Are WD drives reliable?

SBD · Post by **SBD** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:39 pm

I went to Fry's today to check the price on a WD2500KS, and found they had no WD drives on the shelves. I asked the manager about it and he stated that they would no longer carry WD products. He blamed it on the number of returns of faulty drives. I've since verified in another forum that this is the case at all Fry's.

I've heard of several RMAs, but for a major retailer to stop carrying the brand altogether due to low reliability seems to be a serious problem.

So, what's the feeling out there? Are WD products really that bad?

-Dauntless

GHz · Post by **GHz** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:25 am

Until I discovered Samsung products, I was a WD fan myself. After reading good reviews about the new WD drives here and elsewhere, I recommended them to a friend building a server. Unfortunately, 2 out of 3 drives he got from Newegg went bad in just 2 weeks. He has vowed not to touch WD drives again, and I wonder myself if this is an isolated incident or not.

NyteOwl · Post by **NyteOwl** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 1:23 pm

While lots of people have good luck with them, I have never had anything but trouble with WD drives.

In 20+ years of dealing with 5.25/3.5" hard drives I have had more WD drive failures than any other brand (except miniscribe) to the point that I no longer consider them as an option.

On the other hand I have only had 3 Seagate drive failures in all this time (2 IDE, 1 SCSI). I still have my old XT (8088) class machine from 1987 which has a Segate 80MB SCSI in it. Both the machine and the drive are fully operational - and this machine used to run a BBS 24/7.

jackylman · Post by **jackylman** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 3:46 pm

I was under the impression that the major HD makers were about equal in terms of reliability. Western Digital is one of the most popular retail brands, so it makes sense that there might be a lot of returns.

It seems WD and Samsung are the quiet leaders. I've seen a lot of people gripe about Samsung reliability on here, enough to scare me away from that brand. I've also had bad experiences with other Samsung products (esp. monitors). WD, on the other hand, has always been reliable for me. I really hope their more recent drives are reliable because I just got a WD2500KS for my mom's new computer.

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:39 pm

I think this thread is indicative of the fact that it really goes both ways. My sister's computer has a 160 GB WD that's working perfectly for the past six months (we got it used). My two Samsungs, one over a year old, the other three months, are working very well too. (And I couldn't be happier with my Samsung LCDs...)

To answer your question: I wouldn't say WD drives are any less reliable than the other major manufacturers'.

Tibors · Post by **Tibors** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:02 pm

This question gets asked again and again for every HD brand. Despite the anecdotal evidence people start bringing in such a thread, the only good answer we can give you is: We don't know. The only people knowing the answer to this question are the brand itself and large OEMs. They are the only ones that handle a large enough number of disks to give a good overview of reliability.

The only times the general public gets a good view of this, is when something really disastrous happens like the IBM deathstar. But that only says something about a single product or product line, not about a brand.

SBD · Post by **SBD** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:51 pm

Thanks for the replies. I know the long-term record for WD is good. I've owned some in the past, but haven't bought a new drive in about 5 years. My concern isn't because of a few complaints on a forum somewhere. My concern was because a high-volume retailer has dropped the brand, a chain with the records to indicate the overall reliability. Actually, my thoughts did go to the IBM Deathstar fiasco when I left Fry's. I'm wondering if something of that caliber was starting to take shape with WD.

Anyway, anymore comments are welcome. I think I'm going to go ahead and pick up a 2500KS for a system drive, and a 5000KS for storage. The 250Gb drive is more than I need for a system/apps drive, but I can't justify the cost of a Raptor drive, and none of the other small drives (<100Gb) seem to stack up. The benchmarks for performance and quietness are all good for the SE16s, and I know at least some recent WD customers are very happy with their drives.

paapaa · Post by **paapaa** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 12:13 am

I also think there is no reason to think WD is any less/more reliable than any other manufacturer. All manufacturers have had and will have unreliable units or batches but overall they all are reliable. You can see some numbers in www.storagereview.com. They conduct a reliability survey but I'm not convinced that the data is 100% unbiased.

