7 environment, or use them less than 8 hrs a day, you may get by with WD Green by disabling the Intellipark with WDidle3. IMO Black is also of better built quality than the Green.

WD Green overly short autoparking timeout can be set to 5 mins with WIDLE(No you can't disable them), I have compared between an altered WD Green and the a WD Red, the load_unload_cycle / powered on hours is pretty much statistically same after the alteration.

As for whether TLER is really that useful, it will largely depends on the actual RAID configuration. As far as I'm aware, as long as the RAID timeout to a unresponsive I/O operation is longer than what the drive gives, the RAID will not degrade the array. Besides for Linux MD, one can use Write-Intent Bitmap to tackle the issue of a degraded disk joining back. The resilvering don't need to be full fledge as far as I'm aware.

Since WD Red is a relatively new product, I don't think there is any REAL reports to date that can be used to ascertain that WD Red MUST have better longevity compared to WD Green.

Today I'm using both types of drives in the same array. I'm also trying out the new type of drives and see how in terms of performance and durability as compared to WD Green. I have been using WD Green for 2+ years and so far 2 have failed after 1.7+years of continuous used. However those are where Intellipark is on per 8s. I have just set my RMA HDD to 5mins, we will see between these 2 changes and also models if there is any big discrepancies.
 

davidktw

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
13,550
Reaction score
1,301
I am not using it for 24/7. Seriously ... I don't see why typical home user would need 24/7 NAS running.

There are good reasons, would you like to know ? The notion that consumer doesn't need, I think is at far sight a misconception. I wonder who set the rule in the pass that consumer have no needs for 24by7 NAS ? Even your TV is on standby 24by7, same for a lot of users computers nowadays. I don't see how that statement make sense in today's context.
 

davidktw

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
13,550
Reaction score
1,301
The speculations on the durability of WD Green is inaccurate if I may say so. First there is not an even apple-to-apple comparison here worth looking at. Most people don't use WD Black if you just want archival. WD Red is so new to even have sufficient statistics. WD Green pricing is low enough to see widespead adoption. So where is the common ground for accurate statistics to show between WD Green, Red and Black that the amount of feedback you see online are accurate representation on the failure rate probability between these 3 different models ?

Would you be surprised if WD Red has been out longer and have more negative feedback if WD Green product comes out later than WD Red ?

Use them yourselves and make the judgement. These reports online are so inaccurate and you don't even know how these drives are used in these reports made.
 

i1magic

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
22,366
Reaction score
117
There are good reasons, would you like to know ? The notion that consumer doesn't need, I think is at far sight a misconception.

I wonder who set the rule in the pass that consumer have no needs for 24by7 NAS ? Even your TV is on standby 24by7, same for a lot of users computers nowadays. I don't see how that statement make sense in today's context.

Yes, do enlighten me, I really have not come across home user who need 24/7 access to their NAS due to mission critical requirement. So far those I know run NAS 24/7 so that they can access their files over the internet and share files over their home network.

No lah ... I don't mean consumers CANNOT have 24/7. What I mean is that 24/7 are usually are for mission critical stuffs. Yes ... of course if we have a NAS running 24/7 ... we could access to it etc lah.

"Sleep mode" ok lah ... I also set my PC to "Sleep mode" when not in use.
 

KalTorak

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2000
Messages
1,579
Reaction score
23
This is a weird poll, since the 3 WD colors are meant for different storage purposes.

WD Green are mostly for non-24/7 storage only requirements.
Running the Greens in RAID-1 will work fine, but I won't run the Greens in RAID arrays that has parity check.

WD Red are supposedly meant for NAS devices running in RAID and 24/7 type functions.
Since these drives are relatively NEW, it is yet to be confirmed regarding the 'longer' MTBF rating.

WD Black was the choice selection for OS drives...till SSD prices dropped.
5 years ago, everyone was recommending the Blacks for OS disk.
Many, like me, even run them @ RAID-0 for better performance.
These days it is hard to recommend the WD Black, unless you have huge chunks of data (GBs-TBs in sizes) that are frequently accessed all the time.
The Blacks are also most costly, and not Value-for-Money as compared to the other HDDs.

From my own experience, I had similar failure rates for both WD Green and Black.
However, the WD Black tend to fail faster (more likely) due to the heat generated by the dual-processor thingy on these drives.
And yes, even with active FAN cooling these hot disks!

Time will tell if the Reds in my NAS will face similar issues I had with the Green and Black.
 
Last edited:

octacon

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2000
Messages
5,021
Reaction score
3
I have about 4X1TB , 4X3TB WD , 2X2TB WD Green harddisk for my NASes , so far no issue .
 

davidktw

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
13,550
Reaction score
1,301
Yes, do enlighten me, I really have not come across home user who need 24/7 access to their NAS due to mission critical requirement. So far those I know run NAS 24/7 so that they can access their files over the internet and share files over their home network.

