Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Benchmark Results: Multimedia

Network Storage: Three NAS Units Rounded Up
By

Additional Benchmark Results Are Available in Our Photo Gallery

Both the Qnap TS-509 Pro and the Co-World ShareDisk 400 produce great results in our Multimedia Tests. As you might expect, the much cheaper Promise NS2300N delivers performance that more closely matches its cost of acquisition. That said, this level of throughput is acceptable for home network use where no or only limited simultaneous network access will occur.

Display all 18 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • -2 Hide
    chaugh , April 10, 2009 11:59 AM
    TYPO!!!

    and you see that heritage in the TS-590 Pro.

    What's a TS-590?
  • 3 Hide
    cknobman , April 10, 2009 12:45 PM
    If you want something simple to share data at home I cant figure out why anyone would buy a cheap NAS that gives less than 15 mbps or something outrageous costing over $700. Why not build your own using low power cpu that would perform much better than the cheap NAS devices and still come in hundreds of dollars less than the overpriced NAS devices?
  • 0 Hide
    dje007 , April 10, 2009 12:55 PM
    I have a Qnap TS-639 and love it
  • 0 Hide
    yourhighness , April 10, 2009 3:39 PM
    cknobmanIf you want something simple to share data at home I cant figure out why anyone would buy a cheap NAS that gives less than 15 mbps or something outrageous costing over $700. Why not build your own using low power cpu that would perform much better than the cheap NAS devices and still come in hundreds of dollars less than the overpriced NAS devices?


    THIS
  • 0 Hide
    yourhighness , April 10, 2009 3:43 PM
    More on this Topic....?

    Hitting the link for the last page just gives me a blank pop-up box....

    Using Chrome.
  • 0 Hide
    yourhighness , April 10, 2009 3:44 PM
    yourhighnessMore on this Topic....?Hitting the link for the last page just gives me a blank pop-up box....Using Chrome.

    Grabbing the link from the drop down works fine, but from the conclusion page going to the next page is broken.
  • 0 Hide
    theJ , April 10, 2009 3:51 PM
    yourhighnessMore on this Topic....?Hitting the link for the last page just gives me a blank pop-up box....Using Chrome.


    That's all it is. More ads so they can pay the bills.
  • 0 Hide
    theJ , April 10, 2009 3:52 PM
    Nevermind, read the question wrong. Need edit button.
  • -1 Hide
    Anonymous , April 10, 2009 4:59 PM
    If you want to build your own rock-solid RAID NAS, and do so with cheap old hardware, check out my guide on building a Linux RAID-5 NAS. I wrote this guide so even someone who has never worked with Linux before can get it up and running, and maintain it, very easily! Hope this helps someone out there!
    Go to my site at: http://cobraftp.serveftp.com and click on Linux.. then at the top is the PDF, which is labeled "Linux RAID-5 How-to Guide"
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , April 10, 2009 7:02 PM
    how did you exclude the new Readynas NVX? seems kinda silly without that leader in both functionality and performance involved
  • 0 Hide
    midnightgun , April 11, 2009 5:09 AM
    I own a Synology CS-407e. Simple and just works. Leave it on all the time and just don't worry about it. Love it.
  • 0 Hide
    snarfies , April 13, 2009 2:35 PM
    I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't know what this site's obsession is with NAS devices, but the NS3200N is the first NAS ever reviewed here that isn't an overpriced and underperforming piece of garbage! Shame I didn't know about it sooner - I just dropped $300 on a Mini-ITX Atom 330 MB and case to make my own NAS, and I haven't even bought the two drives for my RAID1 yet. I hope I'll get better results...
  • 1 Hide
    WyomingKnott , April 13, 2009 2:42 PM
    Your opion is sought: Why not buy an HP MediaSmart system? It costs less than the Qnap device and seems to be similarly capable?
  • 0 Hide
    voodooaddict , April 13, 2009 8:00 PM
    WyomingKnottYour opion is sought: Why not buy an HP MediaSmart system? It costs less than the Qnap device and seems to be similarly capable?


    I'm wondering the same thing. Why wasn't one of the MS Home Server units included. None of these units are putting out blazing transfer rates.

    The only thing I can figure is that these NAS units could be used for business as well as home use. Where the MS Home server is really just for home use.

    I don't know about anyone else here, but I wouldn't use any of these devices for critical live biz data. Setup as near-line backup devices, sure. But not live data.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , April 14, 2009 1:08 AM
    Actually.. this review is a bit short.. not a comparison for all nas boxes.. just a chumped up silly list of nas boxes that he writer found at the time. rather pathetic actually.
    just to spin a spanner.. try freenas.. www.freenas.com

  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , April 16, 2009 5:54 PM
    Drobo anyone?
  • 0 Hide
    gm0n3y , April 23, 2009 10:37 PM
    AnonymousDrobo anyone?


    I was thinking the same thing.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , December 22, 2012 10:10 PM
    My opinion of QNAP is that it is an overpriced piece of garbage. When it works, everything is great, but when it goes wrong, make sure that you have taken an IT degree before even attempting to fix it. It is not user friendly at all, doesn't give any meaningful error messages, sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, with no clue as to what the problem is. Don't buy it.