NAS vs. a Desktop Server - Why Buy a NAS?

[Just Checking]

This question must have been asked a million times before but I can't find it when I did a search.

Why buy a NAS when I can get a higher performance small desktop server for less money?

The best rated 4-Bay NAS's seem to cost more than US$350 without HDD. I easily can buy a Lenovo TS-140 with a Haswell i3-4130 CPU and 4GB of ECC PC3-12800 RAM, 2-Display Ports, 6 USB 3.0 ports, 2-USB 2.o ports, 1-Gigabit LAN Port, Built in RAID and Remote Access, Built in Graphics and Audio, 4-HDD Bays, and an Optical drive for less than US$200.

I have to put in a OS drive and Storage drives as well as put on an OS. I need to populate the drive bays on the NAS's that come without them anyway.

The TS-140 is a bigger box than a dedicated NAS box. The advantage of that is I have a lot of upgradeability to put in other cards like a 4-port gigabit intel i350-T4 card to give me 5 gigabit ethernet ports. The RAM is upgradeable to 32GB also.

Power usage on the TS-140 is also quite low. I measure power usage at idle somewhere between 15-20 watts depending on how many drives and what other cards I have installed. The maximum power usage when the CPU is at 100% utilization and I am streaming as many streams as possible from all the drives is around 66 watts (most I have ever measured) but more like in the 45 watt range. This is about what a i5 Laptop uses.

I'm curious about this since it has always seemed that NAS boxes have a very high price for not as much capability.

 

[TonyH]

Hi,
How many apps. the desktop can have like NAS box?

 

[Deepcuts]

For starters a NAS is much easier to install. For some brands, it is more like plug and play. + 1 for NAS
Building a custom file server using a PC is not for a novice. Even a more experienced user can get in trouble. + 1 for NAS
Then, it comes the question of licenses. Windows and extra money for a license? Or a flavor of Linux and no costs but more complicated to setup? almost draw if using linux
Then, think about power and associated costs. A PC like the one you describe can easily pull 60W+. A NAS with 2 drives can go as low as 15W under load. + 1 for NAS
Thinking about protecting your file server with an UPS? For a NAS, the most basic APC UPS unit can do the job, giving the low power reqs. For a custom PC, a more powerful UPS is needed to keep it going for just as long. Thus, more money. + 1 for NAS
Do you have a separated space for your file server or you keep it in the house? Using a custom PC, usually means more noise. Using a decent NAS usually means almost no noise. + 0.5 for NAS
Do you check and upgrade all your services and dependencies and are you able to keep track of all security vulnerabilities when using a custom PC as a file server? If you do, this will take a lot of time to accomplish. Using a NAS, usually means that the company that sold you the unit will also provide security updates and patches, which you can apply with only one click. + 1 for NAS
IMHO, for home use and SMB, a ready built NAS is the logical way to go.
For enthusiasts and custom applications, building a powerful custom file server is a possibility. And by powerful I don't mean i3.
Even for the enthusiasts and custom applications, there are ready made NAS units that can do the job...for a hefty price, indeed.

Of course, even if one chooses a NAS over a custom built PC, he/she must first check that the manufacturer is a reliable one, by checking the forums and reading some trusted reviews ( see http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/nas-reviews)

 

[KenZ71]

I kick myself often that I did not buy one of those Lenovos. I did buy an older super micro based server and install nas4free.

I prefer diy like nas4free as i can replace parts as needed for performance improvements and / or worn out items. Yes, this might be possible with a an off the shelf NAS but some have unique hardware not easily replaced/ upgraded.

When I moved my ZFS pool from my first NAS to my current box it was easy. Physically move the data drives and usb boot disk, done !

 

[stevech]

Short and sweet:
Go to the web site for Synology and QNAP. Try their online demos. Thoroughly. Read the user manual.
You'll see that the big appeal is the breadth of capabilities beyond file sharing, on these NASes.

 

[matt6789]

From a newbie:
The previous answers are all great and honest. This forum has members that are very helpful. The reviews and charts SmallNetBuilder.com are invaluable when comparing models. I read the manuals of models I thought might work. Believe it or not, but a manual is very revealing. Something may be missing from the manual for a reason.

I looked at the DIY option and decided I wanted something with minimal maintenance. The homework and work needed to configure and maintain security of a DIY is phenomenal for a non-pro. A box-NAS doesn't have replaceable component parts and that is important to tinkerers. Changing parts regularly adds up too, so cost is a washout.

I think I spent weeks reading here, asking questions, and then trying demos as suggested by 'steveh' and 'thiggins'. I think i had an hour or more on each vendor's demo by the time I made my choice. The software packages by Synology and QNAP are the easiest to use. I considered non-NAS owners such as family using an app to view photos and videos.