No lah ... I don't mean consumers CANNOT have 24/7. What I mean is that 24/7 are usually are for mission critical stuffs. Yes ... of course if we have a NAS running 24/7 ... we could access to it etc lah.

"Sleep mode" ok lah ... I also set my PC to "Sleep mode" when not in use.

Okay, since you want to know, then I shall share my 2 cents worth. If I sound too direct in this post, it's not targeted at you but rather I hope anyone reading this can wake up from their fantasy. The biggest reason to why some don't find it's necessary for NAS to run 24by7 is in my sincere opinion "ignorance".

Upon reading the word "ignorance" it seems pretty offensive, however, I must say I was ignorant too. Because of this ignorance, I lost one of my previous 3D works of 100,000 polygons of a very detailed Tamiya 3D model draw using 3D Studio Release 4 on the times when Pentium Pro in still new in the era.

I observed you have used the words "mission critical" in the context of Enterprise environments. However with respect with what I have lost, I call it Legacy and I will exchange for my ignorance with this Legacy any day, any time. That is mission critical to a company can be also apply to a normal consumer. The fact that you bother to store something for "this" long into a storage and you use it from time to time means it matter to you in some way. The measurement to this is cost. If I am in a business and data are important to the extent of affecting my business, I will not only buy a good backup plan, but also insurance on the data. For consumer, if you are not willing to invest in data protection, then be prepare to lose your time and effort to generate or acquire those information that you store in your storage system. They may not a life and death matter, but in some sense, they will affect your life causing regrets or inconvenience. As such you can definitely attach a cost to such a lost. If I can afford a good backup and redundancy strategy in the past, I wouldn't have lost my previous effort and works which can add up to my resume today and also what I can show to my next generation of what I have achieved previously. Can I say my lost is priceless in this sense ? Will it be mission critical to my life ? As you can see, it all boils down to dollars and cents if you really want to give an amount to it.

10 years ago, in order to achieve the notation of data redundancies and backup strategy, one will need to be a system guru and its probably in the five figures range to achieve what can be achieve today. As such, my ignorance back then was probability not as ignorant today given that its a 5 figure sum that I was looking at. Here I will first share how much it cost to maintain an idling NAS at 24by7 with 3x WD Green + 2x WD Red. 51 Watts, that's all! Review the image below when the electrical consumption is captured during NAS idle time.
2l2niu.jpg


At 51W, it's 38kWh in 31days. Based on PUB's most recent electrical tariffs for household of 21.04cents/kWh, it's equivalent to near $8/month. Okay, perhaps it will be inaccurate to say that everyone can afford this amount, but if you can visit Macdonald at least once per month, I say you can afford it. If you can afford more than 1K worth of electrical appliance, including your big PSU running at few hundreds watts, I'm sure you can afford it. If you don't know that it's this cheap to run a 5 bay with 5 loaded harddisks NAS, then you are classified under "ignorance".

One thing is people seems to underestimate the meaning of data protection. They thought as long as they keep a few copies, they are safe. They thought as long as they weekly perform backup, they are safe. With per storage unit just reached an all-time high 4TB, is one harddisk going to be sufficient ? What about the idiom of "Never put all your eggs in one basket?" It seems there is no lack of users with such concepts.

So what is the value of running a NAS 24by7 given that it seems relatively affordable to do so in today's technology and costing for a consumer. First, like I have quoted below, do you know when is the most vulnerable moment where a light bulb burst ? Read up from here at Light Bulb Failure Causes

After you know how a bulb works, you can in some way relate to how electrics pass through electronics when the temperature is cold. Not it will not just burn like a filament, but under the same scientific reasonings, it is reasonable to assume the stress upon the silicon tunnels when a sudden rush of electrons pass through these conduits is probably stressful. Machines are not humans, the notion that they require resting is irrelevant. In fact, what they need is Consistency. Do you have a harddisk that cease to function after collecting dust in one corner of your house. I have quite a good number of such harddisk. It seems like long time not using them doesn't do them any good. Perhaps the silicon in them have corroded over the years, but surely rest is not relevant to them. They erode over time and rather than having them eroding, doing nothing, why not make them work for you ? Do you think 5400rpm is going to erode your harddisk platters away ? Trust me, the material on the surface erode faster than the mechanical motion in them. Harddisk are best operating at temperatures around 40 deg celsius and I will let them do so all the time.

