The BEST 4-Bay QNAP for ~$1000 price range? TVS-471 the Top Pick? -OR- Jump to the 6-Bay TVS-671?

[iunlock]

Update:

Long story short, I went for the QNAP TVS-671 and the TVS-871 for many reasons. The Asustor should have never been on the short list. The TVS-471 is still the best buy in its class, but I needed more power.

I'm now a happy owner of a TVS-671 Quad Core i7 powered NAS with 16GB of RAM, along with the TVS-871 (i7). It's very fast.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Everyone!

I have been researching very extensively for a worthy 4-Bay NAS around ~$1000, along with a lot of brand filtering which brings me here to QNAP. Upon all the filtering I've basically narrowed it down to the 3 QNAP models listed below, along with a curve ball in the mix (Asustor) that may be a strong contender?

I'd like to also note that my preferred budget is around $2000. Give or take any direction. It doesn't matter. With that being said, there seems to be a plethora of options and a fun one indeed.

Here are my top 2 picks for a 4-Bay NAS that I am strongly considering:


=
QNAP TVS-471 (w/ 3.5GHz "i3-4150" Dual Core)
and
Asustor AS7004T (w/ 3.5Ghz "i3-4330" Dual Core)
=

However...

If the lower end QNAP models (#3 and/or even #4 in the list below) will be able to accommodate my needs...ie...have enough horsepower to do everything that I need it to, then I may be able to save some money. This is where I need the community to jump in to help me out.

My TOP 4-Bay picks so far: (In Order)

* The NAS I decide to purchase will be populated with 4x 6TB WD Red's

1. QNAP TVS-471 [Intel Dual Core i3 (4150) - 3.5GHz] | Upgradable to 16GB RAM
2. Asustor AS7004T [Intel Dual Core i3 (4330) - 3.5Ghz] | Upgradable to 16GB RAM
3. QNAP TS-453 PRO [Intel Quad Core Celeron (J1900) - 2.0GHz (Up to 2.41GHz) | Upgradable to 8GB RAM

It's been interesting to see the TS-453 PRO sit high in the charts of many benchmark tests, even over some of its bigger brothers. Perhaps it's the Quad Core finesse over the Dual Core? - I've just read an entire post on some fellow members on these forums talking about the QVS encoding ability on the lower end J1900 CPU's...very interesting...

On another note, I'm also strongly considering the 6-Bay TVS-671 (i3) Dual Core or even the (i5) Quad Core.


Office Set Up:

• 
  Computer -> Gigabit Switch <- NAS
  (Gigabit Switch to the router of course.)
  Everything is wired with Shielded Cat7 cables.

My needs for the NAS:

1. Media Center / Server: It needs to be more than adequate to handle at least 10 simultaneous streams (Movies & Music) without even blinking or thinking about running out of steam. + It will be the server for everything Media. PLEX etc...
2. Photography and Video Files: There will be a lot of large file transfers to and from the NAS.
3. TimeMachine Back Up:Although I have a dedicated 5TB HD for TimeMachine, I'd like to set up TM as well to the NAS.
4. Backing up Photos from my Smart Phone: Having a cloud based photo gallery is very important to me.
5. iTunes: Although related to point #1, I'd like to have the NAS be the primary library for my iTunes.
6. Future Proof: I would like the ability to swap out the ports to convert it to 10 Gigabit Speeds. (I know the TVS-471 is the only one that will allow this to be possible.)
7. Apps that actually function and not just sometimes: It's important to have the mobile apps such as the gallery app to work properly.

Making the Final Decision:

Most people that I've spoke with, including Level 2 Techs from the various companies all have said pretty much the same thing in that anything below an Intel i3 would hit a wall with my usage needs. I've compared all the CPU's to get a general idea of the horsepower they have and the AMD's and Celeron CPU's are complete snails compared to the Intel i3's and up. This is obvious of course looking at it from a CPU point of view and I understand that in a NAS environment, the sluggish CPU's can do quite well "in a NAS." However, multi-tasking is multi-tasking and power is power.

With that being said, for my needs listed above, should choice#3 even be considered? Or did I waste time typing it?

-

The two finalists for the 4-Bay NAS for me are the:

QNAP TVS-471 (w/ 3.5GHz "i3-4150" Dual Core)
and
Asustor AS7004T (w/ 3.5Ghz "i3-4330" Dual Core)

-

RAM: TVS-471 ships with 4GB of RAM vs AS7004T ships with only 2GB of RAM. (Either way the amount is irrelevant because I'll be upgrading it to 16GB anyway.)

