New Synology 1010+

[ntm1275]

If anybody is interested, Synology sent me one of their new Intel Atom D510 dual core 5 bay NAS's to test

I've only had it a couple of days, but I've posted a small review here, based on my observations and experiences

If anybody wants to know anything about the DS1010+, feel free to ask

 

[jds580s]

Very nice write-up, thanks for sharing.

I am between this Synology 1010+ and the qnap TS-459 Pro
I'm interested in knowing what the power consumption of the Synology unit was in when on and in standby but without drives installed so I could compare it directly to the qnap, which I think spec's them empty at 35W and 19W respectively

Thanks!

 

[iwod]

Just Wondering, It is an basically

1. A Dual Core Atom PC. ( With hardware Riad ? )
2. Custom Linux Build with Web GUI.

What is the different from Build one myself, and just Copy the Synology OS to my system.

Because i bet this things cost $1000+, which means i literarlly pay 800+ more for the Synology interface and casing.

 

[jds580s]

Yeah, amazon put the price up. $1000
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0031ZKX5I/?tag=snbforums-20

Building is a good option for many, but some people need a device they can plug in and it works. They market these to small businesses who may not have a dedicated IT guy.
Other than that you get a nice compact case, their software, support, and warranty.

 

[thiggins]

What is the different from Build one myself, and just Copy the Synology OS to my system.

I think that's easier said than done. Or have you done this?

 

[PowerMAC]

Where are the 5 individual locks for the drives? The 5 drives ARE lockable right? Please tell me an installed drive cannot be taken out without a key within seconds by someone who walks by.

Also, where can I find the FULL DETAILS of the speed measurements that Synology claims for the 1010+? Just claiming it reads 116 MB/s and writes 103 MB/s is of course complete B.S. that says nothing and is probably meant for the uninformed customer who always believe everything manufacturers say about their own products.

Also, what's up with the confusing 1.67 GHz that's mentioned here and there by Synology? In the "review" above you can clearly see the cpu is running at 1.66 GHz just like all other Atom 510's. Intentional or mistake?

Can't wait to see reviews on this site and other independent and reliable sites and also would like to see Higgins updating the NAS charts with this model and see what the speeds REALLY are.

 

[ntm1275]

Very nice write-up, thanks for sharing.

I am between this Synology 1010+ and the qnap TS-459 Pro
I'm interested in knowing what the power consumption of the Synology unit was in when on and in standby but without drives installed so I could compare it directly to the qnap, which I think spec's them empty at 35W and 19W respectively

Thanks!

I asked Synology the question for you and they replied with the answer below

"About power consumption, the below figures are actual power measurement.

68W - 11W x5 = 68W - 55W = 13W
30W - 3W x 5 = 30 - 15W = 14W
this calculation is base on HDDs average power during data access but actually HDD's power is dynamic changing and not every HDD has same value at the same time.

According to Atom spec, the power consumption is about 13~15W."

Hope this clarifies things a little better

 

[ntm1275]

Where are the 5 individual locks for the drives? The 5 drives ARE lockable right? Please tell me an installed drive cannot be taken out without a key within seconds by someone who walks by.

As far as I know, a lot of manufacturers use the same type of 'key locks', so one key will fit and unlock many of these 'key locks' from different manufacturers, so it cannot be intended as a security measure, why walk off with just one drive, when someone could still just walk off with the whole unit
The lock is included to prevent accidental release of the drives, on the DS1010+, instead of a key it is a push switch that has to be physically pushed to the up position to remove the drives

Also, where can I find the FULL DETAILS of the speed measurements that Synology claims for the 1010+? Just claiming it reads 116 MB/s and writes 103 MB/s is of course complete B.S. that says nothing and is probably meant for the uninformed customer who always believe everything manufacturers say about their own products.

I don't know the answer to this, but you could try contacting Synology for an answer

Also, what's up with the confusing 1.67 GHz that's mentioned here and there by Synology? In the "review" above you can clearly see the cpu is running at 1.66 GHz just like all other Atom 510's. Intentional or mistake?

I can only assume that it may be a mistake or perhaps that the actual speed may be 1.665Ghz and some are being rounded up and some rounded down, but in the end it is a Atom D510, so whether it is installed in a Synology, Qnap or Thecus it is still the same CPU
Life's too short to quibble over .01 of a GHz

Can't wait to see reviews on this site and other independent and reliable sites and also would like to see Higgins updating the NAS charts with this model and see what the speeds REALLY are.

