QNAP vs Synology - Latest?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by eightball8, Aug 10, 2017.

  1. eightball8 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    #1
    What's the latest on the QNAP vs Synology buying choice?

    Looking at a 451+ vs. DS416Play.
    Home/small business - use case mostly file sharing and a massive itunes library played through SONOS.

    There will be a little video but not much.

    Feels like QNAP has the better hardware but MAC community prefers Synology.

    Which way should I go?

    (I know WD HD Red Pro)
     
  2. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #2
    I stepped away from using. Drobo connected to a Mac mini a few years back and after a lot of research went with a qnap. Haven’t looked back since. Have updated my original qnap can’t remember exact model off the top of my head.

    It’s tied into my network running plex etc which is its main purpose but I’ve the option to direct connect via TB for quicker file transfers should I wish.

    I’ve no issues with connecting to the qnap either way.
     
  3. Maxx Power macrumors 6502a

    Maxx Power

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    #3
    I have both brands. As for the hardware, Qnap provides a better bang for the buck. For the software and user interface, I have had far less complaints with Synology, where it just seems to work and is way more polished than Qnap. My other devices which uses services provided by these NASes never have an issue with Synology, whether it is name resolution, DDNS, DLNA, SMB or cloud-sync features. On my Qnap, I have had quite a few issues with DLNA (being recognized and properly utilized by my other devices), name resolution and cloud-sync. Your mileage may vary.
     
  4. techwarrior macrumors 6502a

    techwarrior

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Location:
    Colorado
    #4
    I have been happy with QNAP for several years, TS212P (2 disk). Use it for file sharing and media library to stream movies to AppleTV via Plex and Infuse. They seem to do a pretty good job of keeping things up to date as far as security and such. It is a bit underpowered, but fits my need. Newer models and 4 disk units are a bit more powerful and can support running VM and some even have HDMI for direct connections to TV\Monitor.

    I wouldn't recommend NAS for storage of large video or audio files you edit regularly, NAS is kind of slow compared to direct attached storage unless you go with 10Gb ethernet and SSD cache models and the surrounding network gear to support it. But, for long term storage with RAID, it fits the bill. Don't skimp on drives, be sure to get NAS grade drives.

    Never owned Synology, but hear good things about their line of products. Don't think you can go wrong with either of these if you are simply looking for the basics. So, it may come down to price and availability. SmallNet Builder has done a couple of head to head reviews and don't seem to strongly favor one over the other. Latest review here.

    I did use QNAP for Time Machine backups, it was a bit hit or miss. Now use Time Capsule for that, and QNAP for PC backups (my wife still prefers PC).
     
  5. DesignProMac macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2017
    #5
    I've been using my QNAP TS-269 2-Bay NAS and it's been great as a backup / file server.

    Best of luck!
     
  6. MacDann macrumors 6502a

    MacDann

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Can see the end of the Earth from here
    #6
    While I don't own either, I researched them both thoroughly a year or so ago during an effort to replace a Drobo. To mirror the previous comment, even though you don't mention it, I would definitely steer away from Drobo. Mine was great while it worked, but their proprietary firmware wreaked havoc with the drives I chose and as a result it ended up being a large doorstop.

    Both QNAP and Synology make excellent NAS solutions, and as others have suggested, drive selection will play a significant part in performance. This is not a place where you want to skimp.

    I ended up building a Freenas server rather than going the NAS route, and I'm glad I did. I have better speeds than most NAS products with far more flexibility in management and added features that might or might not be supported by a NAS. Because I was able to source most of the components as cast-offs from a friend who does bleeding edge gaming systems I got a decent CPU and memory and only had to buy a MB and nice case. However, you can still build up a perfectly functional Freenas server for about the same as what a NAS and a complement of drives for it would cost.

    Just tossing this out for consideration....

    MacDann
     
  7. svkaster macrumors newbie

    svkaster

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2017
    #7
    Hi, I am new ti iMac, but do have the same Snap TS212P and I seem to not get this NAS drive shown in Time Machine. How to get this QNAP see nas backup drive? I do see my attached drives but I don't want to backup on a single disk. The NAS is put in RAID 1 so mirrored . Thanks for the advice
     
  8. MacDann macrumors 6502a

    MacDann

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Can see the end of the Earth from here
    #8
    You really need to post this in the appropriate forum, as this one isn't for support. You'll get a better response that way.

    Mac Accessories is probably the place to start...

    MacDann
     
  9. eightball8 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    #9
    Thanks for the FreeNAS thought.

    I don't really want something that I have to actively manage. What's the on ramp like for FreeNAS vs one of these boxes?

    I also sort of like the idea that I could pick up a Synology and build up the disks as time went by without having to rebuild reformat copy over the whole thing.

    Does their proprietary raid (SHR? I think) work as advertised?

    Leaning Synology but I do have an old rackmount PC case that I could easily repurpose for probably less than either of these.

    Hmmm......
     
  10. MacDann macrumors 6502a

    MacDann

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Can see the end of the Earth from here
    #10

    I'm not sure what you mean. Are you talking about the learning curve to use FreeNAS?

    It's very simple. If you've got basic PC management skills (even better, Linux skills) you'll have no problem with it. It has a really good GUI and excellent online support and documentation. And even better, it's free!

    http://www.freenas.org

    MacDann
     
  11. mijail macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    #11
    So what you're saying is that it's a time sink? ;)

    (I'm joking... kinda...)
     
  12. Lioness~, Aug 16, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2017

    Lioness~ macrumors 6502a

    Lioness~

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2017
    Location:
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    #12
    Bought a DS416Play few months ago. Very pleased with it.
    My 1st NAS so I'm still getting used to it, it's fun.
    Started with 2x6TB Raid1 and will put in 2 more 6TB's (1 at a time) and make it Raid5.

