QNAP Adds Four-Bay Skinny NAS

[Rhialto]

I was supposed to take care of getting a NAS in 2014 but it didn't happen so I'll try to make that happen in 2015. With 2 computers, a PC and a Mac plus an iPad and 2 smartphones, we need a place where to centralize pics, music and movies.

Since a saw those tiny NAS using 2.5" drives I was hooked. One we see often is the DS414slim which probably benefit from a strong reputation probably due to DSM but otherwise I think this model lacks a bit of power. I say this but have no knowledge in NAS and required power to stream about anything.

Now that I saw the new QNAP TS-451S and its specs I say that's it. Looks like more powerful and I like the fact it offer a HDMI port so I guess it makes it easy to carry around like family members and plug on their HDTV to share pics and such.

I just don't know QNAP reputation but only that Synology is quite popular. Asking about this in a QNAP forums will probably results in biased feedback... :-/

Tim, did QNAP sent you a TS-451S to review?

 

[thiggins]

Tim, did QNAP sent you a TS-451S to review?

I haven't requested one and probably won't.

 

[Rhialto]

I haven't requested one and probably won't.

Hmmm.. didn't know you had to ask a unit, I thought companies were sending those here and there...

There could be so many reasons why you probably won't ask to get this model to review... like you're too busy or the demand for this format is not high or your relationship with QNAP is so so... what else? I'm curious.

I'm confident there will be more of those small units in the next years.

I had hope to read a review of this model here.

 

[thiggins]

Hmmm.. didn't know you had to ask a unit, I thought companies were sending those here and there...

No, that's not how it works...

2.5" only NASes are niche. Performance of the TS-451S will be same as the TS-251/451 we already reviewed.

 

[stevech]

2.5" SSDs.. getting lower cost every day. I just bought a Samsung 500GB SSD for $189. (Samsung is the brand I've used for last 4 SSDs I've bought, no failures. One has a total bytes written of over 2 TB). So far, I use these in Windows PCs as boot disk. So fast to boot and compile big C++ programs.

In a NAS, a 2.5" rotating disk can be 7200 or 5400RPM. The latter would be significantly slower, I think. But maybe it's fast enough to keep gigE speeds maxed with large-file transfers; with small-file transfers, the overhead won't let speeds get to gigE rates.

 

[thiggins]

In a NAS, a 2.5" rotating disk can be 7200 or 5400RPM. The latter would be significantly slower, I think. But maybe it's fast enough to keep gigE speeds maxed with large-file transfers; with small-file transfers, the overhead won't let speeds get to gigE rates.

Slower RPM doesn't necessarily mean lower performance.

This is old, but interesting.

 

[L&LD]

Slower RPM doesn't necessarily mean lower performance.

This is old, but interesting.

I agree, not necessarily, assuming that the slower RPM drive is a newer / denser generation model.

But it will show up more in a multi user environment vs. a single user.