Hard Drive Or Nas Suggestion

[abescalamis]

Hello Friends

As of today my 3TB (2.68) hard drive connected to my RT-AC56U is full, I want to get and external 6TB WD or the 5TB Seagate, but I know that this routers only support 4TB, I would love to buy a Nas but they are too expensive and that is the last of my buying list, I would prefer to upgrade to a RT-ac88.

Have you gone through the same and what would you recommend?

 

[Zirescu]

Go with a NAS if you're using that much storage. Lots of suggested NAS devices on SNB here: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/rankers/nas/view

 

[RMerlin]

Go with a real NAS. Entry-level models aren't that expensive, and will be far more reliable.

 

[jeff3820]

Go with a real NAS. Entry-level models aren't that expensive, and will be far more reliable.

I've been using a 2 drive Synology for years...it's phenomenal. Very robust device. The 2 disk units are not that expensive. If you want, start with one disk and then add the second one when you can afford it to get Raid 1 redundancy. This is one of the best technology investments I've ever made. I have a Synology 215j...current model is 216j. I use the WD Red drives with my Synology NAS.

 

[RMerlin]

Asustor can also provide you with a very good alternative at a lower cost than the usual Synology/QNAP favorites. I have a four-bay Asustor myself at home, their two bay model should be reasonably priced.

 

[abescalamis]

Thanks for the suggestions guys,

I been Checking Some vendors, and I looks like Synology and Asustor have very good nas, but I believe that the Asustor OS might be better than the synology os, besides I think that Sinology sells the additional features, Asustor too but gives more than the others.


I been doing a lot of reading and this is the one I like and can afford, It doesn't have the screen and I would have to open it, to install the drives but its not that important to me.

I see that some have 2-4 ethernet ports, this one only has one. Does it make a diference having 2 ethernet ports?

ASUSTOR AS3204T
https://www.asustor.com/product/AS3204T?p_id=47

 

[RMerlin]

I been Checking Some vendors, and I looks like Synology and Asustor have very good nas, but I believe that the Asustor OS might be better than the synology os, besides I think that Sinology sells the additional features, Asustor too but gives more than the others.

Are you sure you aren't mixing up Asustor with QNAP? In terms of firmware, Synology and QNAP are both easily at the top of the pyramid, with Asustor being quite a few years behind in terms of features (being a newer player in this market).

Having 2 Ethernet ports is only useful in a business environment, when connected to a managed switch that supports link aggregation. It's useless for home users.

 

[abescalamis]

Thank you for the information RMerlin, you made me rethink my buying options.

The cheapest NAS are around $300, since I'm going to spend that much, I need something future proof, I don't see myself replacing this NAA for at least 5 years, so i did a research on the just released NAS and this are my top choices.

I would have pick the Asustor AS3204T, because is cheaper but the fact that you cannot add memory makes me back from the decision to buy it, I guess that if I want it to be future proof, I need to have the option to add memory later. I'm I wrong.

Which of this ones will you pick?

Asustor AS3204T $406.00
Intel Celeron 1.6GHz Dual-Core (burst up to 2.08~2.48GHz) Processor
*Memory: 2GB DDR3L (not expandable)

Qnap TS-453A $579.00
Intel® Celeron® N3150/N3160 1.6 GHz quad-core processor
*Memory: 4GB (expandable to 8GB)

Asustor AS6204T $522.99
Intel® Celeron® N3150/N3160 1.6 GHz quad-core processor
*Memory: 4GB (expandable to 8GB)


I didn't pick a synology NAS because they have not released a NAS around my price range in a while.

 

[RMerlin]

Thank you for the information RMerlin, you made me rethink my buying options.

The cheapest NAS are around $300, since I'm going to spend that much, I need something future proof, I don't see myself replacing this NAA for at least 5 years, so i did a research on the just released NAS and this are my top choices.

