Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red (Which is Best in 2025/2026)?

In late 2025, choosing between Seagate IronWolf and WD Red for a NAS is less about raw performance and more about secondary factors such as noise, power consumption, pricing, and ecosystem. Both brands now offer broadly similar SATA performance in their mainstream and Pro lines once you reach 7200 RPM, 256 MB cache, and CMR recording, and both quote comparable workload ratings and multi bay support for NAS use. Durability claims in MTBF, workload per year, and 24 by 7 operation are also effectively at parity on paper, and the underlying engineering around vibration control, error recovery, and NAS specific firmware has converged to a large extent. Where meaningful technical differences still exist is in the maximum capacities on offer and how they are positioned. Seagate currently leads on headline capacity in the NAS tier with IronWolf Pro drives up to 30 TB, while WD Red Pro tops out slightly lower but overlaps most of the mainstream size points that home and small business users are likely to deploy. As a result, the decision for many buyers is less about which brand is objectively better and more about how each behaves in real deployments in terms of acoustics, energy use, long term running costs, warranty extras such as bundled recovery services, and regional pricing patterns at specific capacities.

Seagate vs WD (and Toshiba!) Market Share in 2025/2026?

Across the HDD industry in 2024 and early 2025, Western Digital and Seagate remain closely matched, with Western Digital holding a slight lead by several common measures. Public breakdowns of exabytes shipped in 2024 put Western Digital at roughly 38.6 percent of HDD capacity shipped worldwide, Seagate at about 37 percent, and Toshiba at around 24.4 percent, confirming that the market is effectively a 2 vendor race with a smaller but still significant third player. Although the exact percentages vary depending on whether you look at units, capacity, or revenue, the pattern is consistent, with Western Digital marginally ahead and Seagate following closely behind.

Recent industry and financial reporting also shows Western Digital gaining momentum in high capacity nearline drives, particularly in data center and cloud deployments, with disk based revenue and shipped capacity outpacing Seagate in at least some recent quarters. At the same time, Seagate retains a leadership position in very large capacity models, including 30 TB HAMR based NAS and nearline drives that are already commercially available and aimed at the same high density markets.

Taken together, these data points indicate a tightly contested landscape where Western Digital currently leads in overall shipped capacity and revenue, while Seagate pushes the capacity envelope and remains highly competitive in large scale deployments.

Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red NAS Hard Drives – Price

In late 2025 there is a clear pattern in how Seagate and WD position their HDDs on price, even if individual deals move around constantly. In general Seagate tends to be slightly cheaper per terabyte across many mainstream retailers and regions, particularly for larger 16 TB to 24 TB IronWolf and Exos capacities. WD pricing is often a little higher at like for like capacity in third party channels, especially for newer Red Plus and Red Pro models, although temporary sales can narrow or reverse this gap. Both brands are heavily discounted during seasonal events, so headline price screenshots are only ever a snapshot rather than a permanent rule.

Where WD changes the picture is through its own direct store. WD sells Red, Red Plus and Red Pro drives through its retail site and often undercuts third party resellers by a noticeable margin, especially during promotions. That means in some regions the cheapest way to buy WD is directly from WD, while Seagate relies entirely on partner channels and keeps relatively steady discounting through Amazon and similar outlets. As a result it is common to see Seagate come out cheaper in most general marketplaces while WD can be the lowest price only on its own store, which is not available in every country.

Once you move up into Pro and nearline class drives, such as IronWolf Pro versus WD Red Pro or WD Gold, pricing becomes more fragmented. Seagate keeps a fairly consistent capacity step pricing model where higher capacities scale in a relatively predictable way. WD on the other hand often runs multiple Red Pro and enterprise SKUs at the same capacity with different cache sizes or internal designs, which leads to overlapping prices and large swings between models that appear similar on paper. In practice this means that at the Pro tier Seagate is usually easier to price compare, while WD may offer good value on specific model IDs or capacities but requires more careful checking of part numbers and current discounts before purchase.

Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red – Noise Level Comparison

In terms of acoustic behaviour, Seagate IronWolf and IronWolf Pro drives are consistently a little louder than their WD Red Plus and Red Pro counterparts at like for like capacities. Manufacturer data sheets show most recent IronWolf and IronWolf Pro models idling in the mid to high 20 dBA range, with seek noise commonly around 30 to 32 dBA. WD Red Plus drives in the same capacities often idle in the low to mid 20 dBA range with typical seek levels in the mid to high 20 dBA band, while Red Pro models generally sit around 20 to 25 dBA idle and 31 to 36 dBA under seek depending on capacity and generation. In practical terms this means that in a quiet room or a small office, Seagate NAS drives tend to be more noticeable both at spin up and during sustained random activity.

