Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Qnap TS-453D

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    30,353
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,942 times in 683 posts

    Qnap TS-453D

    An excellent choice for a four-bay NAS.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    233
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked
    17 times in 14 posts
    • rs4847's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Intel DZ77GA-70K
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-3770K + Corsair H80
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Corsair Vengeance CMZ32GX3M4X1600C10
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 850 Pro 256GB + 860 EVO 1TB SSDs, 2x4TB Hitachi Deskstar NAS RAID1
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA RTX2070 Super XC Gaming 8GB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RM1000i
      • Case:
      • CoolerMaster Cosmos RC-1000
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2716DG + Ilyama ProLite E2473HS
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media Gig1

    Re: Qnap TS-453D

    I might be in the market for another 4 bay NAS, I usually go with Synology but their x20 series is just dated I/O wise, they are turning into the Intel of the NAS world.

    I will give this Qnap unit a closer look.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    248
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked
    90 times in 55 posts
    • matts-uk's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Apple iMac
      • CPU:
      • Core i7 3.4Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 12GB DDR3
      • Storage:
      • RAID5 on the twin Xeon server I keep in the airing cupboard
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI 7970M
      • Case:
      • A lurvely slimline, all in one aluminium number.
      • Operating System:
      • OSX, Centos, Windows.
      • Monitor(s):
      • 27" LED (Apple), 24" LED (Apple), 2 x 20" TFT Dell
      • Internet:
      • ADSL rubbish

    Re: Qnap TS-453D

    Shock, horror! A 2.5Gbe interface can be twice as fast as a 1Gbe interface.

    Quote Originally Posted by rs4847 View Post
    ...they are turning into the Intel of the NAS world.
    I think they are continuing to be Synology; who have always had a conservative approach to adopting new hardware technologies.

    If 2.5Gbe gains traction outside of enthusiasts messing in their bedrooms Synology are very likely to adopt it but for the moment it is bleeding edge and that is not where Synology live (or want to live). In the interim Synology provide multiple Gbe interfaces and suggest using Link Aggregation to fill the gap between their 1Gbe and 10Gbe devices.

    Sadly the review failed to explore where the limits of the two devices lie. Can the Synology keep up and how much faster can the QNap go using Link Aggregation? It may be the case the Synology can go as fast and the QNap cannot go much faster, which would put them in the same class.

    I will give this Qnap unit a closer look.
    I would advise anyone buying a NAS to decide where their priorities lie. If you are planning to use a NAS as a fancy external drive, QNap are likely to beat Synology but there are much better value propositions than either of them - A cheap Pentium PC running Windows even.

    To my mind prioritising throughput completely misses the point of these devices. What makes a NAS really useful are the software packages that can be installed on it. Installing the packages implies concurrent access and a hit on throughput. My NAS buying priorities are the choice of available packages, ease of use and overall reliability of the packages and the hardware. I'm still preferring Synology.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •