NAS vs PC, why

hi, i hope you guys can help me out.
i what to reduce the number of disks in my main computer, To reduce noise, and power consum. (have 7 disks)
Since i use the data on more then one computere at the same time, a USB disk is not an option.

so i googled for some reviews on NAS (network attached storage),
and discovered a free program calld FreeNAS (,
so i tryd to build a small, cheap and low power usage, computer, i come up with 2 systems to use.

Intel-System 1:
Mainbord - ASUS P5PE-VM
CPU - Celeron D 336 2.8 GHz
System Driv - 1 x SDM SD-ADIDE2CF-B1 and 1 x Kingston CF 1 GB
Controller - Promise SATA300 TX4
Network - onbord (1Gbit)

price in Denmark 1517 kr. (274.32$ USD)

AMD-System 2:
Mainbord - MSI K8MM3-V
CPU - Sempron 2800+ 1.6 GHz
System Driv - 1 x SDM SD-ADIDE2CF-B1 and 1 x Kingston CF 1 GB
Controller - Promise SATA300 TX4
Network - D-Link DGE 528T (1Gbit)

Price in Denmark 1550 kr (280.28$ USD)

I have a Spare power supply and RAM i can use, and i want to build a case my self, for this 2.

i also have a look at this:

Intel - Entry Storage System SS4000-E - Price 3643 kr. (658.76$ USD)

Synology - CS-407 - Price 4695 kr. (848.99$ USD)

Synology - CS-407e - Price 3678 kr. (665.09$ USD)

i dont know the difference on this 2, except the price o.O

all system are without harddisks, but i have them.

here my problem then.
what system to buy and why pay twice als much, for a NAS then a computer?
3 answers Last reply
More about tomshardware
  1. sorry for the spelling, i'm dyslectic. :/
  2. Why should you buy one of the pre-built devices instead of building your own? Some would give arguments based on size or the supposed criticality of saving every watt and never turning off the device, and of course the convenience of technical support and having the device pre-designed, built, and largely pre-configured for you. I'm not in that camp, and tend to encourage enthusiasts to build their own machine for better value and performance. Of course the reverse point of view applies to many others -- those who don't have the knowledge or time or inclination.

    I wouldn't make a couple of design choices that you've made -- (1) PCI storage controller and PCI gigabit (in both cases, even the on-board one here goes through PCI) (2) Sticking with old DDR (3) Using a very old CPU socket (the AMD).

    I have nothing really against DDR and old CPUs in this application; it's just that you get many more options and often better performance and support if you don't pursue obsolete technology, and it's much easier to solve (1).

    Native on-board gigabit and SATA (at least 4) should be fine in this application. Not having to buy an add-on storage controller or gigabit NIC also gives you a bit more money to compensate for the old RAM. Using an old/junk PCI video card could give you some more options in motherboards (esp. for more on-board SATA). I bought 10 on eBay for $5 (plus reasonable shipping).

    Note also that drive prices have been coming down fairly significantly, and it's possible to do more with fewer drives than before.
  3. the NAS side of thing has sprung up recently, if you have that many drives and they are SATA i would recomend using RAID it will take a bit longer at first but trust me it worth only having one big drive then lot of littles drive.

    also look into Lin NAS and the BSD free NAS
Ask a new question

Read More

NAS / RAID Computers Networking