---

Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red – Power Consumption (Idle / Active)

Looking purely at spec sheets, both Seagate and WD publish idle and seek values that cluster in similar bands, typically around the low 20 dBA range at idle and high 20 to mid 30 dBA under seek as capacities and spindle speeds rise. In practice though, the character of the noise differs between the brands. IronWolf and IronWolf Pro models tend to produce a sharper mechanical click pattern during head seeks and a more noticeable spin up profile, while WD Red Plus and Red Pro lines usually present as a smoother hum with less abrupt transitions between idle and active states. In a quiet room this difference in tone can matter as much as the numeric dBA rating itself.

At lower capacities, especially in the 2 TB to 6 TB range where air filled designs and lower spindle speeds are common, WD Red Plus models are often among the quietest options, with idle noise figures that sit at the lower end of the published spectrum and relatively soft seek sounds. Seagate standard IronWolf drives in these capacities are not especially loud by absolute numbers, but they generally sit slightly higher at idle and under random activity. Once you move into high capacity Pro class drives, WD Red Pro and IronWolf Pro become more comparable, although WD still often maintains a small advantage in idle noise on the newest helium filled models, while seek noise can be quite close on some capacities.

Noise differences increase as you add more bays and drives. A 2 bay or 4 bay NAS with mixed workloads may only expose a modest gap in acoustic behaviour between the brands, but 8 bay and larger systems can amplify any small variations. Multiple Seagate drives seeking at once will create more noticeable cumulative chatter and vibration inside a metal chassis, which can transfer into desks or shelving if the NAS is not well isolated. WD units with otherwise similar specifications and workload ratings usually generate less overall vibration, so the aggregate sound from a populated chassis can be easier to live with in shared spaces.

For users planning deployments in noise sensitive environments, such as a living room media setup or a small office where the NAS will sit in the same room as desks, these differences can be a factor in the buying decision once capacity and performance requirements are defined. Seagate remains attractive where price per terabyte and maximum capacity are the main priorities, and users are able to position the NAS in a cupboard, loft or separate room. WD drives typically suit scenarios where the system will remain close to people for long periods, sacrificing a small amount of price advantage in favour of lower background noise and a slightly less intrusive acoustic profile at both idle and under sustained activity.

Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red – Verdict & Conclusion

From a technical perspective Seagate and WD now sit very close to one another in most core HDD metrics, particularly in the NAS focused IronWolf, IronWolf Pro, Red Plus and Red Pro ranges. Both brands use CMR recording on their NAS lines, have comparable workload ratings in each class, and converge around similar sustained transfer rates once you reach 7200 RPM and larger cache sizes. The main structural differences are that Seagate currently pushes higher maximum capacities into the consumer and prosumer space and includes bundled rescue data recovery on many NAS models, while WD tends to retain a small advantage in power consumption and acoustic behaviour at equivalent capacities, especially in multi bay systems. Historical issues such as WD Red SMR drives and Seagate high failure rate models at specific points in time are still relevant for older stock, but the current generation NAS ranges for both vendors are broadly aligned in specification and intended workload.

In practical terms the choice between Seagate IronWolf and WD Red often comes down to priority order rather than any single clear winner. Users aiming for the lowest cost per terabyte and the highest capacities available in the near term will usually find Seagate more attractive, particularly in larger IronWolf Pro and Exos class drives, accepting higher power draw and a more noticeable acoustic profile. Users who are sensitive to noise, want marginally lower long term energy usage or prefer WD’s clearer product segmentation may gravitate toward Red Plus or Red Pro, taking care to select the correct CMR models and capacities. In all cases the decision should be made at model level using current datasheets and pricing, not just brand reputation, and should be paired with a sensible RAID plan and an independent backup strategy, since neither vendor can remove the fundamental risk that any individual hard drive can fail.

Idle Seagate Ironwolf	Idle WD Red Plus	Active Seagate Ironwolf Pro	Active WD Red Pro

 

---

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Can We Forgive and Forget The Synology HDD Compatibility Flip Flop?

