The main problem with the current 2,5 inch HDDs is the use of the SMR recording instead of using the classic CMR recroding technology. Sometimes a SMR HDD are very slow during write requests in particular if the are many parallel recordings running or in parallel some other actions are on the HDD.
I´ve made many tests with a classic CMR HDD and a modern SMR HDD.
A SMR HDD is not a good working HDD and is not usefull for the realtime requirement of the recordings. For an archive HDD the SMR ist ok.
Today most current 2,5 inch HDDs with 2TB or more use the SMR technology and that is very bad.
I have made many tests in the past with a ST2000LM0t5 or ST2000LX001 2TB HDD in my two uno4kse and these HDDs are not suitable for a STB which can make many parallel recordings and which has a powerful CPU to do a copy or movie cut in parallel to the recordings. With a SMR HDD it doesn´t work without hicks in the recorrdings, but with a classic HDD (ST2000LM003) it works very perfectly.
Sometime the SMR HDD musts make many internal additional track reads and writes for writing a new track betweeing existing data tracks. The tracks are overlapping in SMR HDD and that is the disadvantage of the SMR HDD. They are not able to write a single track between neighbour tracks as a classic CMR HDD can do
A SMR HDD normally has 128MB and more internal cache to handle the additional internal reads and writes So if a HDD has so much cache it maybe a SMR HDD.
Edited by anudanan, 13 August 2019 - 06:59.
Receiver:2 x Uno4k SE (PLI 7.3 rel), 1 x ET9200 (PLI 4.0), NAS: 2 x QNAP 410, TV: LG 65C8llla, LG 47LB570V, LG 42LM615S, Sound: Yamaha RX-v663, Teufel System 5 THX