Nevertheless, always backup important data and never use Raid0! Backup is the key factor.

riddles · Post by **riddles** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:10 pm

the data is always biased.
but i can say that from my industry point of view (as in the industry I work in) there has been a large move from maxtro to WD due to WDs better reliability. WD perform much better in always on and hot environmnets, and consequently in many other environments. just do do anything stupid like touch it with your bare hands while not grounded and fry it by discharging static, i wonder how many people do that....(mind you, you wont even feel the static, but the drive will)

also, a DOA drive, is not an unrealiable drive, its plaind dead. its how long a drive lasts that actually works when you get it that counts. DOAs are a neusance at best, late quality control

if you need mass storage back up solutions, an external drive that you keep disconnected, and only reconnect when needed (once a week?) is good.

halcyon · Post by **halcyon** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:31 pm

Yes, WD is reliable. Maxtor less so. Statistics: http://www.warrantyweek.com/archive/ww20060502.html

SBD · Post by **SBD** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:20 pm

Nice link

As a group, data storage device manufacturers paid out $571 million in warranty claims last year, down 3.2% from 2004. After dipping to a new low of 1.5% at midyear, claims rates for this group rose at year's end to 1.9%. But that's still a lower claims rate than any quarter in either 2003 or 2004.

Individual data storage manufacturers are all over the map. Maxtor is up at 4.9% while Western Digital is down at 0.9%. But it all evens out in the end, to a remarkably consistent "signature" range of 1.5% to 2.3%. As Maxtor merges with Seagate, it should be interesting to watch what happens as Maxtor's above average warranty claims rates meet up with Seagate's industry average claims rates. Perhaps they'll shed some light on how two companies manufacturing such similar products can have such dissimilar claims rates.

halcyon · Post by **halcyon** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:47 pm

Translation to others:

"down" here means less drives in warranty = less drives gone kaput = better reliability.

"Up" means more drives kaput = worse reliability.

Shadowknight · Post by **Shadowknight** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:59 pm

I had a Maxtor and a WD my brother passed to me 4 years ago that died at almost the same time, so they were both probably exposed to a bad environment, I guess. February of last year, I go a Raptor. 3 months later, it wouldn't boot despite powering up. It was in a Smartdrive enclosure, and the connector for both the drive and the SATA cable were filled with corrosion. This is in the middle of NC and I keep the AC on, so there isn't any issues with high humidity, which the Smartdrive should have blocked anyway since that part of the cable is inside the enclosure. I RMAed it and the new Raptor I've had for about the last 10 months has been perfectly fine.

Devonavar · Post by **Devonavar** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:31 pm

Has anyone given any thought to the fact that not all manufacturers give the same warrany, and not all have the same term of warranty for all of their drives? That data is too sketchy to draw any conclusions.

I would imagine that the relative proportion of OEM vs. Retail shipments and the total number of units shipped would also have an effect on the numbers.

halcyon · Post by **halcyon** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:24 am

Sure. That's possible.

All in all, the margin of error could be bigger than the margin of separation.

Still, this is the least anecdotal, most statistically interesting, large sampling data available publicly.

It's either that or a coin's toss :)

nightmorph · Post by **nightmorph** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 4:12 am

Great, even though it's just touched on in this thread, I've now found another one saying that Samsung drives aren't that reliable, which means I've now had independent confirmations from a half dozen different places (multiple people in each, too).

So if WD, Samsung, and Maxtor can't be trusted, I guess that leaves Seagate -- the one brand that hasn't done too well in SPCR's latest storage reviews. Hmm, silence vs. higher reliability and 5 year warranty?