CPU: Neck to Neck. Both scores a 7.4 out of 10 on a CPU review site.

There's only a slight difference in the cache's and temp:

QNAP w/ the "i3-4150" is a little newer (Released February 2014)
+ Runs a little cooler. (66.8C vs 72C)

Asustor w/ the "i3-4330" is a little older (Released July 2013).
+ The "i3-4330" in the Asustor does have more l3 cache (4MB vs 3MB)
+ More l3 cache per core (2MB vs 1.5MB)
+ More l2 cache per core (0.5MB vs 0.25MB)
+ Scores higher on GeekBench (32-bit) [6,615 vs 6,508]
+ Scores higher on GeekBench (64-bit) [7,205 vs 7,012]
+ Scores higher on Passmark [5,061 vs 4,916]
+ Scores higher on Passmark (Single Core)
+ Has a new 4600 GPU vs 4400 GPU

Despite the small margins, it's basically the same thing.

Then it comes down to the user interface, which I have zero experience with either QNAP or Asustor, but from what I've read and have seen so far they both seem to be good contenders. - Scratch that. I've found the demo to both QNAP and Asustor. --- I must say the QNAP interface is much more polished and is much more refined, whereas the Asustor is a direct rip of the QNAP with the horrific Windows 95 feel.

The price point of the two is pretty much the same as well so in that category it's a complete wash.

Warranty:
Asustor provides a 3 Year Warranty vs QNAP's 2 Year.

In conclusion, I am 50.1% for the TVS-471 and 49.9% for the Asustor at the moment. The percentage toward the Asustor is quickly diminishing due to its horrid user interface. Yikes...

OR

Should I scratch the 4-Bay all together and just jump to the 6-Bay QNAP TVS671 w/ the Intel i3 so that I'll have two more bays to play with? It'll also future proof it for when I will need to expand. However, on the flip side of that I'm one to always want the latest and greatest so this doesn't apply to me too much.

Is it possible to use the 6th bay for a Cache drive? Perhaps put in a SSD in there to make it fly even more? I'll likely go with a RAID 6 config if I do end up getting the 6-Bay over the 4-Bay.

Last but not least, the QNAP TVS-671 w/ the 3.0GHz Intel i5 (Quad Core) is within reach as well. BUT....do I really need it over the i3 for my use? I'm thinking not...

In Summary:

With a preferred ~$2000 budget the choices are endless...and haunting...

If I didn't need the horsepower, I could easily go the WD DL4100 route with its petty 1.7GHz Atom processor, however, fully populated with 4x 6TB WD Reds to give me 24TB (less your RAID config of course) of real estate for only $1200.- With a full 3 year Warranty I might add. That's darn near the cost of 4x 6TB WD Red Drives alone LOL...you're only paying ~$200 for the Geo Metro pop can shell. --- Silly, but the low cost of only $1200 does haunt you for a 24TB set up of the mighty WD Red's. Did I mention the 3 Year Warranty?

That right there....is what is messing with my head right now. The only way to snap out of it is to remind myself that the 1.7 liter tin can will not and can not pull my yacht.

So then I jump into the mode of, "Go BIG or just Go HOME!" --- Which leads me to the TVS-671 with the Intel Quad Core i5, putting me now at $1600 for just the Bentley shell. Plus, another $1000 for 4x 6TB WD Red's to populate it. Now I have a $2,600 Twin Turbo V12 cursing around, all the while rolling down my window at a stop light asking if they have any "grey poupon," while staring at their fully loaded "Bentley Kit Car with that 1.7 liter engine," that only cost them $1200. We can both cruise the same, but not pull the same.

Mind you this is all starting from wanting just a 4-Bay NAS that can handle my, I would say moderate, NAS needs. From the looks of it, unless I can get one heck of a deal somewhere on the 4-Bays super cheap, I'm tipping more and more into the 6-Bay territory.

Even if it's not the (i5), the (i3) would knock the price down about $350 for a starting price of ~$1250 for the TVS-671 (i3). Add 4x 6TB WD Red's, I'm still over the 2K range, but so would I even with the 4-Bay TVS-471.

Either way you cut it, when you're already dancing in the 2K range, a measly ~$250 is chump change is it not? (It's a joke, but with some truth to it.)

My conscience brings me back down to earth and keeps telling me..."just 4-Bay it"...all the while that voice keeps whispering, "Quad Core-Quad Core" over and over again, which I can only get with the (i5) TVS-671.

I really need to think about this...

