QNAP TS-569 Pro

[crmaris]

Today, we get to fully evaluate another high-end SMB NAS server from QNAP. The TS-569 Pro can accommodate up to five HDDs for a total of 20TB storage with 4TB drives. This NAS is also compatible with QNAP's new feature, the HD Station, which transforms it into a fully capable media player.

Show full review

 

[Easy Rhino]

$1000 for a NAS that averages around 110 MB/s ?????? Obviously this isn't true hardware raid. For the same performance buy a $40 controller card and put it in a $50 case and install freeNAS on it. boom. these companies are jokes!

 

[crmaris]

110 MB/s is the max a NAS can achieve without LACP in action. With LACP or with multiple systems it can do double as that in optimal conditions. With my managed switch, although it supports LACP, I couldn't enable it/make it work so the max speed was restricted to 110 MB/s.

Also pure network transfer speed by no means should be the only factor on which such servers should be rated. With free NAS you have zero support if something goes wrong, you have to set up the machine on your own (so have the knowledge to do this) etc. On the other hand as you said it will cost much less so it is up to the users to decide what they want.

In NAS servers like QNAP and Synology ones you also pay for the support and for the custom made/cooked software which offers great flexibility and makes life much easier. Also if something goes wrong and even if you experience a crash you will have proper support by them (in some cases I heard that remotely they even restored the RAID/data). Finally, if these companies were jokes they surely wouldn't have so many years in this area and would vanish from the start. On the contrary they are highly successful and this means a lot.

 

[Easy Rhino]

110 MB/s is the max a NAS can achieve without LACP in action. With LACP or with multiple systems it can do double as that in optimal conditions. With my switch, although it supports LACP, I couldn't enable it so the max speed was restricted to 110 MB/s.

what about benchmarks like hdparm and the like that measure read/write performance without transferring data over a network?

the ATTO test in raid 5 barely hits 125 MB/s . That is unacceptable for a $1000 device.

 

[crmaris]

I run such tests through my custom made software and also through the Intel tool. Performance there surely isn't optimal but on the other hand I haven't tested a custom made free NAS server yet to have a comparison point (with the same HDDs of course that I used on all NAS).

 

[TheLostSwede]

If you've got an amp, multi-channel audio works just fine - http://forum.qnap.com/viewtopic.php?f=295&t=68046#p306039

 

[crmaris]

there is a work-around in anything as it seems I wasn't aware of this plugin but does it work in all times and with HD files/audio, because I saw some users reporting problems. Unfortunately I don't have a modern AVR with HDMI I/O to test it.

 

[MadMan007]

110 MB/s is the max a NAS can achieve without LACP in action. With LACP or with multiple systems it can do double as that in optimal conditions. With my managed switch, although it supports LACP, I couldn't enable it/make it work so the max speed was restricted to 110 MB/s.

Also pure network transfer speed by no means should be the only factor on which such servers should be rated. With free NAS you have zero support if something goes wrong, you have to set up the machine on your own (so have the knowledge to do this) etc. On the other hand as you said it will cost much less so it is up to the users to decide what they want.

In NAS servers like QNAP and Synology ones you also pay for the support and for the custom made/cooked software which offers great flexibility and makes life much easier. Also if something goes wrong and even if you experience a crash you will have proper support by them (in some cases I heard that remotely they even restored the RAID/data). Finally, if these companies were jokes they surely wouldn't have so many years in this area and would vanish from the start. On the contrary they are highly successful and this means a lot.

I'll still never understand the appeal of consumer NASes for DIYers though. Maybe over 3-4 years ago when low-power PC builds weren't easy or too many compromises you could at least make the power draw argument. But nowadays the power draw argument doesn't hold either...my 3570k/GTX 660/SSD/3 HDD/Seasonic 450W system idles at ~40W (HDD don't spin down) and with 3 HDD load (Samsung HD204UI) runs about 50W. It could almost match this NAS on power draw with no graphics card and a lesser CPU, and cost waaay less even with an OS, or you could make a similar atom build. What's that leave...size? Fractal Design 304.

The reason these companies are successful? The vast majority of people aren't DIYers.