For my first NAS, I bought a QNAP TS-251 a few months ago. It does everything I need it to and more, and it has expandable memory. Setup was VERY easy. The most difficult thing to get it fully operational was my router. I didn't want to use QNAPcloud redirecting for remote service (I don't want data going through their server and I don't want to depend on their server, and they ask not to transfer huge amounts of data through them anyway). My router is standard issue Uverse equip (5031nv) and not UPnP. Getting a list of ports to open for features was hardest thing to accomplish as there is no table with feature-to-port references. Maybe port usage is standard across the board, but I am not familiar with monkeying with the stuff.

 

[stevech]

My condolences on the U-Verse crud.

I've had a 2 bay NAS, 2x2TB, for 3 years and have not needed to replace parts.
Same for my desktop PC.
Same for my other PCs.

 

[coxhaus]

There are different levels of server and NAS. Most of time whenever I hear someone compare a NAS against a server they always compare the smallest NAS to the biggest full blown server like you run at a corporation which requires extra licenses per user and so on. Then if you ask the same person what NAS to buy they start recommending 4, 5 and 6 bay NAS not the same small simple NAS as compared. A small simple 2 bay NAS is pretty easy. Hopefully not too simple to the point that it is plugged in and nothing else is done for backups until it fails and the user incurs lost data.

I run Microsoft home server and I have run it for over 6 years. It is fairly simple maybe not as simple as a 2 bay NAS. You have to install the Home Server on a PC. Once installed you install a Microsoft connector on each PC which provides security and share ability between the client and server. Home server is programmed by Microsoft for all the backups of your PC and server. They just automatically happen at night. The server tracks and informs you if there are missed backups. This is simple because it is preprogrammed by Microsoft. All the security fixes are automatically downloaded with Microsoft update just the same as your work station so there is nothing new to learn. Microsoft will provide these updates for years, where the NAS is 3 years. The home server I run is no longer available. Microsoft now seems to be supporting home server on a NAS. So rather than install home server on a PC it comes preinstalled on a NAS. Since the NAS is installed with server it will have all the same features. I think one of the big things is monthly security updates and fixes for years for the Microsoft NASs. I don’t know how often the other NAS vendors provide fixes and security updates but in today’s times they are needed. I don’t know about you but I don’t want to replace my server or NAS every 3 years.

I am obviously bias toward Microsoft because it is what I know. Microsoft’s server solution can be simple but for all you server guys it still is real server on a small scale with all the bells and whistles if you want to tap into them where a NAS is a storage medium.

 

[L&LD]

There are different levels of server and NAS. Most of time whenever I hear someone compare a NAS against a server they always compare the smallest NAS to the biggest full blown server like you run at a corporation which requires extra licenses per user and so on. Then if you ask the same person what NAS to buy they start recommending 4, 5 and 6 bay NAS not the same small simple NAS as compared. A small simple 2 bay NAS is pretty easy. Hopefully not too simple to the point that it is plugged in and nothing else is done for backups until it fails and the user incurs lost data.

I run Microsoft home server and I have run it for over 6 years. It is fairly simple maybe not as simple as a 2 bay NAS. You have to install the Home Server on a PC. Once installed you install a Microsoft connector on each PC which provides security and share ability between the client and server. Home server is programmed by Microsoft for all the backups of your PC and server. They just automatically happen at night. The server tracks and informs you if there are missed backups. This is simple because it is preprogrammed by Microsoft. All the security fixes are automatically downloaded with Microsoft update just the same as your work station so there is nothing new to learn. Microsoft will provide these updates for years, where the NAS is 3 years. The home server I run is no longer available. Microsoft now seems to be supporting home server on a NAS. So rather than install home server on a PC it comes preinstalled on a NAS. Since the NAS is installed with server it will have all the same features. I think one of the big things is monthly security updates and fixes for years for the Microsoft NASs. I don’t know how often the other NAS vendors provide fixes and security updates but in today’s times they are needed. I don’t know about you but I don’t want to replace my server or NAS every 3 years.

I am obviously bias toward Microsoft because it is what I know. Microsoft’s server solution can be simple but for all you server guys it still is real server on a small scale with all the bells and whistles if you want to tap into them where a NAS is a storage medium.

I too am a diehard MS user at heart. But you are wrong about your assessment of a NAS as a simple storage medium.

MS Server as you stated is not available anymore. But it is also not as simple to get running as you suggest. Thankfully, Windows 8 and 8.1 have a built in backup feature called File History. All you need to do is turn it on.

 

[azazel1024]

I personally prefer Windows for my server/serves to. I am not adverse to a NAS, but as a budget constrained person for what I want and need, a NAS can't do it at my price point and within reason just can't do what I want anyway.

I have windows setup so that my server can stand on its hind legs and beg. Complicated metaphor for I couldn't customize a NAS to do everything I would want my windows server box to do, though it could do a lot of it.