Synology’s recent reversal on hard drive compatibility has reopened a larger debate about whether its NAS systems remain a trustworthy and sensible choice for both new buyers and long-term users. Throughout most of 2025, the company faced sustained criticism after enforcing strict drive verification checks that prevented users from installing or operating third-party HDDs and SSDs from major brands like Seagate and Western Digital. This policy, applied to the new Plus-series NAS models such as the DS925+, DS1525+, and DS1825+, effectively forced customers to purchase Synology’s own branded media or risk an unusable system. For a company long regarded as the industry standard for dependable and user-friendly storage solutions, the move appeared both unexpected and self-defeating. Although Synology later justified the decision as a way to ensure system stability and reliability, the backlash was immediate and global, with declining sales and widespread frustration among users who saw the change as a form of corporate overreach. Now, with the brand having confirmed a full rollback through the DSM 7.3 update—restoring support for non-Synology drives and removing prior warning prompts—the discussion has shifted. While the reversal is seen as a victory for users, it also highlights how fragile consumer confidence has become, and how a single policy misstep can redefine a company’s relationship with its community.

Below, my original video after the change by Synology after 6 months of their strict HDD media stance:

What Did Synology Do Wrong?

Synology’s critical mistake was implementing a restrictive hardware policy that undermined one of its key historical strengths: flexibility. For years, the company had built its reputation on offering an intuitive software platform, DSM, that ran on a wide variety of hardware configurations. By deciding to enforce hard drive compatibility restrictions in the 2025 generation of Plus-series NAS systems, Synology effectively turned once-open devices into closed platforms. The systems refused to initialise DSM or create storage pools when non-Synology drives were detected, and even when users managed to proceed, the interface was flooded with persistent warnings labelling third-party media as “unverified” or “at risk.” This move frustrated not only home users who wanted affordable upgrade options, but also small businesses that relied on Synology NAS for their daily operations. It created unnecessary technical and financial barriers at a time when alternative NAS vendors were offering greater compatibility and value. The brand’s own messaging made the situation worse: early statements focused on “system integrity” and “firmware optimisation” but failed to acknowledge that the change mainly benefited Synology’s hardware sales rather than the end user.

The second major error lay in how the company managed the fallout. Synology’s communication strategy throughout the controversy was inconsistent, fragmented, and in some regions almost non-existent. Different regional branches released conflicting press materials, with some hinting that compatibility with Seagate and Western Digital drives would soon return, while others maintained silence. No clear timeline or explanation was given for the testing process or the reasoning behind such aggressive enforcement. As a result, long-standing partners and distributors were left unsure of how to address customer concerns. Meanwhile, the online community—particularly on Reddit, NAS forums, and YouTube—quickly filled the information vacuum, fuelling frustration and speculation. Instead of clarifying the company’s intentions, Synology appeared defensive and disengaged, disabling comments on some of its own videos and refusing to directly address mounting criticism. This combination of restrictive policy and poor communication not only hurt its reputation but also suggested a growing disconnect between the brand’s leadership and its user base.

Why Are Users Mad at Synology?

Many users felt betrayed by Synology’s actions because the company had long marketed itself as the reliable, user-first alternative to more complex or DIY storage solutions. For years, Synology’s systems were praised for their openness—allowing customers to build their NAS setups using widely available components from trusted brands like Seagate, WD, and Toshiba. The introduction of hard drive restrictions in 2025 fundamentally altered that relationship. Suddenly, the same users who had invested heavily in Synology’s ecosystem found themselves unable to upgrade, expand, or even install DSM without purchasing the brand’s own drives, which were often rebranded versions of existing enterprise models sold at a premium. The move was viewed as a breach of trust, and the lack of transparency surrounding it only made things worse. Many saw it as an attempt to create a closed ecosystem that prioritised recurring hardware profits over customer freedom. This frustration was compounded by the timing—during a period when users were already facing higher hardware costs and tighter IT budgets, making Synology’s restrictive approach feel especially tone-deaf.