--- Talk to me Goose.


Thanks in advance!

Cheers!

 

[L&LD]

I go through similar discussions in my head and with my customers anytime a NAS unit is being considered. I have yet to see anyone with the budget to regret buying the Bentley if it better matches their needs now or in the near / foreseeable future.

What the quad core i5 offers is about 40% more performance on tap and additional VT-d support if VM will become important in your setup which none of the other units have. The i5-4590S can do this with up to four times the ram (32GB vs. 8GB) of the J1900 based QNAP TS-453 PRO, depending on how many memory slots there are and with only about 20% more power consumed at full load.

The TVS-671 with the i5 add further possibilities including an SSD cache or building two or three arrays on the single NAS unit. In addition to the possibility of upgrading the ports to 10GBe in the future as and if needed. With the high performance the TVS-671 offers with fully populated drive bays, a 10GBe port should not be considered an option if the goal is to hit some of that performance.

The moral is the same. If you need the performance and or capabilities today or in the next couple of years, it is cheaper to buy the highest performing model you can today. Rather than spend 60 to 70% of the cost today and spend 100% or more in a few short months.

Make sure you have a need for the performance you're seeking.
Check your bank account.
Check with your significant other.
Have the babies been fed?
All systems still 'green'?

Enjoy.


Maverick: I feel the need...
Maverick, Goose: ...the need for speed!

 

[iunlock]

I go through similar discussions in my head and with my customers anytime a NAS unit is being considered. I have yet to see anyone with the budget to regret buying the Bentley if it better matches their needs now or in the near / foreseeable future.

What the quad core i5 offers is about 40% more performance on tap and additional VT-d support if VM will become important in your setup which none of the other units have. The i5-4590S can do this with up to four times the ram (32GB vs. 8GB) of the J1900 based QNAP TS-453 PRO, depending on how many memory slots there are and with only about 20% more power consumed at full load.

The TVS-671 with the i5 add further possibilities including an SSD cache or building two or three arrays on the single NAS unit. In addition to the possibility of upgrading the ports to 10GBe in the future as and if needed. With the high performance the TVS-671 offers with fully populated drive bays, a 10GBe port should not be considered an option if the goal is to hit some of that performance.

The moral is the same. If you need the performance and or capabilities today or in the next couple of years, it is cheaper to buy the highest performing model you can today. Rather than spend 60 to 70% of the cost today and spend 100% or more in a few short months.

Make sure you have a need for the performance you're seeking.
Check your bank account.
Check with your significant other.
Have the babies been fed?
All systems still 'green'?

Enjoy.


Maverick: I feel the need...
Maverick, Goose: ...the need for speed!

Thanks for your input!

You're absolutely right about buying the top of the line now to prevent having to spend more money later. You've helped me sway to get the (i5) even more. I just needed that nudge.

Are there any other fine details regarding the TVS-671 (i3) vs the (i5) that you can throw my way? From purely from a CPU stand point, the (i3) scores a 7.5 out of 10 and the (i5) a 7.9 out of 10.

The big kicker here is the Dual Core (i3) vs the Quad Core (i5). That in itself speaks for itself.

The TVS-671 (i3) I can get for about $1,180 at the moment and the (i5) model for $1,600 out the door. Although price is not an issue, my common sense "conscience" is telling me that if I can get away with the (i3...ie...V8) to pull my boat, than I won't need the Twin Turbo V12.

The two CPU's bare bone price:
Intel Core i5 4590S - $210
Intel Core i3 4150 - $124

Difference of only $86.

Whereas the difference between the (i3) and (i5) equipped unit is: $420.

I plan to populate the bays with 4TB, 5TB and/or 6TB WD Reds. I'm leaning more towards getting all 4TB's in there to have 24TB of goodness (less RAID config.) This is more than enough space for my needs.

I guess the big question is, at what point will I be in desperate need of the Twin Turbo V12 (i5) compared to the V8 (i3)? Would the (i3) be able to handle the weight? What is the tipping point of the (i3)'s capability? Threshold? Where is that line?! LOL

Here's the summary of the weight that I need to haul:

• Around 10 Simultaneous Users => Streaming Movies / Ability to Transcode with a breeze.
  
• NAS will be THE server for PLEX etc...it'll be very busy.
  
• Daily TimeMachine Back Up.
• It'll be the main iTunes Library Server.
  
• Frequent Large File Transfers
• 7+ Mobile Devices will be connected to this at all times backing up photos etc...

As for everything else, all systems Green. Gas is full, Oil temp is good and I'm ready to fly....

