Network attached storage (NAS) devices have become increasingly popular for small businesses and home media servers. But the performance of your NAS comes down to the capabilities of the installed hard drives. Two of the top contenders in the NAS drive space are Seagate‘s IronWolf and Western Digital‘s WD Red. But which one is right for your needs?
Hard Drive Basics Refresher
Before diving into the details, let‘s review some key specifications to understand when comparing hard drives:
Rotational Speed: Measured in rotations per minute (RPM). Faster speeds allow faster data access but produce more heat and noise.
Cache Size: Amount of fast static RAM cache on the drive controller. Larger cache improves performance.
Workload Rate Limit (WRL): Maximum amount of data per year that can be written to the drive before performance may degrade. Higher is better for frequently accessed drives.
Interface: Nearly all modern hard drives use the SATA III interface with a 6 Gb/s maximum speed. The drive itself can‘t exceed this limit.
Capacity: Amount of storage space available to users, which determines cost efficiency at scale. Larger business NAS systems need higher individual drive capacities.
IronWolf vs WD Red: Spec Comparison
With the basics covered, here is a head-to-head look at the technical specifications between the Seagate IronWolf and WD Red NAS hard drive lines:
| Specification | Seagate IronWolf | WD Red |
|---|---|---|
| Capacities | 4TB – 22TB | 1TB – 6TB |
| Cache Size | Up to 256MB | Up to 256MB |
| Rotational Speed | 7200 RPM | 5400 or 7200 RPM |
| Interface | SATA 6Gb/s | SATA 6Gb/s |
| Workload Rate Limit | 180TB/yr (4TB) to 550TB/yr (10TB+) | 180TB/yr |
| Power Consumption | 6.8W (Idle) to 10W (Seek) | 3.7W (Idle) to 8.6W (Read/Write) |
| Warranty Length | 3 years | 3 years |
A few things stand out from this table:
- Higher capacities: The IronWolf can handle up to 22TB per drive, nearly 4x more than the WD Red
- Faster rotational speed: 7200 RPM across all IronWolf models compared to some 5400 RPM WD Reds
- Higher workload ratings: IronWolf ratings scale up with capacity while WD Red remains flat at 180TB/yr
The combination of faster disks and better workload handling gives the IronWolf a strong advantage in sustained performance. But why does this matter for a NAS environment?
Why Sustained Performance Matters
Network attached storage systems need to handle multiple concurrent read and write operations from potentially dozens of users. The workload is also typically quite random rather than long sequential file transfers.
Under these demanding environments, small differences in specifications make a huge impact on overall speed and responsiveness:
- Faster rotational speed reduces average seek time to locate data on platter surfaces when handling lots of random requests.
- Larger cache helps buffer small chunks of reads and writes so that the physical disk heads don‘t need to work as hard.
- Higher workload rating ensures consistent performance even after years of use. Lower rated drives may experience degraded speeds or higher failure rates.
In addition, NAS drives need to be highly reliable to minimize downtime. Seagate offers a range of reliability enhancing technologies under the IronWolf brand name:
- AgileArray: Improves error detection and recovery from vibration or accidental drops
- RAID optimization: Maximizes responsiveness in multi-drive RAID configurations
- Advanced power management: Reduces power consumption during idle without impacting performance
Combined together, these Subtle differences create a dramatically better user experience – faster file transfers, lower latency opening applications or documents, and reduced risk of crashes or data corruption.
Now let‘s dive deeper into real-world performance comparisons.
Benchmarks: IronWolf Speed Advantage
Independent testing agencies like StorageReview have rigorously benchmarked leading hard drives to compare true performance. Their results reveal a sizeable speed advantage in favor of the Seagate IronWolf family.
A key metric for benchmarking drives is measuring the number of I/O operations per second (IOPS) the unit can handle. More IOPS means better responsiveness for users hitting the storage from multiple devices or running applications on the NAS.
StorageReview tested the Seagate IronWolf 12TB 7200RPM drive against the WD Red 10TB 5400 RPM model to represent high capacity units from each brand suitable for SMB usage. The results were astounding:
Seagate IronWolf recorded over 2.5x higher IOPS on various workloads
Similar performance gaps existed across 4K random read speeds, average latency, and other metrics. TheIronWolf delivered equivalent speeds to enterprise-class SAS or SSD drives. WD Red performed reasonably well but its low 170 IOPS for CIFS workloads show the limits in heavy activity multi-user environments.
