Synology DS415+ Review: DSM on Intel Rangeley
by Ganesh T S on October 30, 2014 7:30 AM EST- Posted in
- NAS
- Storage
- Intel
- Synology
- Silvermont
- Enterprise
- Rangeley
Miscellaneous Aspects and Final Words
It is expected that most users would configure the Synology DS415+ in RAID-5 for optimal balance of redundancy and capacity. Hence, we performed all our expansion / rebuild testing as well as power consumption evaluation with the unit configured in RAID-5. The disks used for benchmarking (Western Digital WD4000FYYZ) were also used in this section. The table below presents the average power consumption of the unit as well as time taken for various RAID-related activities.
| Synology DS415+ RAID Expansion and Rebuild / Power Consumption | ||
| Activity | Duration (HH:MM:SS) | Avg. Power (W) |
| Single Disk Init | 0:11:8 | 24.66 W |
| JBOD to RAID-1 Migration | 12:6:13 | 35.43 W |
| RAID-1 (2D) to RAID-5 (3D) Migration | 30:19:14 | 45.43 W |
| RAID-5 (3D) to RAID-5 (4D) Expansion | 25:3:31 | 56.93 W |
| RAID-5 (4D) Rebuild | 10:25:40 | 56.76 W |
The graphs below show the power consumption and rebuild duration when repairing a RAID-5 volume for the various 4-bay NAS units that have been evaluated before.
The competition for the DS415+ comes from the QNAP TS-451 and the Seagate NAS Pro 4-bay. While the QNAP unit has the same clock speeds, the TDP of the SoC is only 10 W (compared to 15 W for the Atom C2538 in the DS415+) because it is dual-core (compared to the four cores in the Atom C2538). As expected, during rebuild, the DS415+ consumes slightly more power. The Atom C2338 in the NAS Pro is clocked much lower (1.74 GHz), so it consumes a full 6 W lesser than the DS415+.
Due to its slower clock, the rebuild duration for the NAS Pro is more than that of the DS415+. That said, it does look like Synology can optimize RAID rebuild durations further, since it is handily bested by the QNAP TS-451. In terms of energy consumption for rebuild, the TS-451 is the winner (~1.8 MJ, compared ~2.0 MJ for the Seagate NAS Pro and ~2.13 MJ for the DS415+). At this point, the only downside of an Intel x86 NAS platform for prosumers and SOHO users seems to be the cost.
Concluding Remarks
The SMB / SOHO / prosumer COTS NAS market is interestingly poised. With the previous generation Atom platforms, NAS vendors had to differentiate themselves with the software. However, with their 22nm silicon, Intel has provided them with multiple options. We have already looked at QNAP using Bay Trail-D with extra focus on the multimedia transcoding and virtualization aspects. Asustor has opted to go the Haswell route, with a Core i3 CPU for the 70-series. With the DS415+, Synology has placed its bets on the Intel Rangeley platform.
The new Rangeley platform has made up for the drawbacks of the previous generation x86 platforms at this price point. Equipped with the Atom C2538, the DS415+ excels in three areas: multi-client performance, encryption capabilities and power efficiency. Synology's DSM is quite mature and it has no problems in bringing out the potential of Intel's Rangeley for the NAS market. Multi-client performance in terms of average response times is better because of the highly integrated I/O compared to other solutions (both ARM-based and some of the other x86-based solutions) which use bridge chips and have bottlenecks in connecting to the CPU. The appearance of AES-NI in the Atom-class SoCs has finally delivered power efficient encryption capabilities. Obviously, the 22 nm fabrication process as well as tight I/O integration greatly help in reducing the power consumption of the platform compared to other solutions in the market.
From a product line perspective, Synology has introduced only one Rangeley-based NAS so far (unlike Seagate which rolled out its full Rangeley lineup with 2,4 and 6 bays in one go). Prosumers / SMBs may need to hold out for a bit if they require more than four bays in a Synology NAS equipped with a Rangeley SoC.
