Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Benchmark Results: Office

Qnap TS-559 Pro+: Familiar Network Storage With A New CPU
By

The results for our simulated system backup in a single container file benchmark are similar to those seen in the multimedia benchmarks. Here, too, the transfer rate increase is barely noticeable. Only RAID 6 shows a notable result: there is a transfer rate increase of 8.1 MB/s.

As with the HD video playback benchmark, a noticeable increase in speed occurs in RAID 6 here, with a bump of 15.2 MB/s. The difference between the TS-559 Pro and the TS-559 Pro+ is slightly higher in RAID 0, providing 16.5 MB/s better throughput.

Significant differences between the Qnap TS-559 Pro and the TS-559 Pro+ are not to be found with regard to office files. The influence of the Intel Atom D525 processor in Qnap TS-559 Pro+ mode is limited to increased performance of only 0.2 to 0.7 MB/s. When seen through the lens of a margin of error, the difference between the two devices in this discipline is essentially zero.

More benchmark results can be found in our image gallery.

Display all 32 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • -2 Hide
    hmp_goose , May 25, 2011 5:56 AM
    I remember a time when teh Internet was going to have hyperlinks embedded in articles for clowns like me to look stuff up with.

    C'mon! I'm a knuckle-dragging FPS-player: I don't know what "SMB/CIFS protocols" stands for, let alone good for! Isn't there at lest a related article?
  • 2 Hide
    barmaley , May 25, 2011 7:17 AM
    Ok, I don't get it. Can someone explain to me why this $1000 device that comes with no storage is better than a $500 Linux box you can build yourself that will do everything this does and more plus it will come with tons of storage too...
  • 3 Hide
    Anonymous , May 25, 2011 7:35 AM
    Did you do Gbit Link Aggregation for the tests? Seeing as it has 2 of'em?
  • 3 Hide
    sharpless78 , May 25, 2011 8:10 AM
    barmaleyOk, I don't get it. Can someone explain to me why this $1000 device that comes with no storage is better than a $500 Linux box you can build yourself that will do everything this does and more plus it will come with tons of storage too...


    Ease of use. Very few users have the time, will and knowledge to build a NAS.
  • 0 Hide
    aaron88_7 , May 25, 2011 11:33 AM
    barmaleyOk, I don't get it. Can someone explain to me why this $1000 device that comes with no storage is better than a $500 Linux box you can build yourself that will do everything this does and more plus it will come with tons of storage too...

    First off, it isn't better than a $500 Linux box. Linux requires Linux knowledge and you have to provide the software you need yourself - that costs small businesses money. This also offers failover and load balancing with its dual NIC card that you wouldn't have in a $500 Linux box.

    The main thing is ease of installation. You don't need a highly technical person to get this box up and running and quickly backing up your companies data, whereas a Linux machine will require additional staff that a small business normally would not have on hand and have to pay to come onsite.

    For $1000 I'd like one just to play around with myself, though it clearly is not targeted for home users.
  • 1 Hide
    aaron88_7 , May 25, 2011 11:36 AM
    Oops, I meant to write this is better than a $500 Linux box
  • 1 Hide
    dealcorn , May 25, 2011 11:58 AM
    I am not aware of any 5 bay hot swap itx case that could be used as a basis for a diy project with comparable functionality. Chenbro can get you to 4 at the cost of no pcie support. No pcie means no esata with a supermicro atom itx board.

    There are ways to go with ATX cases, but that is not really comparable.
  • 0 Hide
    radiumburn , May 25, 2011 12:00 PM
    but with that $500 linux box you will force yourself to learn something.. and in the end isn't it all about the pursuit of knowledge! haha well I admin a few linux servers so I'd save the cash and make my own for myself/work instead. On that note if you want I will make them for $999 and free shipping with initial phone setup!!! save a dollar!
  • 2 Hide
    a-nano-moose , May 25, 2011 1:02 PM
    How can you compare them when you are using different hard drives than the earlier tests?
  • -2 Hide
    cknobman , May 25, 2011 1:11 PM
    Sharpless78Ease of use. Very few users have the time, will and knowledge to build a NAS.


    A NAS is a computer. Heck you can even build a PC put Windows 7/XP Home edition on it and turn it into a NAS all for ~$500 (and thats even with 2tb storage in raid 1, heck that is what I have done and it works great and I am even using a low power AMD CPU that is powerful enough to actually be useful rather than a pathetic atom cpu).

    There is no ease of use factor or amount of time on earth that is worth $500+ dollars.
  • 0 Hide
    serendipiti , May 25, 2011 1:14 PM
    Would be good to see tests with encryption enabled (another article showed it as a NAS Achilles heel). Hopefully benchmarks should show the strenghs of the CPU when encryption is on. What surprised me, is the 150W peak power... The reason of buying dedicated NAS hardware (and not reusing / building a desktop computer for that) should be cost, cost of maintenaince (power bill for a 24x7 device must be taken into account). For that matters, I agree that a properly setup desktop computer should do the job (as well as others that the NAS device won't) and with all that numbers in hand is hard to choose the NAS device.
  • 0 Hide
    STravis , May 25, 2011 1:27 PM
    barmaleyOk, I don't get it. Can someone explain to me why this $1000 device that comes with no storage is better than a $500 Linux box you can build yourself that will do everything this does and more plus it will come with tons of storage too...


    Agreed - I have been running a NAS based on an Atom processor for about two years now (but it's also a RADIUS server, SVN server, etc). However not everyone is technically capable and they are sometimes willing to pay for something off the shelf rather than putting it together themselves.
  • 0 Hide
    TeraMedia , May 25, 2011 2:06 PM
    Would have been great to see comparisons involving encryption. A recent article here on Toms compared the performance of a bunch of NASes using data encryption, and noted that performance was terrible when it was turned on. The article even went on to say that a faster CPU should improve performance, and one with AES-NI should improve it dramatically. No test to confirm this? Opportunity missed.
  • 0 Hide
    obarthelemy , May 25, 2011 2:23 PM
    @reviewer: since when is DDR2 faster than DDR3 ?
  • 0 Hide
    dealcorn , May 25, 2011 2:39 PM
    Based on what I see on their web site, this box could replace every aspect of the functionality of my home, atom d510, headless debian server with software raid 5. It costs a lot more, but only because my time has absolutely no value. It looks like a real easy path to the benefits of Linux from my perspective. The fact that you know it works and is supported is an added bonus.
  • 1 Hide
    d_kuhn , May 25, 2011 3:02 PM
    I've built OpenFiler (linux) NAS servers... affordable and powerful (and a good option for cost sensitive storage). I used one for a little while to play with VMWare clustering as I waited for an EMC iSCSI box to come in. But at the same time, when I needed to buy storage for a platform I'd be deploying to an end user (manufacturing plant) for online storage, I chose to go with an integrated NAS solution (I went with Thecus N7700Pro rather than Qnap... more slots for the same money) to avoid the management need that in my experience even a well implemented Linux box will periodically require.

    It's IMO a choice between fire and forget (if one of the thecus boxes fails the plant can replace it themselves) and an ongoing support need. For me that's worth the incremental cost.

    Additionally, you'll be going with software raid if you roll your own (hardware raid cards would blow any cost advantage entirely) and then you're going to have to be really conscious of processing power required for solid performance. That means time spent tweaking, optimizing, and in component selection that will more than overtake the hardware cost differential if you cost your time at a reasonable rate.
  • -1 Hide
    jblack , May 25, 2011 8:04 PM
    aaron88_7This also offers failover and load balancing with its dual NIC card that you wouldn't have in a $500 Linux box.



    This can be solved by purchasing a $20 NIC and adding it to the Linux system.
  • 0 Hide
    d_kuhn , May 25, 2011 11:23 PM
    Well I'd suggest a better quality card than $20... but you can get a decent intel dual gig-e card that support jumbo frames for $150.

    The important thing to note is that if you've got the time and inclination to learn to setup and administer the system, a Linux box will give you more bang for the buck compared to systems like the QNap or Thecus. the N7700's work great as a single host box (or for archive use), but I've not seen the kind of performance that could support even a 2 host cluster. You could get that out of an Openfiler box with some tweaking (though an Openfiler box with that performance would probably cost a grand or so with required peripherals like a dual nic and hot swap SATA chassis).
  • 0 Hide
    ProDigit10 , May 26, 2011 1:01 AM
    I wonder why people just not simply buy a mini atx computer with raid capability and an Atom processor?
    You may find them under $300!
  • 0 Hide
    ProDigit10 , May 26, 2011 1:26 AM
    You can cut some of the noise down by disabling the 120mm fan, and closing the hole. The air exhaust of the power unit is big enough to cool down the drives and the rest of the system!
Display more comments