1st time buying a NAS, in need of advices

[stevech]

Blue-ray versus 1080p? The former seems to need it's dedicated player - lots of bits and bytes to grind on.

 

[Chojo]

I did a research on codec that a PS4 can read on it Media Center, here the list:
MKV

Visual: H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level 4.2
Audio: MP3, AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital)​

AVI

Visual: MPEG4 ASP, H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level 4.2
Audio: MP3, AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital)​

MP4

Visual: H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level 4.2
Audio: AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital)​

MPEG-2 TS

Visual: H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level4.2, MPEG2 Visual
Audio: MP2(MPEG2 Audio Layer 2), AAC LC, AC-3(Dolby Digital)
AVCHD: (.m2ts, .mts)​

Photo

JPEG (based on DCF 2.0/Exif 2.21)
BMP
PNG​

Music

MP3
AAC (M4A)
​

That being said, since MKV is supported, I won't need my nas to transcode my blu-ray right?

Also, I just read about the future QNAP 251+ (https://www.qnap.com/i/useng/product/model.php?II=195) should I just wait for it and grab it (QNAP + successor of a famous model + darn sexy in black + HDMI port + Remote controller)?

 

[sfx2000]

For the sake of cost, can't the OP use a low end NAS without a hot CPU and without transcoding hardware... and just DLNA or SMB stream file data to a Roku box or XBox, or a smart TV that can transcode (if there are such).

I did that for years, with Sage TV and their HDTV box that used enthernet + HDMI. (Alas, Google bought and flushed Sage TV).

I agree - transcoding can be handy, but there is a quality penalty with real-time/run time transcodes...

If the content is natively supported by the DLNA client, no transcode is needed, and there, ARM based NAS boxes do a pretty good job...

 

[sfx2000]

That being said, since MKV is supported, I won't need my nas to transcode my blu-ray right?

Not true - lot of RIP's have been down converted to MKV/H264 (high profile), but BR is typically H265/HEVC native - so again, without transcoding on the NAS (is there any NAS that does HEVC transcodes even?)...

In any event, PS4 does BR natively, so just play the disks on it local - it's a great BR player (so is PS3 fwiw)

 

[Chojo]

Not true - lot of RIP's have been down converted to MKV/H264 (high profile), but BR is typically H265/HEVC native - so again, without transcoding on the NAS (is there any NAS that does HEVC transcodes even?)...

In any event, PS4 does BR natively, so just play the disks on it local - it's a great BR player (so is PS3 fwiw)

PS4's Media Center just launched (june), i'm optimist that the h265 will be supported one day. During this time, I can simply transcode my Blu-Ray problematic movie in h264 on a proper desktop.

 

[Chojo]

My local store have an open-box QNAP HS-251 for 279.99$

My final choice would be:
QNAP HS-251 open-box @ $279.99 (generally, they are $550 here in Canada)
or the
Asustor 5002T @ $349.99

What would be your pick?

 

[L&LD]

My local store have an open-box QNAP HS-251 for 279.99$

My final choice would be:
QNAP HS-251 open-box @ $279.99 (generally, they are $550 here in Canada)
or the
Asustor 5002T @ $349.99

What would be your pick?

Assuming the HS-251 has sound hardware, the QNAP is the unit to get here (QTS 4.2).

 

[Chojo]

1 vote for the HS-251.

I have until 18h to pick one

 

[Chojo]

Well I purchased the qnap. I have 14 days to return it if I change my mind

 

[Chojo]

Nobody else have some input on the HS-251 vs the Asustor 5002T?

 

[stevech]

Just that Synology and QNAP have OS software that has been refined for many years. But, Asustor could have a fast-maturing product. I suspect very few forum frequent visitors have the Asustor.

 

[Chojo]

Just that Synology and QNAP have OS software that has been refined for many years. But, Asustor could have a fast-maturing product. I suspect very few forum frequent visitors have the Asustor.

What scare me about the hs251 is the low amont of ram (1gb) non-upgradable.

 

[stevech]

1GB is more than enough unless you plan to run virtual machines on the NAS.

 

[Chojo]

1GB is more than enough unless you plan to run virtual machines on the NAS.

Ok, I though it would need more for movies

 

[sfx2000]

Ok, I though it would need more for movies

Probably not... ARM based NAS's are pretty efficient at smaller memory footprints due to lower CPU capabilities for things outside of basic fileserver duty... x86 based NAS boxes - more features, more mem needed... but even then, more than 2GB with current SW is perhaps a miss unless running VM's, and then more mem is better...

 

[stevech]

NASes don't have MS Windows built-in virtual machine overhead either (.net)

 

[sfx2000]

NASes don't have MS Windows built-in virtual machine overhead either (.net)

Linux/BSD based NAS boxes don't have the overhead - recall that there are NAS boxen that use WHS and MS Server Essentials 2012, and they're effective in their use cases...

 

[Chojo]

Thank you all. I made my choice and will keep the Qnap HS-251.

To people that are currently in the same boat as me, here what made me keep my QNAP HS-251 over the Asustor 5002T:

• Totally silent, perfect for my living room.
• Small and sleek design, perfect again for my living room.
• QTS OS
• Performance sheet seems pretty similar except for the RAM

Since I will use it mainly as a HTPC, I think the QNAP will fit more my need for $60 bucks cheaper.