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 4:39 am

As has been discussed elsewhere on these forums, the five year warranty has more to do with marketing and less to do with engineering. It's a matter of simple calculation as to whether extra warranty costs will be offset by more people buying your drives due to perception of quality.

whiic · Post by **whiic** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:52 am

Ask if a well-known brand XXX is a good drive and someone will tell not to trust it... Well, maybe not if you ask if Seagate was reliable. Seagate isn't an exception in HDD reliability, it's just an exception when it comes to enthusiats' beliefs - people who buy Seagates seem to be more likely to buy Seagates even if they had a Seagate die on them already. That theory might not be valid universally but anectodatally that seems to be the case when reading people's opinions on StorageReview.

It appears that one of the reasons for this tolerance is the belief that Seagate has far superior reliability when compared to any other manufacturer. This belief is mainly based on warranty period as people think offering longer warranty means that they trust their own products. Because of this, isolated cases are considered as isolated cases (as they should). Also, if the public opinion is strongly in favour of some brand, saying "I will NEVER again buy brand X!" will make the person saying it look silly. This allows the brand name to survive even when there's short dips in reliability or even if reliability was only "average".

On the other hand, bad reputation is even stickyer than good reputation. People are more likely to share negative experiences and when there's talk about some reliability issue, and the discussion achieves a certain mass, it will start to accumulate more mass with it's already achieved mass and it becomes a scandal.

There's not much bad opinions of Samsungs either because the more a specific brand sells, the more there is negative opinions. (Usually the ones having negative experiences are more likely to share them.)

____

Here's my anecdotal evidence... for what it's worth (i.e not much as I don't own thousands of drives):

ALIVE, BOUGHT NEW:
Hitachi DeskStar 7K400 (HDS724040KLAT80) (video back-up, selective, USB)
Hitachi DeskStar 7K250 250GB PATA (HDS722626VLAT80) (video storage, random files, USB)
Maxtor MaXLine +II 250GB (video storage, USB)
Maxtor 10GB (back-up of WinNT)
Quantum ProDrive 420MB (DOS and Win3.11, old Compaq OEM)
Quantum Fireball ST 3.2GB (back-up of Win98SE)
Samsung PL40 40GB (bad blocks, still in use) (WinXP)
Samsung P80SD 80GB (WinXP)
Seagate 7200.9 160GB (WinXP)
Seagate U5 20GB (Win98SE)
Western Digital WD3200JB (video storage, USB)

ALIVE, OBTAINED USED:
IBM Travelstar 12GB 12GB (4200rpm, 2.5", BB) (travelling documents, USB)
Maxtor MaXLine II 300GB (yes, alive, but is a warranty replacement of a dead one) (video storage, USB)
Maxtor MaXLine +9 200GB (refurbished, warranty replacement for WD2000JB) (video storage, internal)
Maxtor (approx.) 4GB (WinNT)
Quantum Bigfoot CY 4.3GB (back-up, several OS image files)
Quantum Bigfoot BF 2.5GB (back-up, several OS image files)
Medalist Pro 2520 2.5GB (intermittent clicking syndrome) (working well after overwriting with zeroes) (not used at the moment)
Seagate Medalist 545XE 545MB (back-up of ProDrive)

DEAD:
Maxtor MaXLine II 300GB (was for video storage, USB)
Seagate 1...10 GB (don't remember anymore what it was)
Western Digital WD2000JB (was for video storage, internal)

EDIT2: updated list (Medalist Pro 2520 was missing). Maybe I should rate them and their noise levels as well... or maybe not. At least not under this thread. Most of the drive definitely are not silent.

EDIT3: since I listed WD2000JB here while it didn't die in my computer (though I was the one who bought, installed and later diagnosed, recovered from data and returned for warranty replacement), I should also mention the other drives that I've installed to my gf's computer. Thus: added DM+9 200GB and 7200.9 160GB (both alive and kicking).

______

EDIT: apparently qviri managed to answer it first. Warranty doesn't guarantee reliability. 5-year-warranty doesn't make bad drives "expensive" to manufacturer because they are always bad to the manufacturer (they lose their OEM clients, which are much bigger customers than retail business... and OEMs handle their own warranties themselves so 5-yr doesn't mean anything to them).

