What's new

basic home NAS, Asustor or?

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

TinCanFury

New Around Here
moving out of an apartment with housemates in with the girlfriend and need to pare down the media center servers to something that fits into our small condo space. Where I used to have a MythTV system and a DIY fileserver in the basement of the duplex, I'll be replacing with a Tivo Roamio (already purchased), and I'm now looking at a NAS. I'm looking for something that can run Sonarr/Couchpotato and a nzb downloader, can handle basic networked file needs, and something to take over Time Machine duties for our Mac's as we'll be using this to also replace my girlfriends older external storage devices, one use of which is for her Time Machine backups. I'm not too concerned with read/write speed as all the various devices seem to be more than enough for our needs. My concerns are more with being able to run the software on them and cost.

In doing some research I first discovered the Synology devices (specifically looking at the DS414J or DS414), which led to research on QNAP's offerings (specifically the TS-451), and now, most recently the Asustor devices. The Asustor offering seem a little more complex in making a decision on which model to get though.
My other option is to get the Mediasonic ProBox HF2-SU3S2, connect it to my router that is running OpenWRT, and get Sonarr, Couchpotato, and NZBGet running on it.

What I'm wondering is if there is any reason I should be wary of one of the Asustor devices that I'm looking at, AS-304T or AS-5004T, vs the Synology or QNAP? Also if anyone with experience running the programs I want to run on the NAS on their Asustor device can give me their thoughts?

thanks!
 
With either Synology or QNAP, consider too a 2 bay NAS. Lower cost, good enough in many cases. I use a 2-bay with independent volumes, not RAID, for many good reasons

Try the above two vendors' on-line demos on their web sites.
Asustor - newbie in NAS. Spin-off from ASUS. Many here say wait a while on them to catch up.
It's mostly about the NAS software and ease of use.
DIY NAS - sounds like you're expectations are far greater, as DIY has quite spartan software.

Disks connected to a WiFi router always disappoint in speed, reliability of software, features. Not recommended.

Be sure to budget for a good USB3 external drive with which to backup you NAS important data on an automated basis.
 
The reason I'm looking at the 4 bay: I've already got six 2TB drives in my original DIY fileserver, i'll be bringing two with me (possibly 3, the rest of that original fileserver system will be staying at my old apt until my friends that still live there decide to move out), and my girlfriend will be adding one drive, along with the idea that added room for future expansion is nice.

I've played with the online demos, and I agree they are nice, however, what about the Asustor software is considered poor in comparison? This is where I haven't been able to figure out a clear understanding. The reviews I read all seem to think the software is decent while the hardware seems to be great, especially for the money. I'd rather buy nice hardware now for my money as long as the software I want to use on it works, and hope they do catch up over time. The reviews seem to think the hardware of the Asustor is nicer at each price point, which makes me think it will last longer if I don't decide to preemptively upgrade, and if I do, then my initial investment was lower. Thus my interest in a better undertanding of the Asustor software.

I agree on the WiFi router path, why I feel it's a good idea to spend the extra money on a proper NAS.

I do a two-way rsync backup between my system and my parents system of our important files that we want offsite backup of, they live in CA, I'm in MA.

Thanks!
 
Asustor... just that they don't have 10+ years of maturing their software. And they are a very young company.
So go ahead! Take a chance!
 
Asustor... just that they don't have 10+ years of maturing their software. And they are a very young company.
So go ahead! Take a chance!

maybe it works for his needs... there's a lot of options out there...

When thinking about a NAS investment - it really comes down to what one needs - one can easily speed a $1000 plus when perhaps one can buy a couple of 5TB USB drives and use personal filesharing on a $150 Win8.1 box like the Minix Neo64w

I don't think that Router/AP's are the way to go - let them do what they do best, route networking and provide wireless - they're optimized for that, and NAS-like functionality is an add-on...
 
TinCan: ASUSTOR is the new kid on the NAS block. But they have some ex QNAP people and know what they are doing.

If they have the features you need, they provide very good price/performance. Their main weakness might be support, because they are still building out their support network.

You can't load just any program on a NAS, only those in the vendors' app store.

Keep in mind RAID isn't backup. You should never trust your data to a single device,
 
My personal needs are pretty small, so my personal experience isn't relevant to yours.

That being said, if you're spending today, try to imagine what you might want to do with it tomorrow. If I were buying again, I would consider a NAS that could support virtualization (J1900 or better processor with 4GB ram, minimum). You're not going to turn it into the home mainframe, but it could offer a nice centralized bit of processing power.

I recently built a pfSense router with a J1900 processor and 8GB ram. It has a ton of excess capacity. I will probably try some virtualization with it eventually ... although virtualizing the main home router may not be a very good idea relative to virtualizing something on a NAS that's designed to support it as an app.
 
Last edited:
My personal needs are pretty small, so my personal experience isn't relevant to yours.

That being said, if you're spending today, try to imagine what you might want to do with it tomorrow. If I were buying again, I would consider a NAS that could support virtualization (J1900 or better processor with 4GB ram, minimum). You're not going to turn it into the home mainframe, but it could offer a nice centralized bit of processing power.

I recently built a pfSense router with a J1900 processor and 8GB ram. It has a ton of excess capacity. I will probably try some virtualization with it eventually ... although virtualizing the main home router may not be a very good idea relative to virtualizing something on a NAS that's designed to support it as an app.

Virtualization support is most likely a giant overkill and a needless big increase in cost for most users.
 
Virtualization support is most likely a giant overkill and a needless big increase in cost for most users.
Agree. Especially since the title of the thread is "basic home nas..."
 
Agree. Especially since the title of the thread is "basic home nas..."
Then a usb plug in to the home router should suffice. Or, for an advanced NAS, perhaps a WD cloud.

