synology or QNAP

[amrogers3]

Thinking to figure out if I should purchase a Synology DS210+ or a Quad TS-239 Pro II. Looking for good throughput and reliability. Any recommendations?

Thanks in advance.

 

[thiggins]

DS210+ performance will be similar to DS209+II.

TS-239 Pro II is much faster.

 

[amrogers3]

Thanks for the reply.

Are the features between the Synology and the QNAP similar? Is the QNAP worth the extra $100+ dollars.

 

[thiggins]

Thanks for the reply.

Are the features between the Synology and the QNAP similar? Is the QNAP worth the extra $100+ dollars.

Features are very similar.

With the QNAP, you're paying for the higher performance that you get from an Atom-based NAS.

 

[ntm1275]

The Qnap is indeed faster than the DS210+, but Synology's comparable model to the Qnap is the DS710+

Newegg have the TS-239 Pro II at $509.99, and the DS710+ at $479.99

From looking at the NAS charts on this site, the DS710+ beats the Qnap in most of the tests and it's cheaper, plus it can be attached to Synology's 5-bay expansion unit (DX510), if future expansion is needed

So the choice is yours really

 

[amrogers3]

Thanks, you guys are very helpful.

I was researching the 710+ based on comments above and it looks like a good option especially since it beats the QNAP TS-239 and is cheaper. I've heard good things about Synology.

Does anyone have experience with the 710+? I read some reviews of it being very noisy. Also, if anyone has any negatives I would like to hear about those too.

 

[PowerMAC]

At the moment, when I compare all the features of the latest firmware from both brands, I would choose Synology over QNAP. This thread has more info: http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=3866 The features listed there are still missing with QNAP.

 

[amrogers3]

I figured out I have a wireless bottleneck. I am currently using G but could upgrade to N in the future.

Should I stick with the 710+ or the less expensive 210+? The 210+ operates around the 50-60 MB/s range I believe.

Thanks again for the help .

 

[ntm1275]

If your connection to the NAS is only ever going to be via wireless (g now, and n later), both the 710+ and 210+ will be overkill, you may as well go for the lowest model 210j, and save some bucks

Wireless g or n just does not have the speed to even mildly tax most NAS's

You need to have a wired gigabit connection to have any possibility of reaching the speeds that the mentioned NAS's can deliver

I have a DS1010+ which can deliver up to 100MB+/s over gigabit, but only delivers up to 6MB/s over wireless g

My very old Synology DS106e (200MHz CPU, 32MB RAM) which tops out out at about 15MB/s doesn't even get pushed by my wireless connection

 

[amrogers3]

To make sure I understand correctly, even though N runs at roughly 100 Mb/s the 210+ which reads at 108 Mb/s and writes at 58 MB/s would not come close to these posted speeds over wireless N?

What is the reason for it? The added overhead of the packets necessary to communicate from laptop to router to NAS and back again?

 

[ntm1275]

To make sure I understand correctly, even though N runs at roughly 100 Mb/s the 210+ which reads at 108 Mb/s and writes at 58 MB/s would not come close to these posted speeds over wireless N?

What is the reason for it? The added overhead of the packets necessary to communicate from laptop to router to NAS and back again?

I think you are getting Megabits (Mb) and Megabytes (MB) mixed up

Network speeds tend to be quoted in Megabits, and transfer speed in Megabytes

Below are the theoretical limits (divide Megabits by 8 to get Megabytes):-

Wireless g 54Megabits = 6.75Megabytes/s
100Megabit LAN = 12.5 Megabytes/s
Wireless n 300Megabits = 37.5Megabytes/s
Gigabit 1000Megabit = 125Megabytes/s

These figures are the theoretical limits, and in practice you will not reach the Megabytes quotes for the Wireless connections

Even if your laptop is sitting next to your wireless router, from my experience, the speeds tend to drop by up to half of the quoted speeds, and the further away you are, and if there are walls in between, the speeds can drop dramatically

When my laptop (g) is next to my router, it has a theoretical transfer rate of 54Megabits/s (6.75Megabytes/s), but normally only ever gets to about 24Megabits/s (3Megabytes/s)

If I move my Laptop downstairs (15 meters away from the router with a ceiling and brick wall in between), speeds drop to about by about half again to 12Megabits/s (1.5Megabytes/s)

Most NAS's these days can deliver 40+Megabytes/s (320+Megabits/s), so from the figures above you can see that a wireless connection cannot reach 40+Megaytes/s, let alone some quoted figures of up to 100Megabytes/s (800Megabits/s)

 

[amrogers3]

NTM, can't thank you enough for your input.

I understand how this works and now will be able to make a informed decision as to what I need to purchase.

Like you said earlier, looks like the cheaper DS210j will meet my needs. Might think about the more expensive DS210+ or DS710+ for later when I can connect it to my router via a gigabit cable/connection.

Sounds like Synology is the way to go overall. Products been receiving great ratings on both amazon and newegg.com.

 

[ntm1275]

amrogers3

You're welcome

 

[eikka]

If 210j and 410j are of the same hardware, it may help you to know that my 410j has ~35 MBytes/s read performance using windows file copying in Vista with latest service packs and fixes (I use DIR-655 as 1 gigabit switch in between). It should allow approx. 5-6 simultaneous AVC HD stream reads from the device.

 

[amrogers3]

I assume you are using a hardwired connection?





.

 

[kamina]

I assume you are using a hardwired connection?





.

Definately, you won't really get over 10MB/s over wireless and even that requires a very good signal with .n wireless.

 

[eikka]

I assume you are using a hardwired connection?
.

Yep. 1 Gigabit ethernet that is in my DIR-655 switch.