NAS recommendation

[sfx2000]

Transcoding NASes are a steep step in cost. Gotta know you want that.

I have a response - but it's stuck in the filters...

"This message is awaiting moderator approval, and is invisible to normal visitors."

 

[iunlock]

Transcoding NASes are a steep step in cost. Gotta know you want that.

Very true.

 

[RMerlin]

I would have to disagree. The i3 will walk circles around the Celeron. You have low end CPU's like the Atom, Celeron etc...then you have the higher end CPU's like the i3, i5, and i7.

17 years of experience as a computer/system tech, so I'm well aware of the differences between those CPU platforms. My reply was specifically discussing transcoding. I never said the i3 was close to a Celeron in terms of performance, only that it wouldn't be really fast either for transcoding purposes, and you'd rely more heavily on QuickSync than raw CPU power for transcoding - something for which you don't need a more expensive Core CPU.

As for the rest of NAS functionality, in a home network, you don't need an i3 to saturate your disk throughput.

Keep in mind that the OP's needs here are to transcode medias on a home LAN. You don't need a Core processor for that.

Having a NAS is much more than having the ability to just transcode, although that is a big part of most peoples needs. Sure the Celeron based J1900 can get the job done, but anything beyond that the 4 banger will kick the bucket with heavy simultaneous loads. VM's, Multiple On the Fly 1080p/Original File streaming, etc...forget it...the lower end CPU's can barely handle one 1080p/original file on the fly transcoding (okay maybe 2 or even 3 which is a stretch)...try adding 5+, with VM and other stuff going on...It 'ain't' going to happen.

That's not what the original poster was looking for. He even mentionned having a MacBook dedicated to VM duties. He only needs file storage and Plex transcoding.

 

[iunlock]

17 years of experience as a computer/system tech, so I'm well aware of the differences between those CPU platforms. My reply was specifically discussing transcoding. I never said the i3 was close to a Celeron in terms of performance, only that it wouldn't be really fast either for transcoding purposes, and you'd rely more heavily on QuickSync than raw CPU power for transcoding - something for which you don't need a more expensive Core CPU.

As for the rest of NAS functionality, in a home network, you don't need an i3 to saturate your disk throughput.

Keep in mind that the OP's needs here are to transcode medias on a home LAN. You don't need a Core processor for that.



That's not what the original poster was looking for. He even mentionned having a MacBook dedicated to VM duties. He only needs file storage and Plex transcoding.

Again, for most people they'll get by with a fuel efficient rig. Not everyone owns a boat or needs to haul loads of heavy cargo. So for the average person a J1900 would be more than enough for basic functions.

For even more basic functions, a snail of a CPU such as the Atom would suffice. I own two NAS's with Atoms purely for temporary storage. That's it.

The years of working with a computer is irrelevant to the points being made. It is what it is when it comes to CPU'S. Thanks for sharing though.

The fact remains that those who are looking for any kind of power in a NAS, will not find it with the processors such as the Atom and alike. To offer such recommendations to anyone wanting to do multiple streams, run VM's along with other resource intensive tasks would be inconclusive to fulfill their needs.

In the case of what the OP is looking for, he wouldn't need much to accomplish what he wants with his VM usage, however, he did also clearly state that he wants performance did he not? Correct me if I'm wrong and I'll gracefully accept it.

 

[sfx2000]

he years of working with a computer is irrelevant to the points being made. It is what it is when it comes to CPU'S. Thanks for sharing though.

Word to the wise - take a chill - your insight is always appreciated, but you might consider the community and the members...

 

[iunlock]

Word to the wise - take a chill - your insight is always appreciated, but you might consider the community and the members...

Pardon? I take it you two are buddies. That's fine.

I don't believe I've said anything out of the ordinary? I think any rational person would agree that there is no need for chess puffing, if you want to call it that. He could have just left out the 17 years...*rolling eyes*...as it's irrelevant and unnecessary.

 

[sfx2000]

Pardon? I take it you two are buddies. That's fine.

I don't believe I've said anything out of the ordinary? I think any rational person would agree that there is no need for chess puffing, if you want to call it that. He could have just left out the 17 years...*rolling eyes*...as it's irrelevant and unnecessary.

No, we're not, but this is a community based on respect and knowledge - knowledge to be shared and appreciated, and perhaps respect to be earned - you're a smart guy, and we welcome your contributions.