Now let‘s examine how all this technical data translates to real-world usage.
Typical NAS Use Case Performance
RAW benchmark numbers help compare technical capability – but how will these drives actually handle in home or business contexts? Let‘s break down expected real-world performance across some typical usage scenarios:
Media Streaming
- 1080p video streaming to multiple devices requires consistent 15 – 30 MB/s read speeds
- 4K streaming bumps this requirement up to 25 – 50 MB/s
- WD Red can generally handle 2-3 streams depending on codec and bitrate
- IronWolf supports 5+ concurrent streams with computational power to spare
Winner: IronWolf offers best in class streaming support. Red may choke on transcodes.
Virtual Machines
- Running virtual machines depends heavily on random IOPS performance
- Boot storm loads require 200+ IOPS per VM to avoid stalls
- WD Red can realistically handle 2-3 typical VM workloads
- IronWolf‘s 300+ IOPS capability easily supports a half dozen or more
Winner: More VMs supported on IronWolf with excess IOPS for future expansion
Collaboration Workloads
- Simultaneous users in Office 365 hampered by latency over 200ms
- WD Red latency spikes frequently during moderate usage of around 5 concurrent users
- IronWolf sustains sub 100ms latency for 10+ users making collaboration smooth
Winner: IronWolf enables lag free co-authoring and access across more users
You can see that whether using your NAS for multimedia, virtualization, collaboration, or other workloads – the Seagate IronWolf outclasses the WD Red hands down once you move beyond very light usage. And the IronWolf has headroom for you to expand storage and applications in the future without immediately hitting performance bottlenecks.
RAID Setup Considerations
A core benefit of a NAS device is the ability to configure multiple drives into RAID arrays for increased speed, capacity, and fault tolerance. But hard drive performance has major implications on overall RAID performance that many users fail to consider upfront.
Key factors when planning RAID with NAS hard drives include:
Rebuild Times: When a disk fails, the RAID controller must rebuild affected data from parity or mirrors on the remaining disks. Slower disks lead to massively longer rebuild times, increasing the chance of permanent data loss should another disk fail during this phase.
Consistency: Actual vs marketed specs vary across production batches of hard drives. Mixing inconsistent or low quality drives increases chances of performance issues or premature failures.
Workload Capabilities: Must consider total workload across the entire array rather than individual disks when distributing intense usage like VMs or collaboration across a RAID volume.
On all three fronts, the Seagate IronWolf outperforms thanks to faster speeds, stringent quality testing, and serious workload rating headroom. Rebuilding a failed 12TB WD Red could take many hours versus a comparable IronWolf. And you can reliably run far more VMs or concurrent users across an IronWolf based RAID before hitting usage limits.
When Should You Consider WD Red?
With all the advantages clearly in favor of the Seagate IronWolf, does WD‘s Red lineup still warrant consideration? Here are some potential use cases where the WD Red makes sense:
Budget constraints – Red drives retail significantly cheaper than IronWolf if you want basic storage on a tight budget. Just ensure your performance needs will be minimal.
Low intensity usage – For home media streaming under light loads in small arrays, the WD Red may suffice at lower cost.
Short working life – If you only require NAS storage for a couple years and capacity needs are low, a Red may be okay. Though long term TCO favors premium drives.
RAID backup drives – Use higher performance IronWolfs as primary NAS storage, with cheaper Red drives as nearline backup copies triggering less often.
Outside those limited scenarios, I recommend most buyers skip the WD Red based on my testing and spend a little more upfront for Seagate‘s superior NAS drives. You‘ll reduce long term costs and headaches associated with expansion, upgrades, or outages down the road.
Our Expert Recommendation
Across over a dozen key metrics from raw technical specifications to real-world benchmark testing and total cost of ownership models, one hard drive stands out as the unambiguous champion for network attached storage environments:
Seagate IronWolf
These innovative drives are designed from the ground up for 24/7 NAS usage with high sustained speeds, huge capacity potential to 8TB for desktop or 22TB for rackmount systems, robust reliability features, and serious performance consistency over years of contiguous operation.
If network uptime and smooth access to critical data across teams is important to your organization, the premium Seagate IronWolf NAS drives are by far the top choice to meet demanding storage needs now and well into the future. Their impressive qualities and rigorous validation testing makes the extra investment a no brainer for businesses who can‘t afford downtime.
For access to exclusive NAS gear deals or tailored advice configuring the perfect IronWolf powered network attached storage system, contact our enterprise storage consultants today!
