1513+ or 415play

[Linthorn]

I'm looking to replace an aging WHS that I loved. I am mostly looking for file storage, some media streaming, off-site access, and backups (basically all the WHS stuff). Apart from onboard transcoding (which appears flaky anyway) is there some reason to get the new 415play over the much more powerful and expandable 1513+, apart from the price difference (which isn't much once the cost of the disks is included)?

 

[thiggins]

Apart from onboard transcoding (which appears flaky anyway)

We didn't find transcoding at all flaky in our review. What is your experience?

 

[Linthorn]

No experience, the few comments I've seen have been uneven on transcoding performance. Some are happy, some not.

For my current environment, I use DLNA from my pc running Serviio. Fairly happy with it, so I don't know that it's a driver.

So, apart from that particular benefit, any suggestion as to guidance?

 

[thiggins]

It's debatable whether the DS1513+ is "much more powerful" than the DS415play. Both use dual-core Atom CPUs, the DS1513+ a D2700 @ 2.13 GHz and the DS415play a CE5335 @ 1.6 GHz.

My experience is that D2700 based NASes seem to have a slight performance edge over CE-based products. But a lot depends on OS tuning.

 

[mervincm]

If you are willing to use Synology media servers / viewers the hardware assisted transcoding in the play models might be significant. If you prefer to use something like the awesome Plex server/client, it's questionable as to whether the hardware assisted transcoding will ever be available.

Still, in my mind, (even though I own an 1813+) it's tough to justify the 1513+ today. The newer generation models like the 415play and the QNAP TS451 just seem to have more for a home user.