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
Single Client Performance - CIFS & iSCSI on Windows
The single client CIFS and iSCSI performance of the Synology DS415+ was evaluated on the Windows platforms using Intel NASPT and our standard robocopy benchmark. This was run from one of the virtual machines in our NAS testbed. All data for the robocopy benchmark on the client side was put in a RAM disk (created using OSFMount) to ensure that the client's storage system shortcomings wouldn't affect the benchmark results. It must be noted that all the shares / iSCSI LUNs are created in a RAID-5 volume. The DS415+ manages to compare favorably against the ARM-based solutions, obviously. The real tussle in these single client scenarios is not against the other Rangeley NAS (Seagate NAS Pro), but against the QNAP TS-451 based on Bay Trail-D. Both DSM and QTS are mature operating systems. The higher core count in the DS415+'s Atom C2358 compared to the TS-451's Celeron J1800 probably help the former edge ahead in most of the benchmarks presented in the graphs below.
We created a 250 GB iSCSI LUN / target and mapped it on to a Windows VM in our testbed. The same NASPT benchmarks were run and the results are presented below. The observations we had in the CIFS subsection above hold true here too.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
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...