What NAS. QNAP vs WD

[lomenak]

Hi all. I would like to get myself first NAS so, as you can imagine, I have spent days reading through A LOT of information on this topic. I think my requirements are quite simple so even a basic (or older) device would fit the bill here.

Basically what I want to do is to get a 4 bay unit with 4x 3TB drives in RAID 5. That will give me enough storage for 3-5 years for sure. I want to connect the NAS to my router and access it wirelessly. From my HTPC (win8), iMac, MacBook and 2 win8 laptops, but mainly from the iMac (to back up) and the HTPC (to play media from).

I am not doing a back up too often (I know I should!) so the write speed is not as important for me. The most important part here for me is if the HTPC will be able to read the media files over wifi. I am only ever watching compressed HDTV, 720 or 1080p rips where files are not bigger than 1.5GB. The back up would be done from my iMac once a week (can be done overnight) and I always do that manually – just adding weekly folder with RAW and PSB files, nothing like a TimeMachine or such. This could be also done via LAN, but at this stage I don’t want to use more cables than I really need.

From this it is quite clear that I only need network storage. The only extra feature that I can think of at the moment that I may use is DLNA with the smart TV, but I prefer XBMC on the HTPC.

From the selection in my favourite shop I am deciding between QNAP TS-420 and WD My Cloud EX 4 where the QNAP is $100 more, but I have seen some shops where the WD was actually cheaper. I am in New Zealand so the selection is bit limited and also more expensive than elsewhere.

Which one from the QNAP/WD would you choose? Would the QNAP be worthy of the $100NZD? It is looking like $573NZD for the WD versus $688 for the QNAP. Or is there another unit that would better fit my needs?

 

[stevech]

QNAP or Synology. I chose the latter.
WD, nope.

Decision based on price and NAS software features and maturity.
QNAP and Synology and Thecus are NAS-only companies and IMO far better than the mass marketeers like WD, Seagate, Buffalo, et al.
Due to software.

 

[lomenak]

QNAP or Synology. I chose the latter.
WD, nope.

Decision based on price and NAS software features and maturity.
QNAP and Synology and Thecus are NAS-only companies and IMO far better than the mass marketeers like WD, Seagate, Buffalo, et al.
Due to software.

I am not sure if this applies to my case though. As mentioned I need just a network folder mainly, not interested in the software too much. I guess you mean the application and various functionality rather than the software that controls read/write, right?

I am also interested in particular models, not just what makers are (generally) better than others.

 

[thiggins]

As you said, you just need basic storage. And since all access is from wireless clients, performance isn't important. Any NAS today, hell, even NAS functions built into high-end routers, provide performance higher than even many 11ac wireless connections can provide.

To that point, where do your files stream from today and do you have any problems with video quality?

I don't see a need to pay extra for the QNAP vs. WD. But I suggest you look for bargains in older-generation models because, again, performance isn't a factor.

I suggest you avoid RAID5 if you can help it. With 5 and 6 TB drives available, RAID1 provides more robust redundancy. And be sure to put your NAS on a UPS.

 

[lomenak]

To that point, where do your files stream from today and do you have any problems with video quality?

Good question, I will need to test this as I currently only stream from the HTPC.

I suggest you avoid RAID5 if you can help it. With 5 and 6 TB drives available, RAID1 provides more robust redundancy. And be sure to put your NAS on a UPS.

Why would you avoid RAID 5? I do need some redundancy to avoid data loss from drive failure but also I dont think that I can swing 4x 5 or 6TB drives for RAID 1.

 

[thiggins]

If you really need 9 TB of storage, you're correct that RAID 1 won't get you there.

RAID 5 volumes can be prone to errors that trigger frequent rebuilds. And if you lose the volume due to controller failure or other calamity, data recovery is much more difficult.

RAID 1 just mirrors the two drives. If one fails, recovery is easy.

 

[mervincm]

Make sure you do not need or want any transcoding. If you do you will want something with a lot more power. Transcoding may be required if your files are not in a format compatible with your player. Also it may be required if your video is in a high bitrate format that your network or player can't handle in a reliable fashion.
PS have you seen Plex media server? Previously I just used iTunes server but Plex is such a nice integrated product, I am a new fan! Plex can take advantage of server side transcoding and thus impact NAS selection. The brand new qnap x51 series seems like a natural for this use case.

 

[stevech]

I am not sure if this applies to my case though. As mentioned I need just a network folder mainly, not interested in the software too much. I guess you mean the application and various functionality rather than the software that controls read/write, right?

I am also interested in particular models, not just what makers are (generally) better than others.

Have you tried the on-line demos at Synology and QNAP (et al)? A good NAS like these provides you with so many things that are really useful beyond simple file storage/retrieval/sharing. Like Synology's "Time Backup" which, despite its name, keeps an archive of past versions of files withing folders that you select. And more.

If all you want is *just* file sharing, then take any old low power computer with Windows or Linux and setup file shares. And use Acronis or some such for automated backups. This is all you need if you don't want the feature set home or SMB class NASes.