 

[stevech]

Transcode ... 10 streams. Hmmm. It's all about the ASICs and special chips, not the CPU.

 

[iunlock]

Transcode ... 10 streams. Hmmm. It's all about the ASICs and special chips, not the CPU.

I've read some interesting discussions on this topic on how the lower end Celeron Quad Core's offered in the TS-453 Pro did quite well with video transcoding. It had to do with its ability to execute such tasks thanks to something that particular chip-set (J1900?) was equipped with. I'll try to link the discussion when I find it.

I'll update this thread above, but I've gone ahead and ordered the TVS-671 w/ 6x 4TB WD Red's.

 

[Trexx]

Just as an FYI - It will partly depend on what SW you are streaming with. QNAP only spec's the TS-x53 family to support transcoding 5 streams at once (course this depends on resolution, original format, etc.) and that is when using the Intel QV capabilities built into the CPU for apps like Video Station, KODI, etc.

Since Plex does not currently support HW transcoding, you would not want to go with the TS-x53 if Plex is going to be your streaming provider of choice.

 

[sfx2000]

I have a 453Pro - it's a nice little NAS, a bit spendy, but it's probably at the high end that I would spend on a NAS box before moving over into a low-end Dell PowerEdge or Lenovo Thinkserver - the cost crossover is right about there...

 

[sfx2000]

I've read some interesting discussions on this topic on how the lower end Celeron Quad Core's offered in the TS-453 Pro did quite well with video transcoding. It had to do with its ability to execute such tasks thanks to something that particular chip-set (J1900?) was equipped with. I'll try to link the discussion when I find it.

I'll update this thread above, but I've gone ahead and ordered the TVS-671 w/ 6x 4TB WD Red's.

I was part of that discussion - the J1900 in the 453Pro (and the J1800 in the 451) have an element in the Baytrail-D CPU, the Imagination Technologies VXD392 (Intel refers to it as a Video Encode/Decode IP block) that works in conjunction with Intel Quick Sync Video provided by the Gen7 graphics processor... so H264 is pretty much handled by the J1900... and it does a fine job of transcoding for up to 5 users...

Haswell Celeron/Pentium/i3 thru i7 have QSV, but they don't have the VXD392 block, so H264 runs on QSV and cores, but decently well - but perhaps not to support 10 concurrent H264 transcodes.

H265 - that's all CPU, and nothing out there is at the level of what we see with H264 yet... There are some ARM's that do have H265 decode, and some GPU's from AMD/nVidia have H265 decode acceleration.

 

[iunlock]

I was part of that discussion - the J1900 in the 453Pro (and the J1800 in the 451) have an element in the Baytrail-D CPU, the Imagination Technologies VXD392 (Intel refers to it as a Video Encode/Decode IP block) that works in conjunction with Intel Quick Sync Video provided by the Gen7 graphics processor... so H264 is pretty much handled by the J1900... and it does a fine job of transcoding for up to 5 users...

Haswell Celeron/Pentium/i3 thru i7 have QSV, but they don't have the VXD392 block, so H264 runs on QSV and cores, but decently well - but perhaps not to support 10 concurrent H264 transcodes.

H265 - that's all CPU, and nothing out there is at the level of what we see with H264 yet... There are some ARM's that do have H265 decode, and some GPU's from AMD/nVidia have H265 decode acceleration.

Your name did look familiar Thanks for the explanation. In terms of the Haswell CPU's you've listed that power the other units, what would be your general guess as to how many H264 streams it can handle?

Celeron ~5 streams
Pentium ~_______
i3 ~_______
i5 ~_______

What about an i7-4790S 3.2GHz (upto 4GHz) Quad Core? Think that can juggle ~10 H264's at a time? I hope it can because that's my set up.

TVS-671 w/ Intel Quad Core [i7-4790S]
6x 4TB WD reds
16GB of RAM

If it can't I'm sending everything back and jumping up even more LOL...j/k...well kind of....I really need the HP and Torque to pull 10 tons. This is realistic everyday use. Not just sometimes 10...it will be at least 10 people on it at all times at the office.

Thanks!

 

[sfx2000]

Your name did look familiar Thanks for the explanation. In terms of the Haswell CPU's you've listed that power the other units, what would be your general guess as to how many H264 streams it can handle?

Celeron ~5 streams
Pentium ~_______
i3 ~_______
i5 ~_______

What about an i7-4790S 3.2GHz (upto 4GHz) Quad Core? Think that can juggle ~10 H264's at a time? I hope it can because that's my set up.