During these 24by7 times, what are this storage going to do ? A few things actually

1) It will be doing automated backup daily without user intervention
2) It will be performing daily SMART tests daily without user intervention
3) Monthly, it will be performing background disk scrubbing to identify any failing sectors without user intervention
4) As my laptop is used daily for work and personal too, backup is done automatically to the NAS per hour without my intervention. It's as simple as plugin my network cable and just let things run.
5) This is optional but my NAS seems to do a lot more than just a NAS, so these are irrelevant to storage purposes.

I am a normal consumer, I'm not running any business critical business. But because I appreciate the integrity of my data and I want to know that what I wrote into the NAS is safe, I have to at least have these mechanism available to best notify me in situation that the storage may fail, I can replace the harddisk as soon as possible. Today I'm not taking chances for my resilvering operations. I run RAID 6 to ensure in the event during resilvering operation encounter a URE, it will still be possible for a complete recovery.

I have so often read about people that asked for recovery service. These people don't know that there is such redundancy and backup strategy, I don't blame them. If they know about it and not doing anything about it, serve them right.

I have also read about people performing manual backup from time to time, but I have read people admit they do fail to do it periodically because it's an hassle or who knows you could be out for weeks for a tour, or you are just so damn tired coming back from work and rather just leave the data in your laptop sleep over the night. If you are not concern about your data, why even backup. If you feel its an hassle to do backup day in day out, why make yourself do it manually when it can be an automated process ? The whole idea is the extra effort to get something automated doesn't cost you a bomb, it just cost you time to think about the process.

Next is the backup and backup but never knows if your backup works or that data you backup 10 months ago is still readable. I'm impressed that the confidence level is so high for so many people whom is not scrubbing their disk from time to time. So how often you want to do it ? Daily or annually ? I do it monthly because I think it's good enough. In any case a disk scrub will takes hours and can easily reach over a day if you have a large array. So are you going to run this process with your system on over night ? Does it takes hundreds of dollars to have such operation ? I understand it's not everybody's knowledge to know how, but at least it seems like a good question to ask about the integrity of your data in the storage right ?

Thus for the above few opertions about data storage and the cost to run it 24by7, I hope it make sense to everybody what is the advantage of running a NAS 24by7 and how it benefits you at the end of the day having it run 24by7 doing what it's meant to do - Protect Your Data.

With the advancement of data storage technology, having storage size growing so fast and so much reasons to put your data consolidated into a single place, it makes sense to plan properly on how you want to protect these information.
 

i1magic

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
22,366
Reaction score
117
The speculations on the durability of WD Green is inaccurate if I may say so. First there is not an even apple-to-apple comparison here worth looking at.

Most people don't use WD Black if you just want archival. WD Red is so new to even have sufficient statistics. WD Green pricing is low enough to see widespead adoption.

So where is the common ground for accurate statistics to show between WD Green, Red and Black that the amount of feedback you see online are accurate representation on the failure rate probability between these 3 different models ?

Would you be surprised if WD Red has been out longer and have more negative feedback if WD Green product comes out later than WD Red ?

Use them yourselves and make the judgement. These reports online are so inaccurate and you don't even know how these drives are used in these reports made.

Yes .. agree with you that the WD Red is new and more expensive.

Based on the figure I posted above ... the $/GB/yr warranty for WD Black seems to be same at WD Green.

So I am basically torn between getting 2 x 3TB WD Green vs 2 x 4TB WD Black which the former would be more comfortable for the pocket. You are right about higher adoption of WD Green which also translate to higher RMA frequency by users.

But this is just to get some feedback before I decide.
 

i1magic

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
22,366
Reaction score
117
This is a weird poll, since the 3 WD colors are meant for different storage purposes.

WD Green are mostly for non-24/7 storage only requirements.
Running the Greens in RAID-1 will work fine, but I won't run the Greens in RAID arrays that has parity check.

WD Red are supposedly meant for NAS devices running in RAID and 24/7 type functions.
Since these drives are relatively NEW, it is yet to be confirmed regarding the 'longer' MTBF rating.

WD Black was the choice selection for OS drives...till SSD prices dropped.
5 years ago, everyone was recommending the Blacks for OS disk.
Many, like me, even run them @ RAID-0 for better performance.
These days it is hard to recommend the WD Black, unless you have huge chunks of data (GBs-TBs in sizes) that are frequently accessed all the time.
The Blacks are also most costly, and not Value-for-Money as compared to the other HDDs.

From my own experience, I had similar failure rates for both WD Green and Black.
However, the WD Black tend to fail faster (more likely) due to the heat generated by the dual-processor thingy on these drives.
And yes, even with active FAN cooling these hot disks!

Time will tell if the Reds in my NAS will face similar issues I had with the Green and Black.

Thank you for your input ... I am getting feedback to decide.
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ Forums. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts. Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards and Terms and Conditions for more information.
Top