I agree, I can't wait myself for Tim to review this to see how it stacks up againt the other NAS's
My review was based solely on my own independant observations and experiences (I am not connected to Synology)
As a user of Synology products for a few years, and an active poster on their forums, they contacted me to see if I would like to review the unit before it was officially released, and of course I said YES, I'm sure you would have done exactly the same
Most people will probably send and receive files from their NAS using a simple copy and paste method, which is what I have done, and then timed how long it took
e.g. 6840MB file took 74 seconds which equals 92.43 Megabytes/second, which I rounded down to 92
It gives a real world figure


Tim
have you any idea when you might get hold of a DS1010+ to review

 

[thiggins]

Tim
have you any idea when you might get hold of a DS1010+ to review

One is supposedly going to be sent "soon".

Very complete review, BTW.

 

[ntm1275]

Thanks Tim for yor comments

I do love this site because we all get to compare lots of different models

It's the first site I go to when a new model is out (and so does everybody else I think)

Keep up the great work

 

[rpwoodman]

It's interesting that a lot of newly released NAS' use the same Atom, with very good performance figures, considerably better than devices using the older big brothers, such as the ReadyNAS Pro.
I guess it'll mean that that featureset of the software is the differentiator as I'd expect hardware with the same CPU, same memory and same hard disks would give very similar performance figures.
I don't think I really understand how the Atom outperforms the Pentium (in the ReadyNAS Pro) by so much.

Surely Netgear must have something else in the wings so that they can claim their title back of the fastest NAS on the block (and they don't seem to be keeping up with disk compatibility like their competitors are).

I have had credit card in hand for some time now, just waiting to purchase the ReadyNAS Pro, but I'm getting more and more nervous about it for various reasons; with products like this Synology, I'm not sure why I'd pay the large premium.

Thanks for the review (both)

 

[thiggins]

I can't comment on what NETGEAR has in the wings (even if I knew), except to say that they seem to be concentrating on going after rackmount storage market, trying to take share from NetApp and others.

Yes, NASes with similar/same CPU and memory perform similarly. But there are tunings and optimizations that can be done to tweak certain aspects of performance. QNAP's incorporation of a different NTFS driver for attached drives is one example. Another is how write cache and oplocks are handled.

 

[PowerMAC]

Thanks Tim for the review,

the thing that I found most surprising is the DS1010+'s shockingly low backup performance to external NTFS eSATA drives compared to models of QNAP, the TS-459/659/859. Backups like this are very common (for extra safety of the most important data).

Synology DS1010+ ---> 24.1 MB/s
QNAP TS-459 ---> 99.2 MB/s !!!

With the QNAP a backup to an external drive will be done 4 times faster! Thanks for the insight!

 

[thiggins]

That's due to QNAP's incorporation of the Paragon NTFS driver, as mentioned in the SS439 review.

 

[PowerMAC]

Aah I see, thanks. Pretty cool that they've included that fast NTFS driver for free and as part of a firmware upgrade.

 

[FreedomPirate01]

who has? qnap or synology?

 

[thiggins]

who has? qnap or synology?

QNAP. Look a couple of posts back.

 

[ntm1275]

Since my original testing, I've now aquired a Cisco SLM2008 managed switch, and I am now able to make use of the dual LAN ports and Dynamic Link Aggregation (802.3ad)

In my inital tests reading 3 different 6840MB files to 3 different PC's/Laptops simultaneously, I have reached a high of 160MB/s (164196KB/s) and a low of 149MB/s (152674KB/s) as reported in the Network Flow graph in the Disk Station Manager

PC1 = Intel i5 750 CPU, 4GB RAM, W7 Pro 64bit, Intel Pro 1000 PT Dual PCIe x4 NIC Teamed
PC2 = AMD Skt939 4800+ X2, 2GB RAM, Vista Business SP2 32bit, onboard Nvidia nForce Gigabit PCI NIC
Laptop1 = Dell M4300, Intel 7200 CPU, 2GB RAM, Vista Ultimate SP2 32bit, onboard Broadcom NetExtreme 57xx Gigabit PCIe

Also since the original testing, I have installed 2 Western Digital 750GB drives configured in Raid 0 in to my i5 PC and have tested against my single 150GB Velociraptor with the DS1010+, and the 6840MB test file

The Velociraptor reads at 94MB/s and writes at 86MB/s
The Raid 0 array reads at 112MB/s and writes at 106MB/s

So a welcomed jump in transfer speeds with the Raid 0 array

 

[weh]

In response to the new 5-drive add-on chassis for the 710+ and 1010+ NAS models. Am I missing something here? Is the DX510 any different from similar boxes from Sans Digital, etc.? Why twice the price?

 

[thiggins]

In function, the DX510 is just a SATA multiplier chassis connected via eSATA.
2x price is for integration into the OS, I'd guess. Don't SATA chassis require drivers to recognize the multiplier?