Help deciding between Synology or Qnap NAS

[Alpha Centauri]

Hi all. I've canned the idea of using DAS for TM backups but need help deciding which system to go for.

I've identified that perhaps a 4-5 bay NAS will be the best option for expand-ability and listed some examples below from both, but welcome further suggestions. My rsearch on models has been heaviliy Synology based, so perhaps there's other units from Qnap better suited. Outlined under those four links are some pros and cons for both.

1. https://www.amazon.com/Synology-4-Bay-DiskStation-DS923-Diskless/dp/B0BM7KDN6R/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2YCO1JOJDNUTW&keywords=synology+923+&qid=1693478017&sprefix=synology+923+,aps,180&sr=8-1&th=1 (released 11/2022) (DS 923+ = 4 bay, 4GB internal RAM, €600).

OR


2. https://www.amazon.com/Synology-5-bay-DiskStation-DS1522-Diskless/dp/B0B4DFBRZV/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3I527TFSFDDSL&keywords=synology+1522+&qid=1693478268&sprefix=1522,aps,203&sr=8-1&th=1 (released 06/2022) (DS 1522+ = 5bay, 8GB internal RAM, €720).

Similar QNAP variants:

3. https://www.amazon.com/QNAP-TS-464-8G-US-High-Performance-Quad-core-Connectivity/dp/B0BQ5TWCL8/ref=sr_1_1?crid=187XW0TVRWAN9&keywords=qnap+ts-464&qid=1693478585&sprefix=ts+464,aps,223&sr=8-1&th=1 (released 12/2022) (TS-464 = 4bay, 8GB internal RAM, €640).

OR

4. https://www.amazon.com/QNAP-TS-473A-8G-US-High-Speed-Connectivity-Diskless/dp/B092228MCV (released 03/2021) (TS-473A = 4bay, 8GB internal RAM, €750).


As far as I can tell both QNAP models support RAIDz2 with QTS5.1 (I've been advised to look out for this).

From my research thus far ALL four options have NVMe m.2 capability, although only the QNAP has caching and data pooling (Synology has pooling with proprietary NVMe memory, still. Then there's off course the 2.5GbE vs 1GbE differences as stock configuration. ECC memory appears to be stock with the Synology, and "can" be retrofitted on the Qnap, that's at least how I understood it from their marketing blurb. I should add that at this time the NAS will only act as a TM backup device over my WiFi network with my 2TB MBP. So either RAID z2 or SHR but capability to have the one drive set aside internally for the offsite location for me to rotate.

Bearing in mind I have zero NAS experience it seems that the Synology UI is much more user friendly for a beginner BUT the QNAP hardware appears so much better in every way, so it makes it a tough decision with manufacturer to go with. I think it's all about navigating the initial set-up in my case so perhaps both OS would be fine. Indeed option #2 and #4 I listed seem like the more solid variants for nearly similar price points, though perhaps there are more 4 bay QNAP models I've missed. I've included the US Amazon links but the € price points that are currently applicable.

I'd perhaps be interested to read your feedback on which of those two manufacturer (following this post), and models listed, to go with. With the Synology it would definitely be the DS 1522+ and indeed the hardware of the TS-473A appears to be very solid and well situated in base configuration. Overall the QNAP compatibility chart for 3rd party HDD and 2.5" SSDs seems quite large and not as proprietary specific as the Synology one. The included CPUs in all of these models, well, there I'm out of my knowledge depth and I assume for purely (for now) TM use, it may not really matter at all.

Cheers

 

[southerndoc]

Synology offers more in my opinion and has had less security incidents. However, they are moving toward a closed ecosystem and it's really annoying. All kinds of warnings pop up if you don't use Synology branded memory, HDDs, etc.

 

[Alpha Centauri]

Synology offers more in my opinion and has had less security incidents. However, they are moving toward a closed ecosystem and it's really annoying. All kinds of warnings pop up if you don't use Synology branded memory, HDDs, etc.

Yes yes, I've closely compared the drive compatibility charts between both. Synology has no supported 2.5" SATA SSDs, except their own Enterprise NAS one. It does make some sense (to an extent), QNAP goes the opposite way and supports some low grade i.e. Samsung QVO consumer drives.

