Test System, Details, Power Consumption
Test Configuration
We used the NAS devices’ default settings in our benchmarks, meaning no jumbo packets. The firmware (version 3.2.6 build 0423T) proposed the ext4 file system for all the different RAID arrays we tested. Also, instead of using the old 320 GB Samsung HD321KJ hard drives with 16 MB cache we switched to 1000 GB HD103UJ models with 32 MB cache.
| System Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Test Platform | Asus P5E3 Deluxe, Rev.1.03G, LGA 775, Intel X38, BIOS: 0810 (02/11/2007) |
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 (65 nm Conroe core) @ 2.66 GHz |
| RAM | 2 x 1024 MB Crucial Ballistix DDR3-1600 |
| eSATA Controller | JMicron JMB363 |
| System Hard Drive | Seagate Barracuda 7200.9, 160 GB, 7200 RPM, SATA 3Gb/s, 8 MB Cache |
| Test Hard Drives | 5 x 3.5" Samsung Spinpoint HD103SJ, 1000 GB, 7200 RPM, SATA 3Gb/s, 32 MB Cache |
| DVD ROM | Samsung SH-D163A , SATA 1.5 Gb/s |
| Graphics Card | Gigabyte Radeon HD 3850 GV-RX385512HGPU: 670 MHz, Memory: 512 MB DDR3 (830 MHz, 256-Bit) |
| Network Card | Marvell Yukon 88E8056 PCIe Gigabit Ethernet Controller |
| Sound Card | Integraded |
| PSU | Cooler Master RS-850-EMBA, ATX 12 V V2.2, 850 Watt |
| System-Software & Treiber | |
| Operating System | Windows Vista Enterprise SP1 |
| DirectX 10 | DirectX 10 (Vista-Standard) |
| DirectX 9 | Version: April 2007 |
| Graphics Drivers | AMD Radeon Version 7.12 |
| Network Drivers | 9.0.32.3 (Vista-Standard) |
| Intel Chipset Drivers | Version 6.9.1.1001 (20/02/2008) |
| JMicron Chipset Drivers | Version 1.17.15.0 (24/03/2007) |
Intel NAS Performance Toolkit
We used the Intel NAS Performance Toolkit for testing the NAS devices. For a more detailed description of the benchmarks, see the article Benchmarking with Intel’s NAS Toolkit.
Noise Levels (Subjective)
Both the TS-459 Pro and the TS-559 Pro are rather quiet NAS devices. The only time they are actually noisy is when powering up, as the fans are briefly operated at full-speed. In normal use, you only hear a slight hum that is hardly audible and hence not annoying.
We did not notice any major differences between the TS-459 Pro with its 92 mm fan and the TS-559 Pro with its 120 mm fan. The quiet impressions made by the two NAS devices were somewhat disturbed by a recurring noise caused by the vibrations of the hard drives. Applying a slight pressure on the hard drive cages immediately silences the humming noise, until it turns up again at some point. We would suggest better vibration cancelation for the hard drive mounting points.
Power Consumption
| Header Cell - Column 0 | Qnap TS-459 Pro | Qnap TS-559 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Off | 0.7 W | 0.9 W |
| Peak | 110.5 W | 148.8 W |
| HDD Power Down | 24.4 W | 27.3 W |
| Idle | 45.1 W | 56.2 W |
| Rebuild | 52.2 W | 63.5 W |
The power consumption at idle (power down) does not differ a lot, and active idle differs by roughly 10 W. In any case, both NAS devices require roughly as much power as a low-power desktop PC, which is acceptable. Roughly half of the power consumption is attributed to the hard drives, while 15-25 W are required by the Atom D510 platform.
