ASRock Z790 Taichi review
The Callisto Protocol: PC graphics benchmarks
G.Skill TridentZ 5 RGB 6800 MHz CL34 DDR5 review
Be Quiet! Dark Power 13 - 1000W PSU Review
Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GamingPRO OC review
Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review
Seasonic Prime Titanium TX-1300 (1300W PSU) review
F1 2022: PC graphics performance benchmark review
MSI Clutch GM31 Lightweight​ (+Wireless) mice review
AMD Ryzen 9 7900 processor review
Synology DS620slim Gigabit NAS Review
Posted by: on: 09/19/2019 11:57 AM [
12 comment(s) ]
Synology is going on a diet as they now offer a NAS series that holds 2.5" storage units only, and you know what that means. Yes, the SSD revolution is slowly progressing towards the NAS segment as well. Powered with an Intel Celeron J3355 dual-core 2.0 GHz (2.5 GHz boost) this NAS is to set to deliver on the 4K media front as the new is looking to be offering to be an excellent Plex transcoder.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3
Evildead666
Senior Member
Posts: 1309
Senior Member
Posts: 1309
Posted on: 09/20/2019 01:56 PM
While I agree with Hilbert on the software thing I wonder if I am the only one who can't understand NAS manufacturers building 2.5 inch slot versions?
2.5 inch HDD drives are more expensive, are available in smaller sizes (4 TB max. atm. ?) and tend to be slower at some point.
SSDs on the other hand can't put their whole speed through the GBit interface.
And from what I saw 2.5 inch models are a bit more expensive than their 3.5 inch counterparts.
So why invest in a 2.5 inch version when you can get a 3.5 inch version? Cheap HDDs with big cache and high rpm. And you can still get an 2.5 inch drive and mount it by using some 2.5/3.5 inch adapter. SATA doesnt mind.
EDIT:
Regarding size of 2.5 inch HDDs and prices:
https://skinflint.co.uk/?cat=hde7s&xf=13810-4000~3772-2.5&sort=t&hloc=at&hloc=de&v=e
I am actually surprised there aren't more.
For a really good, quiet, RAID setup on a desk, it would be awesome.
Obviously it would ideally be 2.5/5/10Gbit rather than single Gbit, but i'm sure the market is there for it.
I'd get one for my parents, just so they can't break the thing (hopefully).
Just not with this CPU.
While I agree with Hilbert on the software thing I wonder if I am the only one who can't understand NAS manufacturers building 2.5 inch slot versions?
2.5 inch HDD drives are more expensive, are available in smaller sizes (4 TB max. atm. ?) and tend to be slower at some point.
SSDs on the other hand can't put their whole speed through the GBit interface.
And from what I saw 2.5 inch models are a bit more expensive than their 3.5 inch counterparts.
So why invest in a 2.5 inch version when you can get a 3.5 inch version? Cheap HDDs with big cache and high rpm. And you can still get an 2.5 inch drive and mount it by using some 2.5/3.5 inch adapter. SATA doesnt mind.
EDIT:
Regarding size of 2.5 inch HDDs and prices:
https://skinflint.co.uk/?cat=hde7s&xf=13810-4000~3772-2.5&sort=t&hloc=at&hloc=de&v=e
I am actually surprised there aren't more.
For a really good, quiet, RAID setup on a desk, it would be awesome.
Obviously it would ideally be 2.5/5/10Gbit rather than single Gbit, but i'm sure the market is there for it.
I'd get one for my parents, just so they can't break the thing (hopefully).
Just not with this CPU.
TieSKey
Senior Member
Posts: 215
Senior Member
Posts: 215
Posted on: 09/20/2019 02:57 PM
For non technicall users who value simplicity over all and/or need some weird file system driver or licence, I agree.
If not, the NAS-like open linux distros offer support for vm, docker and everything a linux box does. Ofc you will need a lot more technical understanding and patience to set things up the first time
On a hardware level I agree, but the money for a huge part on the software and applications offered. The days that a NAS was simply a file-server and FTP box are long gone, these have become advanced servers with incredibly impressive software packages.
For non technicall users who value simplicity over all and/or need some weird file system driver or licence, I agree.
If not, the NAS-like open linux distros offer support for vm, docker and everything a linux box does. Ofc you will need a lot more technical understanding and patience to set things up the first time
Yakk
Senior Member
Posts: 144
Senior Member
Posts: 144
Posted on: 09/20/2019 03:09 PM
Qnap and several others have been doing the same. Pretty neat stuff.
Yeah, I like what they're doing also.
For non technicall users who value simplicity over all and/or need some weird file system driver or licence, I agree.
If not, the NAS-like open linux distros offer support for vm, docker and everything a linux box does. Ofc you will need a lot more technical understanding and patience to set things up the first time :p
For sure... With working on this stuff all day I'd say I'm technically literate so to speak, I just find it nice to have it all done for me at home so I don't feel like I'm still working...
ops:
Qnap and several others have been doing the same. Pretty neat stuff.
Yeah, I like what they're doing also.
For non technicall users who value simplicity over all and/or need some weird file system driver or licence, I agree.
If not, the NAS-like open linux distros offer support for vm, docker and everything a linux box does. Ofc you will need a lot more technical understanding and patience to set things up the first time :p
For sure... With working on this stuff all day I'd say I'm technically literate so to speak, I just find it nice to have it all done for me at home so I don't feel like I'm still working...
ops:
Deleted member 271771
Unregistered
Unregistered
Posted on: 09/20/2019 03:20 PM
The days that a NAS was simply a file-server and FTP box are long gone, these have become advanced servers with incredibly impressive software packages.
And software can be such a burdensome expense, these modern NAS and SAN can really alleviate a lot of that cost.pages 1 2 3
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1735
While I agree with Hilbert on the software thing I wonder if I am the only one who can't understand NAS manufacturers building 2.5 inch slot versions?
2.5 inch HDD drives are more expensive, are available in smaller sizes (4 TB max. atm. ?) and tend to be slower at some point.
SSDs on the other hand can't put their whole speed through the GBit interface.
And from what I saw 2.5 inch models are a bit more expensive than their 3.5 inch counterparts.
So why invest in a 2.5 inch version when you can get a 3.5 inch version? Cheap HDDs with big cache and high rpm. And you can still get an 2.5 inch drive and mount it by using some 2.5/3.5 inch adapter. SATA doesnt mind.
EDIT:
Regarding size of 2.5 inch HDDs and prices:
https://skinflint.co.uk/?cat=hde7s&xf=13810-4000~3772-2.5&sort=t&hloc=at&hloc=de&v=e