Multi-Client Performance - CIFS on Windows

We put the Synology DS415+ through some IOMeter tests with a CIFS share being accessed from up to 25 VMs simultaneously. The following four graphs show the total available bandwidth and the average response time while being subject to different types of workloads through IOMeter. The tool also reports various other metrics of interest such as maximum response time, read and write IOPS, separate read and write bandwidth figures etc. Some of the interesting aspects from our IOMeter benchmarking run can be found here.

Synology DS415+ Multi-Client CIFS Performance - 100% Sequential Reads

 

Synology DS415+ Multi-Client CIFS Performance - Max Throughput - 50% Reads

 

Synology DS415+ Multi-Client CIFS Performance - Random 8K - 70% Reads

 

Synology DS415+ Multi-Client CIFS Performance - Real Life - 65% Reads

The attractiveness of the Rangeley platform is brought out by the latencies observed when subject to heavy loading. This is one of the key metrics that shows the advantage of a a SoC tuned towards storage appliances (particularly when compared to the previous-generation Atom platforms).

Single Client Performance - CIFS & NFS on Linux Multi-Client iSCSI Evaluation
Comments Locked

41 Comments

View All Comments

  • DanNeely - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link

    It's US Gov Speak (if you follow the link it comes from US Govt Acquisition rules). I suspect it's less generally known than that it appears common in a casual search because US Gov/Contractors collectively represent millions of people.
  • Laststop311 - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link

    Beast quad core cpu for a NAS.
  • Morawka - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link

    where is the ipad air 2 review. you guys even got early review units right? you went to the keynote.
  • jabber - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link

    When there are 4539 iPad Air 2 reviews all saying pretty much the same thing why bother? Why not review something else that enthusiasts might be interested in.

    iPads are for baby boomers and your mum and dad.
  • mexell - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link

    RAID5 for drives this large is calling for trouble. Several enterprise vendors discourage usage of RAID5 for large 7.2k drives because the risk of a second-drive loss (or just effects of bit rot) during a rebuild is just too high.

    I am aware that both RAID6 and RAID10 in a four-bay unit mean 50% capacity loss compared to 25% for RAID5, but in the end, it's your personal media archive that's at risk.

    So, a comparison of RAID10 and RAID6 speeds would have been nice.
  • skarnm2 - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link

    I think you would go with 5+ disk versions for Raid 6.
  • FalconX69 - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link

    Can someone explain why I7 or xenon based Nas drives are so expensive when the chip is only a few hundred dollars more then these atoms? Wish symbology or qnap would allow custom nas units but with reasonable prices.
  • RockyMcNuts - Tuesday, November 25, 2014 - link

    You can put a Synology-compatible OS on custom hardware, or use an open source NAS OS like FreeNAS. At least if it's for a home project, not sure I would do this for a commercial project.

    http://us.hardware.info/reviews/5525/workshop-xpen...
    http://www.avsforum.com/forum/39-networking-media-...
    http://xpenology.com/forum/
  • sin_tax - Saturday, November 1, 2014 - link

    Would the more powerful CPU allow this to be a suitable box for Plex Media Server? Can it handle transcoding one or more 1080p streams?
  • asendra - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link

    I would love to know the answer to this. I need a box that can handle Plex, only 1 stream, at 1080p.
    Currently I have my big gaming PC with PMS, but I prefer a low power NAS, or a HTPC+NAS with Plex/PMS.
    Currently I'm debating between this or a custom box with a J1900 quad @ 2Ghz. Prefer the simplicity of Synology and how compact it is, but don't like the price and I'm not sure if it can handle it...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now