The Alerts and ‘Warnings’ that users have gotten used to up tll now (i.e pre DSM 7.3 roll out):

Another major source of anger came from how the policy rollout created confusion and inconsistency across Synology’s product lineup. While the Plus-series desktop NAS models received the strictest restrictions, larger RackStation and XS-series devices remained unaffected, creating the impression that Synology viewed its home and small-business customers as expendable. Even after announcing the rollback with DSM 7.3, many users noted that the company’s official compatibility lists still failed to mention Seagate or WD drives, and that public communication about the change was minimal. For those outside tech circles, this meant that the situation looked unchanged—product pages still implied that only Synology drives were supported, and many older negative reviews remained visible online. As a result, even with the restrictions now lifted, the perception of Synology as a brand willing to prioritise profit over user loyalty persists. The long delay in addressing community backlash, combined with inconsistent messaging, has left many customers sceptical that this U-turn represents a genuine shift rather than damage control.

What Did Synology Do to Fix This?

Synology’s eventual fix came in the form of a full policy reversal integrated into DSM 7.3, the company’s next major software update. With this version, users of the 2025 generation of Plus-series NAS devices—including models such as the DS925+, DS1525+, and DS1825+—regained the ability to freely use third-party hard drives and SSDs. The update removed not only the installation barriers but also the persistent “unverified drive” and “at risk” warnings that had previously appeared in Storage Manager. For most users, this restored full functionality, allowing them to initialise DSM, create and expand RAID arrays, use hot spares, and assign SSDs for caching without restrictions. The change essentially returned Synology’s systems to the state they were in before the controversial policy was introduced earlier in the year. The reversal applied primarily to desktop-class NAS systems rather than rackmount or XS-series models, suggesting that Synology wanted to restore goodwill among its core consumer and small-business audience first.

However, the way Synology implemented this reversal has drawn mixed responses. Instead of releasing a simple compatibility database update, which could have resolved the issue quickly, the company bundled the fix into a full DSM version upgrade. That meant users had to install an entirely new operating system build to regain third-party drive support, even if they were otherwise satisfied with their existing DSM 7.2 installations. For those managing multiple NAS units or enterprise environments, this created complications, especially since DSM 7.3 initially lacked a public beta and required careful validation before deployment.

The company also issued few direct statements about the rollback, opting instead for limited press communications that focused on “listening to customer feedback.” Despite the importance of the change, Synology’s product pages still make little mention of renewed Seagate and WD compatibility, leaving potential buyers to rely on external coverage or word of mouth. While the technical fix was effective, the manner of its rollout showed that Synology’s communication strategy remains cautious, reactive, and focused on damage limitation rather than proactive transparency.

What were/are the benefits of Buying Synology-branded Hard Drives and SSDs?

In parallel with the policy adjustments introduced in DSM 7.3, Synology has also begun expanding a series of benefits and incentives aimed at customers who purchase Synology NAS systems together with Synology-branded storage media. These initiatives are part of the company’s ongoing effort to strengthen its vertically integrated ecosystem, ensuring optimal performance and reliability when all components come from the same source. In selected markets, buyers who purchase Synology HAT, HAS, or SAT series drives on the same invoice as their NAS hardware now receive extended warranty coverage of up to five years, administered directly through authorized distributors and resellers. In addition, Synology has introduced an Express Replacement program, allowing for immediate drive swaps during the warranty period without waiting for the defective unit to be shipped and inspected, effectively mirroring the convenience of a premium RMA service. These benefits are available at no extra cost when drives are purchased through approved channels. The initiative is designed to make Synology’s validated ecosystem more appealing to businesses seeking predictable lifecycle management and faster recovery in the event of hardware failure, while also providing an incentive for users to standardize on Synology-branded components rather than mixing third-party storage.

Head over to Blackvoid HERE to read Luka’s great write-up on DSM 7.3 below:

Why Are Some Users Unconvinced?

Many long-time Synology owners remain sceptical because the company’s pattern of restrictive decision-making has not been limited to hard drives. Over the years, Synology has gradually tightened control over hardware support in other areas, such as M.2 NVMe SSD usage, network adapters, and GPU compatibility. Even though the recent rollback allows full use of third-party HDDs and SSDs in Plus-series models, the same freedom does not apply to NVMe storage. Users still cannot create storage pools or volumes on M.2 drives unless they are Synology-branded, which reinforces the perception that the company is only willing to compromise when it faces enough public pressure. Critics point out that while Synology deserves credit for reversing the hard drive restrictions, it has shown no similar flexibility in other parts of its ecosystem. This selective openness suggests a tactical move designed to repair short-term reputation damage rather than a genuine shift toward more open hardware policies. As a result, many users fear that future DSM updates could easily reintroduce similar restrictions under a different justification.

