Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Off Topic NAS enclosure buying advice

I am going to buy a NAS enclosure. It'll be used for backups from several machines (including Sooloos), and some streaming.

My question is: at what point does processor speed become relevant? Some tests I've read claim that a faster processor will make for higher speed even with only one client copying over onto the NAS. I had assumed this would not be the case, and that a faster processor would only be necessary with many clients (i.e. more than the maximum of three or so I will have).

Which is the case?

(PS, FWIW I am thinking of QNAP.)

Yes, the cpu speeds on NAS boxes are not like PCs.

Qnap and Synology are the usual suspects. I would focus on the amount of disks first then worry about what processorspeeds are available for that size of diskdrawer.

I assume you are looking for 4 diskdrawer or more?

Don't forget that NAS's are essentially PC's with a custom OS

And just as with PC's, Slow Processors and Small RAM is the Bane of Performance, whether in single user or multi-user environments

IMHO, the Synology 4 bay 411j is very hard to beat in the current market for its combination of Performance and very useful features........many of which you only find handy once you start to use the Device

Make sure that whichever NAS you look at can take 3TB drives. Some of the older models can't.

I'm a happy ReadyNAS user. Would never touch Thecus again.

Remember that if you buy a NAS box without drives, don't just put any old drive in the box and expect trouble free performance.
All hard drives are not created equal!
There are special drives that are specifically designed for NAS type services. Unfortunately, suitable NAS drivers are more expensive than desktop drives but they are more robust and have special power features that are needed for NAS boxes.
As indicated earlier in this thread Synology and QNAP are very popular.
Not heard that processors speed is that relevant for file sharing duties.
What would be important in relation to processor and memory is if you wanted to add applications into the NAS (e.g. Bit Torrent, Squeezebox server etc)
Lastly, bandwidth to and from the NAS drive is very different across the ranges so beware that cheaper boxes will have lower i/o bandwitdth.
Generally speaking in the NAS market, you get what you pay for...

+1 for the Synology 411j. Have been very pleased with the performance and features.
( thanks Duncs! )

I would never have thought that processor speed made a difference, until I had more than one NAS. I've had four QNAPs and all have been fantastic....with the same disks inside (all Deskstar 7200s from the 2TB range) I get approx:

TS109 (Single 2TB HDD) - 9-10MB/s
TS119 (Single 2TB HDD, better CPU, more RAM) - 25-30MB/s
TS459 (4x1TB HDD in RAID 5 + hot spare, Atom CPU) - 70-80MB/s

The RAID 5 NAS is getting a performance kick from using multiple drives of course, but the difference between the two single-bay enclosures is amazing.

Pay as much as you can afford to now, and then update the HDDs to a larger size as and when you need the space (and when prices come down again).

One note is that a multi-drive NAS (or more than one NAS) makes future migrations much, much easier.

Hope this helps.

S

I have a 4 TB Buffalo Tech NAS.

http://www.buffalotech.com/products/network-storage/business/terastation-iii-rackmount-ts-rxlr5/

It has been very easy to use, has hot swappable drives and once it boots, it�s pretty quiet. I should note, mine is rack mounted, in a sever rack. I am currently running in Raid 5 config. It has been easy to use on my network and is accessed by several computers. I cannot imagine needing anything faster. There are never 100's (or 10) user accessing the server. Opening heavy graphics is almost instantaneous.

Based on all the options that I don�t use, I probably utilize 1/10th of the �functions� available on the unit.

I had the QNAP TS410 and had loads of problems with it crashing whilst running apps; slow performance and not enough processor speed or ram.
Using BT Infinity it just could not cope with the download speed. I upgraded to the QNAP TS459 and have not looked back. Buy the best you can afford is my advise.

Tim

Thanks everyone for the input.

I was looking for a 19" rack model - should have said before. I know it's more expensive but the room (the library in my basement) is already heavily packed and the desktop format will not be so easy to fit in.

In the comparison between Synology and QNAP there are quite a few anecdotal comments negative towards QNAP. I shall look at Synology further.

I'm in the same boat, I will be rack mounting my kit next year and was considering a Dune and Nas solution but its hard to know how high to aim?

Something like this Synology RS3411xs/RS3411RPxs perhaps with room for expansion in the future?

Excellent reviews and available from www.scan.co.uk. Elsewhere, Ronnie's made a compelling case for a Plex-based client system. My HPmediasmartserver is no longer playing nice with iTunes and I'm going to have to rerip my DVD collection which I'm not looking forward to.

~M~

Meridialen that looks like an excellent NAS drawer.