If advice for QNAP and the like was being offered, as in the others who discussed multiple drive arrays, then apps are the main reason to buy in and people should get what they need now and may need later, as opposed to buy with the blinders on. Apps from virtually all respondents (direct or implied) were the main thrust of the discussion.

Disagree strongly with your limited view of the prior discussion.
 
Last edited:
There's a huge difference between downloading vendor-approved apps and running VMs.

Technology moves too fast for buying based on future-proofing.
 
Virtualization support is most likely a giant overkill and a needless big increase in cost for most users.

The discussion wasn't for 'most users'. It was in response to a direct question and a request for opinions. I like to take a forward look into possibilities as opposed to limit my replies to what worked for me a few years ago and seems to still work today.
 
There's a huge difference between downloading vendor-approved apps and running VMs.

Technology moves too fast for buying based on future-proofing.

Agree it's a step up, but VMs are an app and the extra cost just to leave the door open is minuscule relative to the buy in price for a basic unit. If budget is a consideration, it's a valid concern, but the user's to decide. I buy televisions based on your logic. I try to apply a little more foresight with computers simply because the tech is moving forward and I don't want to be caught with geezer tech. I never buy bleeding edge.

Edit: QNAP treats VMs as an app ... I think they call it virtualization station or something similar. You may have even written about it.
 
Last edited:
Having enough RAM and CPU speed/cores and support VMs adds a lot of cost for a NAS intended for home use by a non-IT-geek.
 
Having enough RAM and CPU speed/cores and support VMs adds a lot of cost for a NAS intended for home use by a non-IT-geek.
Not really. Look it up on Amazon. QNAP is pushing it big time. Also, the original poster is not a non geek.

Edit: this is an excerpt from the QNAP page that describes a drive the poster mentioned: Note the verbiage about virtualization. Guess its time to read up on the new fangled stuff that's out there?

BTW, it comes stock with a J1900 processor and I think maxes out at 4GB ram.
********************************************
https://www.qnap.com/i/en/product/model.php?II=143

The TS-451 provides a high performance & high capacity storage solution for SOHO & home, workgroup, and SMB users. Powered by the advanced QTS operating system, the TS-451 performs as an easy-to-use yet powerful NAS for data backup, file synchronization, remote access, home entertainment, and is ideal for users to build a personal cloud to access their data easily.

  • Transcode Full HD videos on-the-fly or offline
  • Play 1080p videos with 7.1 channel surround sound pass-through via HDMI output
  • Create a personal cloud and stream your multimedia library via DLNA, AirPlay, and Plex
  • Centralize your file storage, sharing and backup
  • Run a virtual machine and extend the functionality of the NAS with an integrated virtualization solution
  • Expand the total raw storage capacity up to 72TB (with maximum 12 hard drives) with the economical QNAP expansion enclosure UX-800P
 
Last edited:
The TS*51's are J1800 dual cores, and they max out at 8GB

The TS*53Pro's - J1900, and again 8GB, but I've heard rumors that some have bumped up to 16GB...

I've got the 453Pro, and yes, I do leverage into the VM functionality for a Linux VM that I have a LAMP server along with some other things...
 
He should get the Asustor and help us all learn how feature-full and stable they are!
I have an AS-5004T at home and really happy with it. It also replaced my Zotac HTPC as my media player.

I really like QNap, that's what I sell and deploy to my business customers, but couldn't justify the price difference for home usage.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
 
I have an AS-5004T at home and really happy with it.

At some point, would you recommend Asustor to your clients?

The HW is compelling, and the SW, at least at first glance, is similar enough to the established players in the top-tier. The top-tier players are all pretty similar in feature sets (Thecus, ReadyNAS, QNAP, Synology), but one also pays the top-tier price...

I settled with QNAP - mostly because of the VM capability to be honest... that was the deal-maker for me.

Other than that, they were all about the same, objectively looking at performance and price..
 
At some point, would you recommend Asustor to your clients?

For my business customers: not in the near future, for various reasons:

Warranty/support handling. QNAP has offices here in Canada, and they're a known quantity when dealing with warranties. They even offer warranty extensions for customers worried about it (though, so far, we simply stock one spare QNAP, and sold our own warranty extensions to a few of our customers).

Hardware quality: while at first glance Asustor still did a good job (the casing for instance is still in metal, while "cheap" brands tend to opt for plastic instead, which means poorer thermal handling), the real test is to see how stable the device remains in the long term. We sold maybe 7-9 QNAPs over the years, and none of them has ever shown a single hardware issue (the oldest one in service being 4 years old now). It would take a year or two before I could be as confident with a new brand.

Availability: none of our suppliers carry Asustor products.

The HW is compelling, and the SW, at least at first glance, is similar enough to the established players in the top-tier. The top-tier players are all pretty similar in feature sets (Thecus, ReadyNAS, QNAP, Synology), but one also pays the top-tier price...

The AS-5004T has pretty much the same hardware as the TS-451, but it was clearly cheaper when I was shopping for a home NAS. Disk drawers aren't lockable and they look slightly cheaper, yet they didn't seem to have gone down the cheap route often seen in lower end products.

Software-wise, Asustor definitely has a long way to go to reach feature parity, and seeing how aggressive QNAPs are in adding new features, it might be hard for them to catch up and keep the pace with them. They might be able however to still remain relevant by focusing on the more commonly used features.

So right now, I wouldn't have a problem recommending Asustor for home users, unless someone actually had the budget for QNAP. That might change if you ask me again a year from now, a lot of things take time to fully evaluate. I"ve had this Asustor for only a bit over a month now. But for business use, the 100-200$ price difference is easy to justify when you have to serve a LAN of 5-25 users.
 

Similar threads

Latest threads

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top