Second, drives that outlast 3 years usually outlast 5 years. Drives that are bad usually die within the first year and during the second.

Third, what benefit do we get of 5 year warranties? A drive we buy now is ridiculously outdated 5 years later. It's not worth much then... so isn't the warranty extension (because warranty replaces it with equivelent capacity drive, not equivalent price drive). You buy a 750GB Seagate now (and pay half a grand for it), and if it dies during the 4th year, you'll get a replacement that could be bought new for a hundred. (And you get a factory repaired one... something that would cost even less than a new drive.)

Fourth. Many people store important stuff on their drives. They think a drive with longer warranty is safer. Sorry guys: the warranty is only for the drive and for the drive ONLY, not for data and what it is worth if it is lost, or for data recovery expenses. Back-up, or suffer the consequences. And one more thing: be smart, use SMART. It can't replace backing up, though.

The Internal · Post by **The Internal** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:03 pm

I've been hearing of problems with some of the newer models from WD, particularly the ones using the new perpendicular magnetism stuff. However, my two 120 GB WD Special Editions which I've had for like... oh, I guess 4 years at least have held up rather well. I purchased one of those new 320 GB perpendicular drives from em, and so far haven't had any issues... admittedly, I've yet to use the hard drive for much... haven't even slapped an OS on it yet.

alfred · Post by **alfred** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:50 am

whiic for vice-president please

what more can we say after his post lol

In a previous life (ahem.. well ok, it was 6 years ago) I didn't have a clue about how to properly build a computer. I somehow managed to add two WD drives right below the floppy drive without any kind of airflow (don't remember what case it was but for sure it was a crap). I ran this PC for almost one year, then discovered the SMART feature and both WD drives showed temps between 65Â°C and 72Â°C most of the time. They never died and I never lost a single byte of data. Obviously this doesn't give any statistical info about how reliable WD drives were at this time, and it says nothing about current WD drives -- but I'm astonished these two WD screamers still run without any problem.

whiic · Post by **whiic** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:55 am

[OFF-TOPIC RANT]

alfred wrote:In a previous life (ahem.. well ok, it was 6 years ago) I didn't have a clue about how to properly build a computer. I somehow managed to add two WD drives right below the floppy drive without any kind of airflow (don't remember what case it was but for sure it was a crap).

Not all OEM PC's are that great either (especially small OEMs, those who don't have done the required engineering work to consider cooling but merely just assemble computer of available standard components). Choises pretty much were bad airflow or worse airflow. Old computer cases manage to be a pain in the arse. Why do they even have fan slots, if the holes for airflow are so small that the area available to airflow is less than 20% of the area that could be used (if there was no finger guard at all)? I also had one system which had a 80x80mm fan with a potentiometer to change the rpm between ... maybe 3000 to 6000rpm. 3000rpm the minimum? Regardless which rpm the fan was spinning, CPU was always at 60 deg C (reading from SpeedFan). So, the case itself had very poor airflow. I added an exhaust fan and replaced the monster cooler with a standard case fan. Now, running at 7V the temperatures are below 60 deg C... while running BOINC at 100% CPU utilization.

Not all current cases are good either, nor are all OEM implementation using those cases. They might have airflow, but the airflow into the case is at the low bottom, where as HDD rack is usually placed completely outside of air stream. Also maybe the CPU has a intake duct on the side panel so that way most air coming in the case comes through the side panel and none of the airflow actually uses the front intake openings. Even a single-platter P80 might reach 50+ deg C on such a case. I would even dare to image how hot would a 7K400 run if mounted into the in the topmost 5.25" slot. (I solved it by installing an exhaust fan, 92mm Jamicon running at 7V. JFxx25B1L series Jamicons might not be the ideal solution for silencing enthusiasts as while they undervolt well and start spinning at less than 5V, they also produce bearing noise which becomes pretty noticeable at low rpm (when airflow noise has already diminished beyond hearing threshold).)

