Synology DS1812+ 8-bay SMB / SOHO NAS Reviewby Ganesh T S on June 13, 2013 4:00 PM EST
- Posted in
A number of Intel Atom D27xx-based NAS systems have been evaluated in our labs, even though we formally reviewed only one earlier this year, the LaCie 5big NAS Pro. The Thecus N4800 has made its appearance in a some benchmarks presented in our SMB / SOHO NAS testbed article. Synology is one of the well respected vendors in the SMB / SOHO NAS space, and we have reviewed a number of units from them in the previous years. They recently refreshed their 8-bay SMB / SOHO NAS lineup with the DS1813+. Based on the same platform as the DS1812+ (Atom D2700), it added two extra network ports. However, due to the similarity in the underlying platform, the performance can be expected to be similar to last year's version (except when all four links are teamed together when compared to dual teaming), the DS1812+. The Synology DS1812+, a 8-bay desktop tower form factor offering, has been under stress in our labs since the beginning of this year.
In our experience with Synology NAS units, we have found that they typically manage to tick all the right boxes for the perfect consumer NAS (except for the pricing factor). Does the DS1812+ carry things forward, or do we have something to complain about?
The specifications of the Synology DS1812+ are provided below:
|Synology DS1812+ Specifications|
|Processor||Intel Atom D2700 (2C/4T, 2.13 GHz)|
|RAM||1 GB DDR3 RAM (Upgradable to 3 GB)|
|Drive Bays||8x 3.5"/2.5" SATA / SAS 6 Gbps HDD / SSD (Hot-swappable)|
|Network Links||2x 1 GbE|
|USB Slots||2x USB 3.0 / 4x USB 2.0|
|VGA / Display Out||None|
|Full Specifications Link||Synology DS1812+ Hardware Specs|
In the rest of the review, I will cover some unboxing and setup impressions. A detailed description of the testbed setup and testing methodology is followed by performance numbers in both single and multi-client modes. As requested by multiple readers, we will also briefly cover performance with encryption enabled. In the final section, power consumption numbers as well as RAID rebuild times will be covered along with some closing notes.
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
SirGCal - Friday, June 14, 2013 - linkUPDATE: After looking carefully over these screenshots - I think their review might be SERIOUSLY lacking... I see a RAID 6 option in the setup for the box. But it's greyed out. Probably because they didn't have any drives in it when they were there is my guess. need 4-5 drives MINIMUM to do it to start. But with this many drives, Even testing a RAID 5 is just honestly a bit stupid. It should have been tested RAID 6 and in that situation, might actually be a more attractive option if it is capable and performs.
But then again, RAID 5 generally is faster then RAID 6 due to the added calculations for the extra parity.. And it's RAID 5 performance was pretty weak unless I'm reading the numbers wrong. That is, if the RAID 6 is actually activatable within this device and not just an option within their software that is disabled in this device all together. But I would have thought this review would have tested that mode since that is what an 8-drive setup should have been setup for.
ganeshts - Friday, June 14, 2013 - linkThe benchmarks were done with all 8-bays filled with WD RE Drives in RAID 5.
The screenshots show that we can have disk groups. So, for example, you could allocate 4 disks to one disk group and run a RAID 5 volume on it. Then, the other 4 disks could be in another group and you could run a RAID 6 volume in that group.
What is the problem with performance that you are seeing? These Atom-based NAS units basically saturate the network link (accounting for overheads). Remember two links teamed is 2 Gbps in this case and that translates to a maximum of 250 MBps. Accounting for overhead, I see units saturate between 210 - 230 MBps and never have had any unit go above that unless I am teaming 4 ports or more (as you can see in our QNAP TS-EC1279U-RP review)
I will take your feedback about RAID-6 evaluation into consideration in the next round of benchmarks.
Jeff7181 - Monday, June 17, 2013 - linkHow is single client, 1.5 MB/s throughput at about 100 ms latency "stellar?" That sounds absolutely abysmal to me. I'm curious to know how you set up IOMeter... I'd like to repeat the test on my own box and see how it fares.
mitchdbx - Saturday, June 15, 2013 - linkThere comes a time in your life where you just want things to work without the hassle of them breaking every time you turn around. I OWN the 5bay unit (for over a year now) and can say that the UX is wonderful on these. They configure to let you know when something goes wrong (send email, beep, send SMS, etc) so you can fix the issue. Please look at the product before you make conclusions that they are only "dumb" boxes. You can run Plex, and Many other media servers in addition to a DNS, DHCP, Web server with PHP and various CMS installs. Photo Management, Surveillance, etc....
On another note, a inexperienced individual commented that an issue will arise when a drive fails and the array must rebuild. If you are using quality drives and constantly spinning the drives, the chance of a two drive failure is very low. As anyone that has years of experience with computers, keep the drives spinning and things will be fine, it is when you shut down and start up that issues come into play.
mitchdbx - Saturday, June 15, 2013 - linkMore FYI about the RAID levels....
Micke O - Monday, June 17, 2013 - linkSynology aren't using some "nonstandard raid" with SHR. They are using mdadm
This is how to restore an array in standard PC using linux if your DiskStation would fail:
I'd say that's even better than using some H/W Raid controller. Good luck replacing one of those with something else than an identical controller with the very same firmware etc.
Insomniator - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - linkWow great timing! Been looking for a NAS with huge storage capabilities to transfer data offsite. Haven't seen many around... Buffalo Terastation looks good but I haven't seen reviews for those or any other modern NAS systems. Thanks for the review!
SirGCal - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - linkDid I miss it? But I didn't see it support Raid 6? But Raid 5, ESPECIALLY with large drives, is just asking for failure. I personally have one 8-drive array, building my 2nd now. First with 2TB drives, new one with 4TB drives. Both are Raid 6. Old one 12TB, new one will be 24TB. Ya you lose 2 drives of usable space but that creates 3-drive failure protection. Or basically, when a drive fails and you're rebuilding, you have protection from another drive failing. Cause THAT is what it will happen...
But I didn't see anything in the whole thing about Raid 6 at all. I would Never build an 8-drive system with Raid 5... Not especially with consumer grade hardware... Without Raid 6... It's just not worth it for large array...
Gigaplex - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - linkNo, it only creates 2-drive failure protection. Lose 3 drives in RAID6, and you're toast.
SirGCal - Friday, June 14, 2013 - link3-drive failure, as it it takes 3 to kill the array.. Point is you can be repairing one, if another one fails, your not dead yet... As you would be with RAID 5...