TVS-671 w/ Intel Quad Core [i7-4790S]
6x 4TB WD reds
16GB of RAM

If it can't I'm sending everything back and jumping up even more LOL...j/k...well kind of....I really need the HP and Torque to pull 10 tons. This is realistic everyday use. Not just sometimes 10...it will be at least 10 people on it at all times at the office.

Thanks!

Well - for capacity beyond 5 streams served concurrently - that's a question for QNAP - I did some work as a user/customer and found that, yes, 5 streams can be supported on a TS-453Pro with an Intel J1900, and sound reasoning as to why they can claim this...

Intel 'small core' performance is not linear with their 'big core' CPU's - they spend their functions in different ways... and several of the small cores feature enhancements that the big cores don't..

Since I don't have a QNAP with one of Intel's 'big cores', e.g. Ivy Bridge/Haswell, I don't have a sound point of reference when comparing to what I see with the 4-core Silvermont J1900..

 

[iunlock]

Well - for capacity beyond 5 streams served concurrently - that's a question for QNAP - I did some work as a user/customer and found that, yes, 5 streams can be supported on a TS-453Pro with an Intel J1900, and sound reasoning as to why they can claim this...

Intel 'small core' performance is not linear with their 'big core' CPU's - they spend their functions in different ways... and several of the small cores feature enhancements that the big cores don't..

Since I don't have a QNAP with one of Intel's 'big cores', e.g. Ivy Bridge/Haswell, I don't have a sound point of reference when comparing to what I see with the 4-core Silvermont J1900..

I've submitted several support tickets to QNAP and have chatted with them on LIVE chat. One thing that I can tell you for sure is that talking to their support is like talking to a bag of rocks. No exaggeration. They simply don't know what their talking about. People on here know more than they do. It was a waste of 2 hours of my life on chat with them. -
Update: I have been able to speak with some very knowledgeable people over at QNAP both on chat and over the phone. I assume the folks that I've spoken with before were either newbies or the janitor. I recall my statement about QNAP's support, as they pick up the phone right away and do indeed know what they are talking about. Just make sure the janitor doesn't pick up the phone or chat. I guess it can happen to anyone.

---

I'm thinking that the Quad Core i7 in my unit should be able to handle its own. If not, I'll have to look at Xeon's and upgrade.

The TS-453 Pro reminds me of that 4 cylinder turbo that can give V6's and V8's a run for their money on a twisty turn track. The only obvious thing here is that there's no replacement for displacement in terms of torque as the bigger displacements (i5, i7) will surely shine when pulling that boat. However, for most people the 4 banger turbo will be more than adequate while sipping gas as oppose to the gas hogs. Take a look at these numbers:

Intel Celeron J1900 Quad Core (2.0 GHz, up to 2.42 GHz)

• TDP: 10W
  
• Power Consumption: 8.13W
  
• Annual Home Energy Cost: $2.41
• GPU clock speed: 688 MHz
• Turbo Clock Speed: 854 MHz

Intel Core i7 4790S Quad Core (3.2 GHz, up to 4.0 GHz)

• TDP: 65W
  
• Power Consumption: 52.81W
• Annual Home Energy Cost: $15.66
• GPU Clock Speed: 350 MHz
• Turbo Clock Speed: 1,200 MHz

In the real world the cost of energy won't break the bank, but for the energy efficient minded it's fun to see the numbers for what they are.

You can also see the higher GPU clock speed on the J1900, although not really relevant due to it being two completely different platforms, but it sheds light on what you've mentioned about the, "...element in the Baytrail-D CPU, the Imagination Technologies VXD392 (Intel refers to it as a Video Encode/Decode IP block) that works in conjunction with Intel Quick Sync Video provided by the Gen7 graphics processor."

The best analogy that I can think of is the 4 cylinder Turbo vs the naturally aspirated V8's. The GPU clock speed here is the 4 banger having a higher rev to produce power as oppose to the V8 not having to rev as high to produce the torque. Very typical.

The TS-453 will suite most users, however, for power users it has its limitations beyond 5 streams. (Then there's the point of factoring in the quality of stream (720p, 1080p etc...) and real time transcoding which is another thing. Lots of variables.)

 

[stevech]

Maybe I've been lucky, but the phone and email dialogs I've had with Synology US (Calif.) tech support have all been excellent. They don't put me on to a level 1 screener-dolt. But I've not inquired about transcoding as I don't use that on the NAS.

