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




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
« ASUS Radeon RX 5700 XT ROG STRIX review · Synology DS620slim Gigabit NAS Review
· EK Classic RGB P240 review »
pages 1 2 3
TieSKey
Senior Member
Posts: 215
Senior Member
Posts: 215
Posted on: 09/21/2019 02:27 PM
For home use i agree with you but on pro side i am not so on your side.
The 2.5 HDD format have risen last year for 3 reason:
- It is more energy friendly (main argument)
- The extra cost compared to 3.5 equivalent on specialised is realy low on specialised NAS's HDD.
- It permit to mix it with SSD (or use only SSD) more easily.
Now even on 3.5 Nas they bundle the 2.5 adaptator for the bay. Anyway future will be 2.5.
My old and cheap qnap model trays have holes to mount either size. Atm I have it running on a single 8Tb 3.5'' for backups and an old 128Gb SSD as system + work files.
For home use i agree with you but on pro side i am not so on your side.
The 2.5 HDD format have risen last year for 3 reason:
- It is more energy friendly (main argument)
- The extra cost compared to 3.5 equivalent on specialised is realy low on specialised NAS's HDD.
- It permit to mix it with SSD (or use only SSD) more easily.
Now even on 3.5 Nas they bundle the 2.5 adaptator for the bay. Anyway future will be 2.5.
My old and cheap qnap model trays have holes to mount either size. Atm I have it running on a single 8Tb 3.5'' for backups and an old 128Gb SSD as system + work files.
pages 1 2 3
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 3561
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
For home use i agree with you but on pro side i am not so on your side.
The 2.5 HDD format have risen last year for 3 reason:
- It is more energy friendly (main argument)
- The extra cost compared to 3.5 equivalent on specialised is realy low on specialised NAS's HDD.
- It permit to mix it with SSD (or use only SSD) more easily.
Now even on 3.5 Nas they bundle the 2.5 adaptator for the bay. Anyway future will be 2.5.