Concluding Remarks

The preceding two sections presented the results from the newly added test components using the new testbed. Standalone, they only tell a minor part of the story. In future reviews, we will plot results from multiple NAS units on a single graph (obviously, we won’t be putting the ARM/PowerPC based units against the Atom based ones) so as to get an idea of the efficiency and effectiveness of each NAS and its operating system.

Green computing was one of our main goals when building the testbed. The table below presents the power consumption numbers for the machine under various conditions.

2012 AnandTech NAS Testbed Power Consumption
Idle 118.9 W
32GB RAM Disk + 12 VMs Idle 122.3 W
IOMeter 100% Seq 100% Reads [ 12 VMs ] 146.7 W
IOMeter 60% Random 65% Reads [ 12 VMs ] 128 W
IOMeter 100% Seq 50% Reads [ 12 VMs ] 142.8 W
IOMeter 100% Random 8K 70% Reads [ 12 VMs ] 131.2 W

Note that we were able to subject the NAS to access from twelve different clients running Windows for less than 13W per client. This sort of power efficiency is simply not attainable in a non-virtualized environment. We conclude the piece with a table summarizing the build.

2012 AnandTech NAS Testbed Configuration
Motherboard Asus Z9PE-D8 WS Dual LGA2011 SSI-EEB
CPU 2 x Intel Xeon E5-2630L
Coolers 2 x Dynatron R17
Memory G.Skill RipjawsZ F3-12800CL10Q2-64GBZL (8x8GB) CAS 10-10-10-30
OS Drive OCZ Technology Vertex 4 128GB
Secondary Drive OCZ Technology Vertex 4 128GB
Other Drives 12 x OCZ Technology Vertex 4 64GB (Offline in the Host OS)
Network Cards 3 x Intel ESA I-340 Quad-GbE Port Network Adapter
Chassis SilverStoneTek Raven RV03
PSU SilverStoneTek Strider Plus Gold Evoluion 850W
OS Windows Server 2008 R2

Thank You!

We thank the following companies for making our NAS testbed build a reality:

What are readers looking for in terms of multi-client scenario testing in NAS reviews? We are open to feedback as we look to expand our coverage in this rapidly growing market segment.

Testbed in Action : Thecus N4800
Comments Locked

74 Comments

View All Comments

  • xTRICKYxx - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    May I ask why do you guys need such high requirements? And why 12 VMs? I just think this is overkill. But it doesn't matter anyways... If I had a budget like this, I would totally build an awesome NAS like you guys have and follow this guide. Great job!
  • xTRICKYxx - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    I should clarify I am looking at this NAS as a household commodity, not something where 10+ computers will be heavily accessing it.
  • mfed3 - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    still didn't read...this is hopeless..
  • extide - Thursday, September 6, 2012 - link

    Dude they are NOT BUILDING A NAS!!!

    They are building a system to TEST other NAS's
  • thomas-hrb - Thursday, September 6, 2012 - link

    It would also be nice to test against some of the other features like for example iSCSI. Also since the Thecus N4800 supports iSCSI, I would like to see that test redone with a slightly different build/deployment.

    Create a single LUN on iSCSI. then mount that LUN in the VM like ESXi, create some VM's 20GB per server should be enough for server 2K8R2 and test it that way.

    I don't know who would use NAS over SAN in an enterprise shop, but some of the small guys who can't afford an enterprise storage solution (less than 25 clients) might want to know how effectively a small NAS, can handle VM's with advanced features like vMotion and fault tolerance. In fact if you try some of those HP ML110G7 (3 of them with a vmware essentials plus kit) you can get 12 CPU cores with 48GB RAM, with licensing for about 10K. This setup will give you a decent amount of reliability, and if the NAS can support data replication, you could get a small setup with enterprise features (even if not enterprise performance) for less than the lost of 1-tray of FC-SAN storage.
  • Wixman666 - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    It's because they want to be able to really hammer the storage system.
  • The0ne - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    "The guest OS on each of the VMs is Windows 7 Ultimate x64. The intention of the build is to determine how the performance of the NAS under test degrades when multiple clients begin to access it. This degradation might be in terms of increased response time or decrease in available bandwidth."

    12 is a good size, if not too small for a medium size company.
  • MGSsancho - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    12 is also a good size for a large workgroup.. Alternatively this is a good benchmark for students in dorms. sure there might be 4-5 people but when you factor in computers using torrents, game consoles streaming netflix along with tvs, could be interesting. granted all of this is streaming except for the torrents and their random i/o. However most torrent clients cache as much of the writes. With the current anandtech bench setup with VMs this can be replicated.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    The same reason they need 8 threaded benchmark apps to fully test a Quad-HT CPU. They're testing NASes designed to have more than 2 or 3 clients attached at once; simulating a dozen of them puts the load on the nases up, although judging by the results shown by the Thecus N4800 they probably fell short of maxing it out.
  • theprodigalrebel - Wednesday, September 5, 2012 - link

    Well, this IS Anandtech and the article is filed under IT Computing... ;)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now