| QNAP TS-419P II NAS Network Storage Server |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Network | |
| Written by Bruce Normann | |
| Tuesday, 01 November 2011 | |
|
Page 9 of 14
Network TerminologyBenchmark Reviews primarily uses metric data measurement for testing storage products, for anyone who is interested in learning the relevant history of this sore spot in the industry, I've included a small explanation below: The basic unit data measurement is called a bit (one single binary digit). Computers use these bits, which are composed of ones and zeros, to communicate their contents. All files are stored as binary files, and translated into working files by the Operating System. This two number system is called a "binary number system". In comparison, the decimal number system has ten unique digits consisting of zero through nine. Essentially it boils down to differences between binary and metric measurements, because testing is deeply impacted without carefully separating the two. For example, the difference between the transfer time of a one-Gigabyte (1000 Megabytes) file is going to be significantly better than a true binary Gigabyte (referred to as a Gibibyte) that contains 1024 Megabytes. The larger the file used for data transfer, the bigger the difference will be. Have you ever wondered why your 500 GB hard drive only has about 488 GB once it has been formatted? Most Operating Systems utilize the binary number system to express file data size, however the prefixes for the multiples are based on the metric system. So even though a metric "Kilo" equals 1,000, a binary "Kilo" equals 1,024. Are you confused yet? Don't be surprised, because even the most tech savvy people often mistake the two. Plainly put, the Kilobyte is expressed as 1000 bytes, but it is really comprised of 1,024 bytes. Most network engineers are not fully aware that the IEC changed the way we calculate and name data chunks when they published the new International Standards back in December 1998. The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) removed the old metric prefixes for multiples in binary code with new prefixes for binary multiples made up of only the first two letters of the metric prefixes and adding the first two letters of the word "binary". For example, instead of Megabyte (MB) or Gigabyte (GB), the new terms would be Mebibyte (MiB) or Gibibyte (GiB). While this is the new official IEC International Standard, it has not been widely adopted yet because it is either still unknown by institutions or not commonly used. NAS Testing MethodologyAll the NAS devices we test cannot accommodate all the different disk configurations, so our current test protocol has been based on two of the most popular setups: a basic (single) disk and RAID-5 configurations. Since this four-bay device easily supports RAID 5; I tested both disk modes this time. During initial setup, the NAS was upgraded to the latest v3.4 firmware by flashing the DOM with binary files on the included CD-ROM. The supplied firmware for the TS-419P II was v3.4.3 (0331T) Connected directly to the Realtek 8112L Gigabit LAN controller in the test-bench system by a ten-foot CAT6 patch cable, the NAS product receives one test transfer followed by at least three timed transfers. Each test file was sent to the Western Digital Caviar Black 750GB (WD7502AAEX) hard drives installed in the NAS for a timed write test, and that same file was sent back to a Western Digital VelociRaptor 150GB 10,000 RPM (WD1500HLFS) hard drive in the test system to perform a read test. Each test was repeated several times, the high and low values were discarded and the remaining results were recorded and charted. This is the start of NAS testing where we are going to exclusively use Windows 7 as the testing platform for the host system. The performance differences between Win7 and XP are huge, as we documented in our QNAP TS-259 Pro review. The adoption rate for Win 7 has been very high, and Benchmark Reviews has been using Win 7 in all of our other testing for some time now. It's definitely time to make the jump for NAS products. 
The two transfer tests: read and write, were conducted on each NAS appliance using the 1 GB file and then a 10 GB file. Additionally, a second set of tests were conducted with Jumbo Frame enabled, i.e. the MTU value for the Ethernet controllers was increased from 1500 to 9000. All the NAS products tested to date in the Windows 7 environment have supported the Jumbo Frame configuration. I also include a baseline of sorts, which is the internal file transfer from the Corsair P64 SSD to the Western Digital 150GB VelociRaptor installed on the Intel P55 motherboard SATA connections, where the Intel P55 chipset provides the SATA 3Gb/s interface, and a Marvell 88SE9123 controller provides two ports of SATA 6Gb/s connections. NAS Comparison Products
Support Equipment
Test System
|
|
Comments
The TS-419P II is a well designed software solution with a wealth of functionality. The case is well made and looks great but uses yesterday's processing hardware. Why USB V3.0, Dual CPU and SATA6 are missing is a turn off for me. SATA6 is probably of little value but it's the industry trend with disk drives and may prove useful in the future. Intel hardware is a plus for me.
USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gb/s are all available on the more high-end QNAP servers. I don't know of any Dual CPU units made by anyone, but if you mean dual-CORE, then that's also available on the pricier units. Most of the "Pro" models have the Dual-Core Intel® Atom? (1.80 GHz) in them. The really hardcore models have a Quad Core Intel Xeon E3-1225 at 3.1GHz Processor or a Dual Core Intel® Core? i3-2120 Processor at 3.3 GHz.
The software on this unit looks great and has a lot of functionality and great access ability.
For the average home user with a decent amount of tech knowledge, working within a win7 environment at home but an iPhone/iPad on the road what would be better; windows home server or a product like this? And in your opinion would building a box myself with better parts( processor, memory) bet the better option?
Yes, I meant dual core, I know better. I would be happy with an Intel 2120, but never an Atom anything.
Disk drives sure jumped in price due to unfortunate weather!
Keith,
If the sofware was offered separately, the answer would be easy. I'm in much the same position as you. I don't like the processing capability until the price is more than I want to spend.
I totally agree with you. I will probably break down and pay the higher price for improved processing because the software is impressive!
I just now ordered the TS-659 Pro II. Didn't get everything I wanted but got everything I could afford. I will have a toy to play with tomorrow. I should have purchased the TS-659 Pro+ because it's a much better buy, but common sense failed.
What is your intended use(s)?
- Music/movie streaming
- Backup
- Central storage
- Near future hosting my own website
What's the price difference - about $100, right?
Now, the OTHER thing you get as you spend more mony is WRITE speed. Take a look at QNAPs published write speeds:
Write Performance (MB/s) - Dual-Core Atom: 107, Single-Core Atom: 88, Marvell 2.0GHz: 75, Marvell 1.6GHz: 45
This has a direct impact on yur backup speeds, although the laptops may be the limiting factor anyways, if they have the typical 5400 RPM HDDs in them. They use less power, so it's quite common to use them instead of the 7200 RPM models.
The other thing you get for your $$ is USB 3.0. This may not have any impact on your intended usage, but for some, USB 2.0 is a deal-breaker.
Of course, you also know that QNAP released a couple new models at CES, right. I tell you, I can't keep up with them... LOL
Bottom line, like Anna above, I think your expectation for backup performance is the key discriminator here. That's the primary area (of the ones you listed), where spending more will get you more.
Presently I don't need the virtualization features.
Are the new models announced at CES listed in their site? I would assume so, as their site indicates the 459 Pro II as a new model.
And thanks for the link below.
qnap.com/images/products/comparison/Comparison_4BayNAS.html
I first saw it on the box then when I opened and looked at the back of the unit, two of the ports are labeled USB3.0 The quick start guide also says USB3. This is very odd since their website and all reviews say only USB2.0
I do not know if the new units are shipping with USB 3 or is it Canadian versions. I am in Canada. Anyways I am thrilled. This unit offers so much for the price.
Usually when the "Manufacturer reserves the right to update the product specifications" it's to take cost out of the product.