At $600 for a diskless unit, the pricing is not unreasonable (given the premiums usually associated with Synology units). The Atom C2538 is one of the more powerful Rangeley SoCs and it helps the DS415+ pack quite a punch. Pretty much the only downside from a home consumer perspective is the absence of a hardware transcoding engine for media-centric applications. Though many multimedia apps can be installed on the DS415+, media enthusiasts are advised to go for the Synology DS415play or QNAP TS-x51 if power-efficient media serving is a primary use-case. The focus of the DS415+ is solely on the SMB / SOHO market. With the final version of DSM 5.1 around the corner, Synology seems well-placed to serve the needs of the NAS market.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
41 Comments
View All Comments
ganeshts - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link
Encryption testing is with a single client. The limitation is on the client side which has only a single GbE link.Reason it is done this way is to make sure we have data that can be compared against other units that have been evaluated before.
thewishy - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link
Well, the client side isn't entirely the problem here. You could do LACP on the client side too, and still only see gigabit. Ethernet was never designed to receive frames out of order, and the two interfaces aren't easily syncronised - so traffic between a pair of endpoints is sent over only one link. Fine and dandy for busy networks, poor in this scenarioSonic01 - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Makes sense, it's a shame you guys don't test this as some of us might be using a client or server configured with link aggregation.I've purchased this NAS, a LAG capable switch and network card for my desktop and server, will see what kind of performance I get...
xenol - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link
Gallery: Gallery Title!I laughed harder than I should at that.
shelbystripes - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link
Two questions I can't find the answers for anywhere:1) Does the 415+ come with ECC RAM?
2) If not, does it work if you put ECC RAM in it?
One of the key potential benefits of Avoton/Rangeley is support for ECC RAM, but Synology doesn't mention it, and it seems like the kind of thing you'd advertise (or at least list in the specifications) if you used it.
ganeshts - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link
Nope, no ECC RAM. The platform may support it, but Synology's board doesn't. At this price point, ECC support is difficult to get.shelbystripes - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link
ganeshts: I don't understand this. I'm not saying I don't understand you, or don't believe you. (If I didn't think your answer was possible, I wouldn't have asked the question.) What I am saying is, I don't understand why ECC RAM isn't supported in this model.From the block diagram under "Platform Analysis", it appears that the memory controller is built into the CPU/SoC, and the C2538 they're using does support ECC RAM. DDR3 SODIMMs are 204-pin whether they're ECC or not, and while it's not really discussed in this review, a teardown on legionhardware.com shows the memory as a single SODIMM module. Since Synology is using an SoC with an integrated ECC-capable memory controller, I can't understand why they would leave out ECC memory support. It seems like it would have to be an active choice on their part not to, in order to discourage people from sticking in ECC RAM on their own. (Synology doesn't like its users upgrading RAM and claims that doing so will void the warranty, which is something the PC industry stopped pulling a decade ago.) All the necessary hardware should be there, right? So why doesn't it work if you just stuck an ECC UDIMM in there? Did Synology actively disable this feature of the SoC?
chubbypanda - Thursday, October 30, 2014 - link
While dimensions and sockets for DDR3 and ECC DDR3 modules are physically the same, they've got different electrical layouts! Inserting regular memory module into ECC DDR3 equipped board would result in damaged memory module and possibly the board.As why Synology chose not to use ECC memory (despite they could have), Ganesh already answered that.
jabber - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link
Plus it leaves them open to sell a version in the future that does support ECC and charge you an extra $400 for the benefit.shelbystripes - Friday, October 31, 2014 - link
Chubbypanda: Thanks for your reaponse, it put me on the right track.I was about to say that I don't buy this, since both ASUS and SuperMicro make Avoton boards that are listed as taking both ECC and non-ECC RAM. But on a closer look, only the SuperMicro mATX boards (which have full-size 240-pin DIMM sockets) claim to support both ECC and non-ECC RAM. Their mini-ITX boards (which have 204-pin SODIMM sockets) support ECC RAM only. The missing pins in SODIMMs must be ones that would allow cross-compatibility (probably by providing separate electrical signals for ECC and non-ECC RAM, at least for detection at startup).
I think that's it. Since the Synology unit uses SODIMMs, it can only support one or the other, and they chose non-ECC. Boo. If (as jabber mentioned) they release a higher-end version with ECC RAM, I'll buy it... If I haven't given up waiting for it and built myself a FreeNAS box. I had been waiting and hoping for the inevitable Avoton Synology box, but I hadn't anticipated this.