Anyhoo, I'll be looking at NAS 3.5" HDDs once I decide on the model. For sure Synology enables some options only when propitiatory parts are used, be it HDD or NVMe. It's unfortunate that Qnap only supplies std memory fitted with the option to remove all and buy ECC. That's something that Synology has already. Do people believe that this is a vital deal breaker for data integrity verification?

I know, I'm reading multiple stories over the last years of Qnap's NAS units being compromised. That's quite scary.

 

[Rnd-chars]

I've been a fan of Synology's NAS systems and routers and haven't any complaints based on my current experience. If given the choice between "secure but proprietary" (Synology) and "insecure but more open" (QNAP), I'd opt for the former every time.

That said, if I were looking at options just for Time Machine backups, I might consider buying a few large, external SSDs and rotating through them. Backups would be significantly faster, require less power and occupy less physical space. It would also be simpler to administer and perhaps even cost less while still providing a level of redundancy. Also, if one of your Time Machine backups becomes corrupted in this scenario, you'd still have other TM backups on your other drive(s). However, if this happened with your NAS, you're going to spend some time resolving it and maybe fixing it.

 

[Alpha Centauri]

>I've been a fan of Synology's NAS systems and routers and haven't any complaints based on my current experience. If given the choice between "secure but proprietary" (Synology) and "insecure but more open" (QNAP), I'd opt for the former every time.<

I guess that's why Qnap brought in the ZFS based OS with QuTS hero recently. I know very little about this but have been advised to only get a Qnap that can run this OS.

That said, if I were looking at options just for Time Machine backups, I might consider buying a few large, external SSDs and rotating through them. Backups would be significantly faster, require less power and occupy less physical space. It would also be simpler to administer and perhaps even cost less while still providing a level of redundancy. Also, if one of your Time Machine backups becomes corrupted in this scenario, you'd still have other TM backups on your other drive(s). However, if this happened with your NAS, you're going to spend some time resolving it and maybe fixing it.

Tbh I looked at those options. Ordered NVMe SSDs+enclosures but limited to 2TB for cloned backups. Then also a 4TB SATA +enclosure. But often these aren't reliable from the controller side, die with no forewarning and at 2x the size of the internal, just too small for TM use. Larger 8TB QLC nand SATA SSDs are even more unreliable. Adding that this laptop isn't desk-bound and travels (in the apartment) so then to set manual schedules to backup rotating drives, purely as DAS will probably work initially. Then one forgets, becomes lazy, etc But yes, here in the EU, adding 4-5 decent sized 3.5" HDDs and buying the NAS itself will easily cost double the price of a DAS solution with multiple drives.

Have you had many TM corruptions? I do realize a NAS over WiFi will be much slower and louder than a DAS solution BUT it would be automated. I'd only really need to intervene by rotating one drive for offsite storage. If it was a desktop, the option would be obvious.

 

[Alpha Centauri]

Is ECC memory indispensable for verification in a NAS?

I mentioned that Synology has ECC standard, whilst Qnap has only the option to fit it retrospectively (if I read the specs correctly).

 

[370zulu]

I know that this a very late reply. But if you are considering ECC ram as part of the level components you want, you might want to give TrueNAS a look. They are built with more business grade components and their underlying operating systems have an option for Linux or BSD. Just a thought.

 

[SmittyKen12]

@AlphaCentauri Same Situation for me now…what did you ever decide on?

Advice? Anyone?

Thanks in advance

 

[Alpha Centauri]

@AlphaCentauri Same Situation for me now…what did you ever decide on?

Advice? Anyone?

Thanks in advance

I did a 180 and entirely canned the idea of a NAS. But that's more due to the limitation of running cables to a room where I wouldn't hear the 3'5 HDD's churning away. Secondly, is that my (now) older Belkin mesh routers aren't quite reliable enough and didn't want to risk a corruption during writing.

I ended up with DAS: 3 NVM's and 1 HDD, enclosures bought individually. Some for Time Machine and some for Super Duper (cloning), and one kept offsite. Actually restored all from a repaired MBP and all went well.

Had I however 100% reliable mesh routers and/ or ability to hide Ethernet cables, I would have likely bought the Synology for it's UI. But either way would also have needed another drive for off site.