If I'd have to rate my OEM assembled computers, the best ones are 486s... Desktop computers lying flat with CPU heatsink right next to PSU and no fan on the heatsink. No other additional fans either. (Too bad the HDDs of those computers are all noisy, small and slow. Same applies to RAM, CPU, etc.) Most 486s have way more than adequate cooling and still remain quite quiet. But I do have one good 700MHz HP computer that has only one fan (PSU). Without it's HDD (i.e running KNOPPIX) it's pretty hard to notice whether it's on or off. (Providing long enough idle time to allow CD-drive to spin down.)

So I do have both good and bad experience of these pre-assembled OEM PCs. Old ones were better, so from now on, I'll build them myself.

[/OFF-TOPIC RANT]

alfred wrote:I ran this PC for almost one year, then discovered the SMART feature and both WD drives showed temps between 65Â°C and 72Â°C most of the time. They never died and I never lost a single byte of data. Obviously this doesn't give any statistical info about how reliable WD drives were at this time, and it says nothing about current WD drives -- but I'm astonished these two WD screamers still run without any problem.

It's pretty hard to evaluate the effect of changed environment to HDD reliability. The reason is the same as is when trying to compare two different drive model's reliability: it requires absurdly big sample of drives to make a reliable estimate.

From my data set, I've bought 14 drives new and of them, 3 have failed. That's a 21% failure rate. That'd be very alarming, if it was correct for all the drives and not just my very small data set. Typical HDD failure probablity during warranty period is very low (I'm not certain but probably around 2%...3%). 10% is already a disaster (something like 75GXP/60GXP was). Obviously, we cannot determine whether a brand is good or bad just by our own experience (or experiences of only a small group of friends).

Me having a 21% failure rate would be alarming, if I had a very big sample of drives. I use some of my drives in USB enclosures and they travel a lot. Some of them have poor cooling (only 7K400 has a DIY fan attached to USB enclosure). So was, only one of them died in an external enclosure. Two died inside a computer case (different computer, different PSU). Since I have too small a sample, I can't argue that travelling with HDDs doesn't carry an added risk of killing the drives.

Maxtor MaXLine +II 250GB was inside a OneTouch (1st gen) USB/FW enclosure until it's warranty period expired. When it was running, it felt like I could fry eggs on it... and the HDD inside was probably at least 10 deg C hotter than the enclosure I was touching. Very likely 60++ deg C during the summer, I'd guess, yet it's alive.

7K250 has suffered some bad handling and transportation (like me slipping and falling on my arse on the sidewalk, the drive in a backpack, or accidentally banging the enclosure against a desk, etc.). It's like all the mishaps have happened only when I handle that drive. No bad sectors, no scary SMART values. But that doesn't mean it's safe to mishandle them.

_______________

EDIT:

WARNING! Do NOT mount non-Maxtors in OneTouch enclosures. 2nd gen OneTouch will permanently (or semi-permanently) clip the drive to 137GB/128GiB, possibly causing data loss, certainly causing capacity loss. I recently found out even 1st gen OneTouch may do this: no problems with WD3200 but my 7K250 was clipped.

The issue has been discussed here: http://forums.storagereview.net/index.p ... opic=22403

Chocolinx · Post by **Chocolinx** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:39 pm

I have had 2 WDs in the past. Cavier SATA and Cavier SE SATA. Both were 160GB and both are now pissing me off.

My older Cavier 160 GB SATA started making a whinning noise after 2 years of use. It's a really low pitch whinning noise that I doubt most people will hear unless you're about 1 meter away from the case (really silent case). So I guess normal people wouldn't care. As for my newer one that was only about one year old. Well it decided it wouldn't work anymore and sent it in for RMA (Which cost me $10 shipping).

Anyway, personally, it seems like WD gets worst as they get newer o.O Weird huh? So I doubt I'll be going back to them for a while. They're not bad for the first 2 years I suppose but I've had to RMA both my HDDs from them. So unless my current Seagate starts pissing me off too. I might consider them again or head straight to Samsung.