 

[sfx2000]

The TS-453 Pro reminds me of that 4 cylinder turbo that can give V6's and V8's a run for their money on a twisty turn track. The only obvious thing here is that there's no replacement for displacement in terms of torque as the bigger displacements (i5, i7) will surely shine when pulling that boat. However, for most people the 4 banger turbo will be more than adequate while sipping gas as oppose to the gas hogs. Take a look at these numbers:

Well - there is no replacement for displacement - but consider that the K24 in my Acura - 2.4 Liters @ 200 HP, is more than enough - blow it up to 7.4 liters - well that's a hella engine, 600+ HP, and that's net, not gross - and this is a car that idles nice, and drives well, and I don't need to tweak and tune.. I'd like to have a Hellcat... but day to day, I'm probably better off with my TSX, and getting some "V-TEC - yo" moments kicking in from time to time... trust me, it's more than enough, and very capable of extra legal speeds more often than not...

We won't talk about the stealth cars - 3.5 Liter V6 CamCords - they're family cars that are silly quick when pushed...

When I look at NAS boxen - not just QNAP, but other vendors, when one gets to a point, sometimes it is better to step up into a small business server... NAS boxes hit the Core-i5/i7 chips... the value situation starts to change - it does for me...

 

[iunlock]

Well - there is no replacement for displacement - but consider that the K24 in my Acura - 2.4 Liters @ 200 HP, is more than enough - blow it up to 7.4 liters - well that's a hella engine, 600+ HP, and that's net, not gross - and this is a car that idles nice, and drives well, and I don't need to tweak and tune.. I'd like to have a Hellcat... but day to day, I'm probably better off with my TSX, and getting some "V-TEC - yo" moments kicking in from time to time... trust me, it's more than enough, and very capable of extra legal speeds more often than not...

We won't talk about the stealth cars - 3.5 Liter V6 CamCords - they're family cars that are silly quick when pushed...

When I look at NAS boxen - not just QNAP, but other vendors, when one gets to a point, sometimes it is better to step up into a small business server... NAS boxes hit the Core-i5/i7 chips... the value situation starts to change - it does for me...

I agree. Some CPU's can be more than adequate for simple day to day use. I love the VTEC analogy as it fits perfectly for the likes of the J1900's etc... It gets good MPG (low power consumption), while being able to have the advantage of VTEC when needed. This is a better analogy than my Turbo one, because it is more like VTEC than a Turbo as nothing in the J1900 is really force induced, rather more VTEC like than anything.

However, even the K24, K20, B18C even the older B16's all have their limits even with VTEC. What makes them work so well is the power to weight ratio. If you were to put a B16 in a 4,000lbs. car, well it's not going to do much even with VTEC as the power to weight ratio will be way off.

I like to look at the J1900 as being perfectly tuned for the car (NAS) that it's in. It's quick, it's fast, it does most of the everyday jobs very well, while giving the V6's a run for their money on a twisty track (transcoding). However, it's still not going to be able to pull even something small as a UHAUL trailor around that same track and win over the V6 with it also pulling the UHAUL with the same weight. The torque just isn't there.

But with everything getting more and more efficient, the bigger displacement cars (i5, i7's) are tuned very well and can turn just as well on the track as the lighter 4 bangers, while still pulling ahead by a wide margin. (Ex...Nissan GT-R inline 6...Ferrari V8's) Then of course with a higher price tag.

It's all only relevant to the users actual needs. For most people the 4 banger w/ VTEC (I wouldn't go with anything else than the J1900 and a like) is more than sufficient. For power users, well you need to be ready to pay for power prices (i7's) LOL. Everything comes with a price eh? Just keep in mind that being able to do a motor swap will save you a lot of money and fortunately, there are some cars (NAS's) that will let you do just that.

So choose wisely because you can have the best of all worlds.

 

[sfx2000]

It's all only relevant to the users actual needs. For most people the 4 banger w/ VTEC (I wouldn't go with anything else than the J1900 and a like) is more than sufficient. For power users, well you need to be ready to pay for power prices (i7's) LOL. Everything comes with a price eh? Just keep in mind that being able to do a motor swap will save you a lot of money and fortunately, there are some cars (NAS's) that will let you do just that.

So choose wisely because you can have the best of all worlds.

You make some great points - the key thing is having a clear understanding of what one needs for a NAS box - the big risk perhaps is over-buying...

 

[stevech]

You make some great points - the key thing is having a clear understanding of what one needs for a NAS box - the big risk perhaps is over-buying...

100% agree. But some people have plentiful 'discretionary funds'.