I would have pick the Asustor AS3204T, because is cheaper but the fact that you cannot add memory makes me back from the decision to buy it, I guess that if I want it to be future proof, I need to have the option to add memory later. I'm I wrong.

Which of this ones will you pick?

Asustor AS3204T $406.00
Intel Celeron 1.6GHz Dual-Core (burst up to 2.08~2.48GHz) Processor
*Memory: 2GB DDR3L (not expandable)

Qnap TS-453A $579.00
Intel® Celeron® N3150/N3160 1.6 GHz quad-core processor
*Memory: 4GB (expandable to 8GB)

Asustor AS6204T $522.99
Intel® Celeron® N3150/N3160 1.6 GHz quad-core processor
*Memory: 4GB (expandable to 8GB)


I didn't pick a synology NAS because they have not released a NAS around my price range in a while.

If budget isn't a problem, I'd get the QNAP without hesitation. It's a superior product in every way.

 

[jeff3820]

Thank you for the information RMerlin, you made me rethink my buying options.

The cheapest NAS are around $300, since I'm going to spend that much, I need something future proof, I don't see myself replacing this NAA for at least 5 years, so i did a research on the just released NAS and this are my top choices.

I would have pick the Asustor AS3204T, because is cheaper but the fact that you cannot add memory makes me back from the decision to buy it, I guess that if I want it to be future proof, I need to have the option to add memory later. I'm I wrong.

Which of this ones will you pick?

Asustor AS3204T $406.00
Intel Celeron 1.6GHz Dual-Core (burst up to 2.08~2.48GHz) Processor
*Memory: 2GB DDR3L (not expandable)

Qnap TS-453A $579.00
Intel® Celeron® N3150/N3160 1.6 GHz quad-core processor
*Memory: 4GB (expandable to 8GB)

Asustor AS6204T $522.99
Intel® Celeron® N3150/N3160 1.6 GHz quad-core processor
*Memory: 4GB (expandable to 8GB)


I didn't pick a synology NAS because they have not released a NAS around my price range in a while.

Don't worry about memory...expanded memory on a NAS is mainly to run VMware virtual machines. Many NAS units run great on 256 and 512megs of RAM. Sure, more RAM allows for more simultaneous users but if you are not in an enterprise environment it is not a concern at all. QNAP generally has more advanced hardware but I found aspects of their software behind compared to Synology. The Synology OS is fantastic. I'm in a mixed Mac/Windows environment and supporting both with the Synology OS is easy. Time Machine support differences were significant between QNAP and Synology. Regardless, with a NAS, they all are good at storing data; they all tend to max out a gigabit ethernet port...the disk performance is that good of ALL OF THEM; carefully look at other potential needs...video server/audio player/photo library management/for inside your home and with external access with support for portable devices...making the NAS your own personal cloud storage with internal and external access...ability to automate and schedule backups...need to run virtual machines, etc. There are so many applications for a NAS these days. Decide what you want to do then chose the OS/vendor. The hardware/memory is not the focus here, it's what you want to do and how easy it is to setup the NAS to do it.

 

[paulbates]

Go with a real NAS. Entry-level models aren't that expensive, and will be far more reliable.

Are there reliability issues for using the router as NAS outside of not having RAID & 2 disks? I've run for a number of years with a cloud backup solution on a NAS but no RAID/second drive. I just moved to the asus & ssd.

The application is light office file sharing (2 computers), pictures and iTunes... no movies or TB files. If the asus dies, I'll plug the ssd in local to a machine. Is there anything else I should be worried about?

Paul


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RMerlin]

Are there reliability issues for using the router as NAS outside of not having RAID & 2 disks?

Compatibility issues with various enclosures, poor performance due to USB overhead and a weak USB controler from Broadcom, random issues mouting the disk at boot time, very old version of Samba... and the list goes on.

 

[paulbates]

Compatibility issues with various enclosures, poor performance due to USB overhead and a weak USB controler from Broadcom, random issues mouting the disk at boot time, very old version of Samba... and the list goes on.

