Netgear NVX or Qnap TS-459 Pro

[sylvainp]

NVX, Pro Business, Qnap TS-459 Pro, Qnap TS-659

Well i'm in a tough decision and it's very hard for me to select between these NAS.

Netgear NVX (2x1TB)
Netgear Pro Business (3 x 500GB)
Qnap TS-459 Pro
Qnap TS-659 Pro

Right now I have 4 x500GB HD that I have been used on my Netgear NV+ that I sold. The NV+ was working without a glitch and I was using X-RAID.
But I want a faster NAS with faster write speed and read speed.

I mainly use it for HD streaming (PS3, Xbox360), Share music for my Sonos and also use it with Genie Timeline Pro a realtime backup program. So I mainly use CIFS, DLNA, UPNP, Printer server. What I really want is to access all my media files without having to leave my PC on all the time to access my files.

For what I can read on the NAS chart the Qnap TS-459 Pro look to be quite faster than the NVX on the write speed. On the read speed the NVX is a little bit faster.

But in realtime condition which one is faster ? Let's say when I copy files from my PC to the NAS using Windows Explorer ?

Also the powerhouse (CPU) on the Qnap is also faster than the NVX.

Here is the Pros and cons about these 2 NAS (my personal taste)

ReadyNAS NVX (2x1TB)

Pro's
- easy to use
- Warranty 5 years
- 2 x 1TB
- X-RAID2 (horizontal and vertical expansion) Easy to use.
- Nice look

Note: If I use 2 x 500GB at start and after I add 2 x 1TB then I should get 2.5TB available by using X-RAID2

Con's
CPU speed (slower than other NAS)
X-RAID2 performance (NAS chart are based on RAID5) how X-RAID2 will perform compared to RAID5 ?
No ESATA port (faster to backup NAS to external drive)
Web interface


Qnap TS-459 Pro

Pro's
Faster CPU
Write performance
Nice web interface
ESATA port

Con's
Warranty (only 1 year)
Tech Support ?
No HD (but I already have 4)
Twonky Media (is it good for streaming media to Sonos, PS3, Xbox360) ?


And for long term and size capacity and more HDD Slots I have these 2 NAS

Netgear Pro Business (3 x 500GB)
Qnap TS-659 Pro

The Qnap TS-659 Pro rocks ! Quite faster than both Netgear and a bit faster than the TS-459 Pro.

So if I want to save money than I have the Qnap TS-459 and the NVX.
and for futur expand then I have the TS-659 and the Pro Business

I didn't put the Synology DS1010+ in my selection just because I don't like the plastic HDD cage. I just think for that price they could at least put metal HDD cage.


Which one would you pick ? (4 bay drive) and why ?

Which one would you pick ? (6 bay drive) and why ?

Thanks

 

[thiggins]

You should not see a significant difference in performance between XRAID2 and RAID5. You also should not see any storage capacity difference between XRAID2 and RAID5.

 

[teknojnky]

x-raid2 on the nvx will let you expand with replacing only 2 drives instead of all 4, so it could save you money in the long run (not having to buy 4 replacement drives at a time).

other than that, you have the pro/cons down pretty good, so it will come down to what you favor more.

If you plan to backup to external drives alot, the esata will be way faster than usb2 on the nvx which will save you time on an ongoing basis.

I went thru the same basic decision regarding the readynas pro vs thecus/qnap models.

I ended up with the pro based on warranty, readynas forums, and x-raid2, but I really really wanted esata (no current readynas products have esata).

 

[thiggins]

x-raid2 on the nvx will let you expand with replacing only 2 drives instead of all 4, so it could save you money in the long run (not having to buy 4 replacement drives at a time).

Gotta be careful here.

From http://www.readynas.com/forum/faq.p...ity_when_installing_disks_of_different_sizes?

Volume capacity will be limited by the smallest disk. For example, if you are installing one 250GB drive and three 750GB drives, your data volume capacity will be limited to 250GB on each of the four disks. In Flex-RAID mode, you can utilize the leftover space on the 3 750GB disks by creating another data volume (3 x 500GB). With X-RAID, if you replace the single 250GB disk with a 750GB disk, your capacity will automatically expand, utilizing all 750 GB from each of the 4 disks.

 

[teknojnky]

that applies to x-raid.

x-raid 2 uses two raid layers to achieve better expansion

xraid2 1tb + 1tb + 2tb + 2tb = ~4tb usable (instead of 3tb).

4x 1tb raid5, 2x 1tb mirrored.

replacing one of the 1tb with a 3rd 2tb would yield:

4x 1tb raid5, 3x 1tb raid5 = ~5tb usable

see @ http://www.readynas.com/?cat=53

 

[sylvainp]

So if I get it right. If I buy the NVX and use X-RAID2 I will benefit an extra 500GB of space.

I already owne 4 x 500 GB. and the NVX come with 2 x 1TB

So I just to start the NVX with 2 x 500 GB

2 x 500 GB = 500 GB
Then I add 1 TB drive

now I should have 1 TB capacity

Then I finally add the other 1 TB

Now I should have 2TB capacity with X-RAID2 instead of 1.5TB with RAID5 setup.

Well to be more close 461 x 4 = 1844 MB

Right ?

 

[teknojnky]

yes, one thing to keep in mind, is you must start with the small drives.

Once you add a larger drive to the system, you must add the same size or larger.

in other words, start with the 500's, then add the 1tbs.

you can not start with the 1tbs, then add the 500's.

you also can not go, 500, 1000, 500, 1000

 

[sylvainp]

Another question:

Are the results in the NAS chart comparable to realtime performance ?

Why I ask because if I check the results of the ReadyNAS Pro which is supposed to be a very fast NAS seems to be slow compared to the Qnap TS-459 Pro.

The Qnap look to be faster than the ReadyNAS Pro which have a better CPU.
Even then NVX look faster at some test.

Well at another site I see they are using reatime performance (photoshop, spreadsheets, powerpoint files, etc.)

And the performance of the ReadyNAS was one of the fastest...


Just looking the charts here and other places the results are very different.

So are the results in the NAS chart comparable to realtime performance ?
This is what you get in realtime performance.

Thanks

 

[thiggins]

Are the results in the NAS chart comparable to realtime performance ?

The filecopy benchmarks are a "realtime" test. Results should match up pretty well with what you will see with a Vista or Win 7 system.