 

[sfx2000]

No, we're not, but this is a community based on respect and knowledge - knowledge to be shared and appreciated, and perhaps respect to be earned - you're a smart guy, and we welcome your contributions.

FWIW - It's a good group here - Tim Higgins has done a fine job of attracting a wide range of users with various backgrounds.

FWIW - want to see a hostile environment, go and try the QNAP sponsored community forums... there is a reason why a lot of QNAP users land here...

 

[iunlock]

No, we're not, but this is a community based on respect and knowledge - knowledge to be shared and appreciated, and perhaps respect to be earned - you're a smart guy, and we welcome your contributions.

Thank you. I'm still not sure what was derogatory about my statement. If anything, I believe it would have been more appropriate to direct your comment to him beginning the sentence with 17 years...that was just unnecessary to begin with.

Anyhow, back to the topic. I think the OP will get by just fine with pretty much any NAS he has listed in the OP. However, I think we would need to hear from him so that he can define what he meant about wanting, "performance," because as it stands right now, it just leaves us to speculate.

 

[iunlock]

FWIW - It's a good group here - Tim Higgins has done a fine job of attracting a wide range of users with various backgrounds.

FWIW - want to see a hostile environment, go and try the QNAP sponsored community forums... there is a reason why a lot of QNAP users land here...

You're absolutely right about the QNAP sponsored community. It's quite a place of uncertainty and ....well some things are best left unsaid.

This is indeed a great community and I'm really enjoying the wealth of knowledge and kind people who contribute to it.

 

[sfx2000]

All good..

Going back to OP's question...

At this moment I'm looking at following models:
- Synology DS2415+
- Synology DS1815+
- Qnap TVS 871
- Qnap TS853 pro
​

not much difference in the Synology boxes - except for number of disks handled, but the QNAP's pretty much outclass them on some aspects - but for general NAS/Box Trucks, they're all very similar...

For a SoHo network, look at the price differences - the 871 does have a performance advantage in certain use cases - but the 853 is well rounded in my experience - it the old 80/20 question, and everyone has a different 20 percent emphasis...

 

[iunlock]

All good..

Going back to OP's question...

At this moment I'm looking at following models:
- Synology DS2415+
- Synology DS1815+
- Qnap TVS 871
- Qnap TS853 pro
​

not much difference in the Synology boxes - except for number of disks handled, but the QNAP's pretty much outclass them on some aspects - but for general NAS/Box Trucks, they're all very similar...

For a SoHo network, look at the price differences - the 871 does have a performance advantage in certain use cases - but the 853 is well rounded in my experience - it the old 80/20 question, and everyone has a different 20 percent emphasis...

Indeed. The harsh reality here for the OP is being limited with his choosing on 8-bay NAS's, as the price seems to be a slim variable hovering in the $$$$ range that comes with the territory.

This is one of the reasons why I've recommend him going with the base model to save some bucks. When he wants to upgrade in the future, the option is there with certainty and confidence of knowing it's more than possible. Best of all, for only a few hundred bucks he'd he able to sit nicely with an i7. Or for a little less an i5.

I see this as his best option being that he's looking in the 8-bay territory.

 

[itgeeks]

The QNAP's on Silvermont/J1800/J1900 do support QuickSync, and it also has a dedicated H.264 encoder, so plex server actually does run ok...

What I can say is the TS-453Pro does a very good job at Transcoding, and it can totally saturate a 1GB link on SMB3, even when running a VM that is on two cores...

The Synology you speak of, the DS-1815+ runs a dual core Silvermont (Rangley) at 1.7GHz - that SoC doesn't even have a GPU... it's a fine chip and the DS-1815+ is a good NAS,,,

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Yes I agree the Synology DS-1815+ is a good NAS but I have to correct you, Its not a dual core 1.7GHz its a quad core 2.5 GHz

 

[itgeeks]

An i3 in terms of raw CPU power isn't going to break any record there either. The important bit is to have a CPU that supports Intel's QuickSync technology. That means a Celeron might potentially be able to do just as good a job as an i3.

Beyond that, you are going to end up paying the price of a desktop PC just to get an i5-based NAS - not worth the money. Either get an actual server, or get an Atom or Celeron-based NAS, and put something like a Zotac PC next to it to host the Plex server. The total cost of such a solution will probably be less than that of an i5 or i7-based NAS.

There is definatly a premium getting a NAS with some guts, I am starting to agree with you that it would be cheaper to purchase a Celeron NOT an Atom and use something like an Intel NUC Core i5 I just spect one out and we can purchase the QNAP TS-453 Pro for 541.99 and the Intel NUC Core i5 with 8GB of ram and a Samsung 850 Evo 250 GB hard drive total cost for everything would be 976.21 and that would be a great setup heck you could even get the TS-653 pro instead and the total cost would be 1176.11

 

[RMerlin]

There is definatly a premium getting a NAS with some guts, I am starting to agree with you that it would be cheaper to purchase a Celeron NOT an Atom and use something like an Intel NUC Core i5 I just spect one out and we can purchase the QNAP TS-453 Pro for 541.99 and the Intel NUC Core i5 with 8GB of ram and a Samsung 850 Evo 250 GB hard drive total cost for everything would be 976.21 and that would be a great setup heck you could even get the TS-653 pro instead and the total cost would be 1176.11

Also take a look at the products offered by Zotac. I think that, in general, they are a bit less expensive than the Intel NUCs. They can get pretty small if you look at their Pico product line.

Personally, I used a Zotac ZBox as my HTPC for a few years, before getting my first NAS a few months ago, and using that NAS to also act as my HTPC. I have no need for transcoding, so that integrated solution was ideal for me. But in your case, you might be better serve by such a dual box approach. Prices start to climb rapidly in the NAS market once you look at i3/i5/i7 products.

And I would agree to skip the Atom and go with no less than a Celeron if it fits your budget. Celeron-based NAS are still quite affordable.

 

[itgeeks]

Also take a look at the products offered by Zotac. I think that, in general, they are a bit less expensive than the Intel NUCs. They can get pretty small if you look at their Pico product line.

Personally, I used a Zotac ZBox as my HTPC for a few years, before getting my first NAS a few months ago, and using that NAS to also act as my HTPC. I have no need for transcoding, so that integrated solution was ideal for me. But in your case, you might be better serve by such a dual box approach. Prices start to climb rapidly in the NAS market once you look at i3/i5/i7 products.

And I would agree to skip the Atom and go with no less than a Celeron if it fits your budget. Celeron-based NAS are still quite affordable.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Agreed, I only wish Synology would step up to the plate with there hardware and start offering some better processor more inline with QNAP. I for one like the Synology DSM and all the great polished software over QNAP from what I have seen, I have only done the live demo of QNAP but to me the software & interface looks dated to me and a lot of there software is only in beta. The QNAP mail server is stand alone, Not integrated like Synology and I don't think they offer a DNS server package from what I can tell and I use both packages on my Synology boxes. Here is how I look at these two company (Hardware=QNAP) (Software-=Synology) unless of course you need VM support on the NAS then QNAP. Hey thanks for the tip on Zotac Pico, That looks like an interesting product. I again want to thank each and everyone that has responded to me, This has been a great discussion on the NAS topic.

 

[stevech]

Home/SOHO NASes.. IMO: It's about NAS OS features. Not CPU speed. Transfers of ordinary folders of files is limited by overhead in the file systems (plural for source, destination), and SMB and rarely gets to the LAN wire speed.

Given the above, the DIY (including Zotac, et al) don't give you the NAS OS, and freeware is not equivalent by far.

Mail server in small NAS? Really?? A full time job

 

[RMerlin]

Home/SOHO NASes.. IMO: It's about NAS OS features. Not CPU speed. Transfers of ordinary folders of files is limited by overhead in the file systems (plural for source, destination), and SMB and rarely gets to the LAN wire speed.

Given the above, the DIY (including Zotac, et al) don't give you the NAS OS, and freeware is not equivalent by far.

Mail server in small NAS? Really?? A full time job

The Zotac is only to host the Plex server.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[stevech]

The Zotac is only to host the Plex server.

Ah. Makes sense.

 

[itgeeks]

Home/SOHO NASes.. IMO: It's about NAS OS features. Not CPU speed. Transfers of ordinary folders of files is limited by overhead in the file systems (plural for source, destination), and SMB and rarely gets to the LAN wire speed.

Given the above, the DIY (including Zotac, et al) don't give you the NAS OS, and freeware is not equivalent by far.

Mail server in small NAS? Really?? A full time job

Mail server in a small NAS, Yes really and it runs great, I do have a full time time in fact I own a business that keeps me very busy. Everyone has different needs and a different use case for there stuff. No need to criticize and put one down for how they are using there equipment. You may not install a mail server on a NAS but others do.

Thanks for taking the time to post...