Ok, thanks for that candid feedback, Merlin. I will try at my own risk for a period as I have a WD mycloud NAS that I can move the SSD over to (and a full backup on idrive) if this don't work for me.

One more question, there is an option for SMB2 for windows, does that no address the samba concern?

 

[RMerlin]

One more question, there is an option for SMB2 for windows, does that no address the samba concern?

No. The SMB 2.0 protocol is in fact too intensive for the weak CPU used by these routers, and will degrade performance. That's why the option is left disabled by default.

SMB 2.0 is also considered obsolete, as it goes back to the days of Vista. Modern Windows versions are all using SMB 3.x now.

 

[paulbates]

No. The SMB 2.0 protocol is in fact too intensive for the weak CPU used by these routers, and will degrade performance. That's why the option is left disabled by default.

SMB 2.0 is also considered obsolete, as it goes back to the days of Vista. Modern Windows versions are all using SMB 3.x now.

Other than that.... Again, many thanks.

 

[ricardjs]

I'd thought i'd contribute, as i don't write a lot here...

I can vouch for QNAP being great. At home I have an old TS-212... As said above, it doesn't need a lot of power to run it, as it as a single core 1.2 ghz cpu with 256 of ram.
I use it for file server, personal cloud (works brilliantly!), vpn server, media server, backup server, ...
Also QNAP updates firmware very frequently and supports its devices for a long time. You can't go wrong there.

Hope this helps.

Ricardo.

 

[MarioCaires]

Since you are looking for futureproofing, for that price range a FreeNAS may be something to consider!

 

[abescalamis]

I want to thank Merlin and everybody else for their help.

I kept doing more and more research and tested the OS of Synology, Asustor and Qnap, I ended choosing the Synology DS916+, Now I know what a NAS is capable, and will use it for one of my IPcameras, for two TV's that access the movies, shows, Music from the NAS, I will host a website using the Wordpress app. and will use it for other things, I will set a few accounts to online streaming of my music, videos, movies for friends.

My order is supposed to arrive on 02/23/2017 with my Synology DS916+ (8GB), and a 6TB WD red nas, I feel very impatient, lol.

I'm planing on using Btrfs + raid 6, I will only have one drive for now, next year I will buy another 6TB because my pocket is bleeding right now, it needs time to heal.

 

[paulbates]

As a follow up, I connected an SSD in a portable drive->USB enclosure to the Asus USB 3 connector. Per my post above, my application is very light file sharing for a couple of computers... office type docs, pics, music. It works very well. On a wired switch connection I can get just under 60MB/sec reads for 2MB files. Its around 12MB/sec for 2.4 ghz N 150mb connection.

Per Merlin's comments, a lot of disk requests will make the processors work harder, specifically when selecting SMB2. I noticed this the most when downloading all of my files to it, and also after that when firing up the onboard media servers and they first discovered their content. The processor temp went up 3C during this activity, but back to normal since. No apparent effect on speedtest.net scores run during the drive speed tests. I had a power failure yesterday and everything came back on its own.

The only other ASUS features I'm using are adaptive QOS, IPV6, and AI protection. No AI cloud, other add ins. I'm not running 'user' programs under linux. Note that you have to pre-format the drive on another system, I used NTFS with 4k blocks.

Merlin recommends a separate NAS, and I'm accepting the risk of this configuration. I can imagine that an already heavily loaded router could get over taxed sharing a drive via SMB2.

Paul

Wired speed test (1 gb connection) from Windows 10 client

2.4ghz speed test (150 mb connection) from Windows 10 client
(The dip at 1 MB was where I ran a speedtest.net test.)

 

[TonyH]

Go with a NAS if you're using that much storage. Lots of suggested NAS devices on SNB here: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/rankers/nas/view

+1, NAS is way more stable compared to USB drive. I never attach anything to router as a matter of fact.