Another concern is that Synology has not done enough to communicate these changes clearly to new buyers. Even after the DSM 7.3 announcement, the company’s official compatibility lists for 2025 models still prioritise its own drives, with no explicit mention of Seagate or WD models being supported again. For first-time users who rely on these lists for purchasing decisions, there is no clear indication that the policy has changed.

This lack of transparency undermines confidence in Synology’s commitment to openness. Furthermore, the decision to tie the rollback to a major DSM update rather than a smaller patch raises worries that the company could use similar tactics in the future to control hardware functionality through software revisions. Many see the reversal as a necessary correction rather than an act of goodwill, and that distinction matters. Users may accept Synology’s reasoning for now, but the brand’s reputation for reliability has been replaced by a lingering doubt about whether it can be trusted to keep its platform open and user-focused.

NAS Series	Drives on Compatibility List	Drives Not Listed	Drives on Incompatibility List
RS Plus (e.g., RS2423+, RS422+)	Supported for new installation, storage pool creation, and migration	Supported only for migration; cannot create new storage pools or caches	Fully blocked from all operations
DVA/NVR Series (e.g., DVA1622, DVA3221, NVR1218)	Supported for installation and migration	Supported only for migration; cannot create new storage pools	Fully blocked from all operations
Supported Drive Types	HDD and 2.5″ SATA SSD	HDD and 2.5″ SATA SSD (migration only)	All drive types blocked
Drive Example Notes	Synology HAT5300/HAT3300 verified; select enterprise drives	Seagate IronWolf, SkyHawk, WD Purple not yet verified for use	Drives failing thermal or firmware tests
Use Case	Rackmount and surveillance workloads requiring consistent write throughput	Data migration or backup restoration	Unsupported entirely

Should You Trust Synology NAS Again?

Trusting Synology again depends largely on how much users value its software ecosystem compared to its corporate behaviour. The company’s DSM operating system remains one of the most advanced and stable NAS platforms available, offering a wide range of applications for backup, surveillance, multimedia, and virtualization that are unmatched by most competitors. For those who prioritise reliability, ease of use, and integration over raw hardware flexibility, Synology still provides a compelling product. The reintroduction of unrestricted hard drive support in DSM 7.3 restores much of the practical functionality that users lost earlier this year, and for many, that will be enough to justify purchasing a new NAS. From a technical standpoint, the Plus-series devices are still capable and efficient, with consistent performance, strong data protection features, and excellent long-term support. In short, the hardware remains solid, and the software continues to define Synology’s market dominance in turnkey storage solutions.

Below, references to the change in hard drive support policy are either absent in release notes or severely underplayed on the compatibility pages as of 3rd Nov 2025.

However, from a consumer trust perspective, caution is still warranted. The brand’s repeated pattern of restricting features, followed by later partial reversals, has left many wary that similar policies could return in future product generations. Even though DSM 7.3 represents a positive correction, Synology has not issued any long-term assurances that it will maintain this open stance. There is also concern about how much influence profit margins and proprietary hardware incentives continue to have over product decisions. For experienced users, the safest approach may be to treat Synology as a premium but increasingly closed ecosystem—one that delivers outstanding software at the cost of long-term flexibility. Whether it is “okay” to buy a Synology NAS now depends on priorities: if you value a polished interface and dependable system behaviour above everything else, Synology is still one of the best options available. But if transparency, open standards, and full hardware freedom matter more, then the company’s recent U-turn should be seen not as a full restoration of trust, but as a cautious and temporary concession to public pressure.

If/When you do wish to purchase a Synology NAS, please do use the links below in order to purchase your NAS. Doing so results in a small commission coming to me and Ed here at NASCompares, and it allows us to keep doing what we do here, and is the most frictionless and zero-cost way for you to support our articles, reviews, videos, guides, support systems and more.

Synology DS925+ NAS	Synology DS1525+ NAS	Synology DS1825+ NAS
Check Amazon in Your Region for the Synology DS925+ NAS	Amazon in Your Region for the Synology DS1525+ NAS @ $799	Amazon in Your Region for the Synology DS1825+ NAS @ $1149
heck B&H for the Synology DS925+ NAS	B&H for the Synology DS1525+ NAS @ $1149.99	B&H for the Synology DS1825+ NAS @ $1149.99

 

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you. Need Help? Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry. [contact-form-7] TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions   Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.

WE LOVE COFFEE