«

»

QNAP TS-470 NAS Server Review

PAGE INDEX

<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

1GB Single-Disk Test Results

The bottom line for any storage device is the combination of capacity and transfer speed. For a network attached storage server, the differences are all about the infrastructure that is placed around the basic HDD array. Since capacity is something that’s easy to define and measure, the real question for any NAS product is how fast will it Read and Write data. For this reason, Benchmark Reviews measures NAS performance as the bandwidth achieved during a file transfer test. The first tests we perform utilize a single 1GB (1000 megabytes / 1,000,000,000 bytes) file in a transfer to and from the NAS.

With all the NAS units operating in single disk mode, the performance of the NAS units is largely dictated by the choice of CPU and operating system. The QNAP TS-470 puts in a very strong showing on the 1 GB Read tests, primarily due to the Celeron CPU under the hood. The Jumbo Frame results lag behind in this particular file transfer benchmark, but the 1500 MTU results are right up near the top. The Intel Core i3-based TS-879 unit has about 50% more horsepower under the hood than the TS-470, but in this test the two QNAP NAS models perform about the same. Of course they both can sprint past most of the Atom-based units, and they in turn, the Marvell-based models. The EonNAS units have a measurable performance penalty due to their Solaris-based O/S and the ZFS file system that comes with it. It’s a tradeoff with data integrity, so there is a significant benefit to compensate for the slightly lower performance. Most people won’t use a single disk configuration, but it’s useful to get an understanding of any possible issues with the basic architecture of the system. In this case, none of these NAS servers have any major issues, and they all turn in good performance numbers.

QNAP_TS-470_Turbo_NAS_Server_38-TS_470_Basic_1_GB_READ_01

Moving on to the 1 GB write bandwidth test, our results suggest that while it may sometimes be faster to read files from a hard drive than it is to write files onto it, the opposite is often true for a NAS appliance. As the performance levels of the NAS devices go up, this test has a hard stop at the upper limit of GbE transfer rates, and so Rear and Write performance get closer to equal. The good news is that the TS-470 also turns in some strong numbers for Write performance, comfortably sitting a few MB/s below the top tier. The EonNAS 850X proved itself to be a much better performer in Write tests, and that’s reflected in these benchmarks. All the top performers are affected by the GbE cap on transfer speed, even with only a single SATA III (6Gbps) disk loaded in the drive bays.

QNAP_TS-470_Turbo_NAS_Server_39-TS_470_Basic_1_GB_WRITE_01

Next up is 10 GB (1000 metric megabytes / 10,000,000,000 bytes) file transfer testing. Using the single-disk configuration in each NAS, and a Gigabit Ethernet connection, network throughput will be put to the test, and the effect of any system or hardware caches will be minimized.

10GB Single-Disk Test Results

Examining 10GB basic file transfer speeds, the QNAP TS-470 delivers top notch read performance, better than most of the other two-bay or four-bay units. The ASUSTOR does better in combined results by virtue of its Jumbo Frame performance. These small differences in single-disk performance aren’t going to make a huge difference to anyone’s day-to-day work, but they do show a clear, steady evolution of NAS infrastructure performance over time, and as you move up the product structure. Of course, you get none of the advantages of redundancy with a single disk or JBOD, so most NAS users will go for one of the many possible RAID configurations.

QNAP_TS-470_Turbo_NAS_Server_40-TS_470_Basic_10_GB_READ_01

In our 10GB write performance tests, the performance of the TS-870U-RP sits just below the top tier again, offering clearly better performance than many NAS models in the test group. The Celeron CPU in the TS-470 really helps it keep up with the high-end SMB devices, like the TS-870U-RP, and also keeps it well ahead of the lower cost devices. The Thecus and the ASUSTOR are still hanging in there, despite their reliance on the low-power Intel Atom CPU. They will both have to put up a fight to remain competitive once we start RAID 5 testing, but for now they look very competitive. The EonNAS shows off its Write performance again, and it isn’t bothered by large file sizes, for certain.

QNAP_TS-470_Turbo_NAS_Server_41-TS_470_Basic_10_GB_WRITE_01

Next we’re going to look at RAID 5 performance, where the TS-470 should have an easier time staying on top of the chart, based on the superior power of its Celeron CPU. Since the QNAP TS-259 Pro and TS-219P+ don’t support the RAID5 configuration that we normally use to test large format NAS products, we won’t be able to include their results in this comparison.

NAS Comparison Products


SKIP TO PAGE:

<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

3 comments

  1. dansus

    Be nice to see an approved pci-e tv tuner like Black Gold tuners for a complete HTPC solution.

    1. Bruce Normann

      For now, TV support is limited to USB tuners. There are about eight models listed in the compatibility table.

      “You may install TV Station from QPKG Center in firmware 3.8.1 or above. A compatible DVB-T USB TV Tuner as listed is required to use this function.”

      Asus My Cinema U3100 Mini
      AverMedia A850(AVerTV Volar Black HD)
      FOTOCOM HiHD3
      Hauppauge WinTV NOVA-T Stick
      KWorld KW-DVB-T 399U
      PCTV Systems nanoStick Solo 73e SE
      QNAP USB-DVBT01
      UPMOST DVB192A HD

      1. dansus

        None of those seem to support T2, making them redundant. Plus USB tuners generally suck.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>