My personal box is slightly thistier than a typical 2 or 4 bay NAS, but not my a significant margin. About 20w idle and 30w streaming around 45w under 100% CPU load. Yeah, it is more, but it also only runs 19/7, so the power difference is going to be more compacted to. Maybe $10 a year difference in operating costs. If that. A future build will likely push that down closer to 10w at idle and 20w streaming, which is on par with most typical 4 bay NAS boxes (or actually a little lower).

The price though isn't in the same ball park, nor is performance. Celeron G1610 with 8GB of RAM, 60GB SSD for a boot and app drive along with a 3TB HDD (will be doubled up shortly) and 2GbE NICs with SMB Multichannel allowing me 2Gbps between my desktop and my server. Running iTunes, Calibre server, IIS, backup jobs, auto-updating iTunes, SFTP download box, RDP server, SMB and I am sure I am not thinking of at least a couple of other uses for the thing.

Total outlay was around $220 not including the HDD (I had a spare Windows 8.1 license, so that wasn't a cost).

That said, I am strongly considering a 2-bay basic Synology or QNAP NAS as a backup to my server. That said, I am also looking at a basic Bay Trail NUC with a USB3 enclosure also, as that would be slightly more expensive in the end, but it could do absolutely everything my primary server could do (if slower) and easy enough to mirror everything and leave it as a warm backup.

 

[coxhaus]

I too am a diehard MS user at heart. But you are wrong about your assessment of a NAS as a simple storage medium.

MS Server as you stated is not available anymore. But it is also not as simple to get running as you suggest. Thankfully, Windows 8 and 8.1 have a built in backup feature called File History. All you need to do is turn it on.

Take a look at Thecus W4000 4-bay Cloud Ready Windows NAS. It has an SSD loaded with Microsoft Server Storage edition. I some how believe this is the "new" home server from Microsoft. Home Server os is dead but this will work fine for home use,

 

[stevech]

specs say the Thecus W4000 uses Windows Storage Server 2012 R2 Essentials
on a 2.13GHz Dual Core Intel Atom baseboard.

Top Storage for 1-50 Employee Business
Office 365 & Microsoft Azure: Cloud Service Integration
Active Directory Domain Services: Scalable, Secure User Management
Data Deduplication: Performance Optimization
Enhanced Boot Drive: Embedded SSD

It might take some kahunas to go with that OS that might be hardwired to MS's cloud stuff.

 

[L&LD]

I wouldn't buy a computer with an embedded ssd that I use to just browse the web with. Access to the hard drive (or other storage medium) needs to be there.

Implemented as a NAS? Does not pass the sniff test to me.

 

[coxhaus]

I don’t think the NAS is a computer for browsing. It is going to be data storage and perform server services. I never use my home server for browsing either. My home server is only used for data storage and server services. I don't rent Office365 either. We buy our copies. I think 50 users is being a little over optimistic.

 

[L&LD]

I don’t think the NAS is a computer for browsing. It is going to be data storage and perform server services. I never use my home server for browsing either. My home server is only used for data storage and server services. I don't rent Office365 either. We buy our copies. I think 50 users is being a little over optimistic.

I think you missed my point. The embedded ssd is what I have an issue with (and the O/S installed on that proprietary component).

 

[stevech]

embedded (non-removable0 SSD for the OS is kind of unnerving. The NAS I have and most, I think, put the OS on each volume (I use a 2 bay, 2 volume config). That way, the OS will boot from either.

 

[coxhaus]

I think you missed my point. The embedded ssd is what I have an issue with (and the O/S installed on that proprietary component).

It is just the same as a desktop using an SSD. Why would you want to remove it if it is working correctly? I would never use a server or NAS to browse the internet so you should be safe.

 

[L&LD]

It is just the same as a desktop using an SSD. Why would you want to remove it if it is working correctly? I would never use a server or NAS to browse the internet so you should be safe.

You really are missing the point.

An embedded ssd or hdd for that matter makes for a very proprietary setup. When (not if) Thecus decides to not support it anymore, all you have is a paperweight if the os gets borked or the non-replaceable drive dies.

Nothing to do with browsing. I was using that as an example of how little faith I have on an embedded solution in the long term for even something as simple as surfing the web.

 

[azazel1024]

That and odds are excellent that it is a eMMC chip, not actually an SSD. Now, granted, that means probably higher performance than the OS being house on a HDD, but much lower performance than if the OS was actually housed on a real SSD.

 

[coxhaus]

You really are missing the point.

An embedded ssd or hdd for that matter makes for a very proprietary setup. When (not if) Thecus decides to not support it anymore, all you have is a paperweight if the os gets borked or the non-replaceable drive dies.

Nothing to do with browsing. I was using that as an example of how little faith I have on an embedded solution in the long term for even something as simple as surfing the web.

Surely you have a Microsoft Key so the OS can be replaced, like any OS.