Seagate's acquisition of LaCie in 2012 made quite a bit of sense as most of their product lines were complementary in nature. However, they had a bit of an overlap in the NAS market, particularly in the SOHO ARM-based segment. Early last year, we reviewed the LaCie 5big NAS Pro, a desktop form factor x86 NAS with an embedded Linux OS developed in-house by LaCie. With Seagate not having a presence in this space, it was an ideal segment to target with the help of LaCie's expertise. The result of the attempt is the Business Storage 1U rackmount lineup.

The Seagate Business Storage 1U Rackmounts come in 4-bay and 8-bay varieties. The Business Storage lineup also includes 1-4 bay versions based on a Cavium chipset, but the OS running on those is not based on LaCie's NAS OS. There is also a 4-bay Windows Server. The Cavium-chipset based units as well as the Windows Server come in the desktop tower form factor, while the units based on LaCie's OS are all rackmounts.

The specifications of the Seagate Business Storage 8-Bay Rackmount unit being reviewed today are provided below.

Seagate Business Storage 8-Bay 32TB Rackmount (STDP32000100) Specifications
Processor Intel Celeron G1610T (2C/2T @ 2.3 GHz)
Drive Bays 8x 3.5" SATA 6 Gbps HDD [ Populated with 8x ST4000NM033 Constellation® ES.3 SATA 6Gb/s 4-TB Hard Drives ]
Network Links 2x 1 GbE
USB Slots 3x USB 2.0
eSATA Ports None
Maximum Capacity 8-bays
VGA / Console / HDMI VGA
PSU Redundant (2x) 250W
Full Specifications Link Seagate STDP32000100 Specifications (PDF)
Suggested Retail Pricing US $5100

After taking a brief look at our testbed setup and testing methodology for the unit below, we will move on to the hardware and setup impressions. Following that, we will cover performance in single client scenarios and our usual multi-client tests. The final section will cover rebuild times and power consumption numbers while also providing some closing thoughts.

Testbed Setup and Testing Methodology

Our NAS reviews use either SSDs or hard drives depending on the unit under test. While rackmounts and units equipped with 10GbE capabilities use SSDs, the others use hard drives. Despite being a rackmount, the STDP32000100 was evaluated with the bundled drives because of the vendor's market positioning. Evaluation of NAS performance under both single and multiple client scenarios was done using the SMB / SOHO NAS testbed we described earlier.

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
Tertiary Drive OCZ RevoDrive Hybrid (1TB HDD + 100GB NAND)
Other Drives 12 x OCZ Technology Vertex 4 64GB (Offline in the Host OS)
Network Cards 6 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
Network Switch Netgear ProSafe GSM7352S-200

Thank You!

We thank the following companies for helping us out with our NAS testbed:

Hardware and Setup Impressions


View All Comments

  • buffhr - Friday, March 14, 2014 - link

    I can see the merit in a single point of contact, however at 5.1kusd it is overpriced IMO. Sure the disk = roughly50% of the cost but still 2.5k disk-less for a system that does not support SSH and practically has no ecosystem or encryption... Reply
  • Samus - Friday, March 14, 2014 - link

    I can't believe what a hit encryption has on read performance. 25MB/s opposed to 102MB/sec? Holy... Reply
  • extide - Friday, March 14, 2014 - link

    It would be a lot better if they used a CPU with AES-NI Reply
  • max1001 - Friday, March 14, 2014 - link

    Look at the CPU. There's your answer. Reply
  • npz - Friday, March 14, 2014 - link

    Wait, what encryption are you referring to, since this NAS does not support it?

    I think if it did through software, it would still perform very well. 2.3Ghz Ivy Bridge dual core Celeron would still be able to do AES encryption faster than IO to the mechanical disks.
  • CadentOrange - Saturday, March 15, 2014 - link

    The processor doesn't support AES-NI, hence massive speed hit. Reply
  • silverblue - Sunday, March 16, 2014 - link

    Amusingly, AMD's Jaguar line does. Still, it has a single channel memory interface... Reply
  • npz - Sunday, March 16, 2014 - link

    Yes I know. I'm just saying his figures are nowhere to be found in this article and seems to refer to an older Atom instead. I'm sure this CPU would not have much of a performance hit in the NAS if software AES were enabled.


    A Core 2 Duo E4300 can do AES at ~124MB/s
  • npz - Friday, March 14, 2014 - link

    Yeah having no ssh access is huge deal breaker.

    I speculate a reason is to prevent people from enabling features in Linux that Seagate has disabled, like encryption and volume expansion above 12 TB
  • Ammohunt - Thursday, March 20, 2014 - link

    I agree $5k buys alot of jbod that you can hang off an exiting server and configure however you want ZFS, tgtd, SMB, CIFS, NFS etc.. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now