    Still have a some external HD's that is in good use, so as long as they are in good health,
    they will add to backup. But NAS will take over as it goes.

    I have Seagate Ironwolf. Heard good things about them too.
    Got a really good price so, that's why I didn't pick WD RED.

    Buy it :D
     
  13. shaunp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    #13
    I've used both on Mac and PC and while Synology has the best software experience, and quieter hardware, their support is pretty much non-existent. They tend to use external power bricks which are proprietary and expensive so if they break it's hard getting another one and forget going down the support route even if your still in warranty as they just ignore you.

    QNAP for the most part use internal PSU's which seem to be (touch wood) a bit more resilient. Can't speak for the support as I've not had to use it, but reading around various forums it seems to be better than Synology. I would in both cases however buy from Amazon and use them for support. They gave me a full refund after 18 months because they couldn't give me a replacement.

    As for the software there's not that much in it and Sonos works on them both. My money would still be on QNAP because their hardware is better.
     
  14. jlc1978 macrumors 68000

    jlc1978

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    #14
    I have an older Synology that has been bullet proof for over 3 years. The only thing I wish it had was the ability to stream to iTunes without using a separate server; the Synology's processor doesn't have the horsepower to run an uTunes server.

    Definitely go for server grade disks. I started with regular disks and they died after about two years. Both failed so the RAID feature was useless, fortunately I make a separate back up just in case. I'd also buy 2x as much space as you think you need as I found myself filling up the disk pretty quickly as I converted all my DVDs to video files.
     
  15. techwarrior macrumors 6502a

    techwarrior

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Location:
    Colorado
    #15
    Older FW had a Time Machine configuration page under Networking settings, seems to have been dropped in newer versions. I still see theQNAP in TM disks on my Mac, but moved to Time Capsule some time ago and removed all of the sparse bundle images at that time. The newer Hybrid Backup Sync app seems to have TM settings, so maybe they removed it from the base OS to an add-on app.

    As MacDann suggested, look at other forums for more details. QNAP has its own forum that may be most helpful.
     
  16. AFEPPL macrumors 68030

    AFEPPL

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2014
    Location:
    England
    #16
    I currently run two Synology 416s with replication of key data between the two seamlessly.
    Unfortunately i can't offer a real world comparison between the two brands, i can only say the two Synology devices i have operate with full uptime and have been completely flawless in every way.

    The reason i went with Synology was the OS and the bonding for the NICs (you may be able to do that on the 451 too now) but it gave me additional throughput. I also live the look of the 416 better, so shallow yes. but I'm honest!.
     
  17. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #17
    I use a Synology four disk unit running Raid five. I have been happy with it and doubled its size a while back by simply replacing one disk at a time and let the Raid five capability do its thing.

    It takes little or no management and have some very useful apps including backup software. I also use it for time machine backup and have never experienced any issues with this.
     
  18. techwarrior macrumors 6502a

    techwarrior

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Location:
    Colorado
    #18
    Most Ethernet switches and routers of the personal line (unmanaged) see the two NIC separate and can't aggregate the traffic. To take full advantage of NIC teaming, the network gear must also support it.
     
  19. MacDann macrumors 6502a

    MacDann

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Can see the end of the Earth from here
    #19
    Heh. All joking aside, I rarely ever have to log into my FreeNAS box. I currently run six 2GB Hitachi NAS hard drives in it for storage, and a 64GB OWC SSD for the boot drive (you can run FreeNAS from a USB stick as small as 32GB, I believe.)

    I have two volumes, one that's my Time Machine volume for my Mac Pro and a smaller volume that's used for a PLEX media server.

    I have never had down time with this in nearly 2 years of operation. I get alerts if a drive is failing, and the ability to hot swap and rebuild in a very short time. The GUI is detailed and intuitive, and I've never had a difficult time with navigating it or finding what I need. Their online forums are great as is the support for a lot of third party plugins, such as PLEX. And there is native Time Machine support in the OS as well.

    MacDann
     
  20. AFEPPL macrumors 68030

    AFEPPL

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2014
    Location:
    England
    #20
    Correct, but my 10Gbe switches handle it fine. YMMV.
    My whole backbone between floors is 10GBe with 1GBe Switches in rooms where the streaming devices connect.
     
  21. Scott Robinson macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2014
    #21
    Synology UI is a great as the hardware is overpriced. I had a 212j for many years and loved it but was massively underpowered. If you have the inclination buy a HP Microserver G8 and turn it into a Synology box https://xpenology.com/forum/ . Update the processor and you can have a Xeon powered 4 bay for about about £250.
     
  22. AFEPPL, Aug 16, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2017

    AFEPPL macrumors 68030

    AFEPPL

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2014
    Location:
    England
    #22
    Synology do a 6 core Xeon unit with 200000 IOPs if needed.

    You could go for an enterprise class array too, but do you really need to?
    As with all things what's the workflow, what is the intent of the user/s. "music and a little video"... you could do that without breaking a sweat.
     
  23. techwarrior macrumors 6502a

    techwarrior

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Location:
    Colorado
    #23
    sweet setup
     
  24. Scott Robinson macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2014
    #24
    User intent... From my experience the Synology boxes have a limited life. After a few years of use my box would no longer run the latest OS and eventually that would make Plex un-updateable and incompatible with my roku box (okay so a NowTV with Plex installed). This was always an issue. The 212j was woefully underpowered when new. There are solutions which would provide an upgradable box that is a lot more powerful for the money. I wasn't suggesting a 6-core monster. A low-powered XEON dual-core is more energy efficient than a Celeron and more powerful even for simply using Plex and file storage for a small family. But it money weren't an issue (and I want craving for a hobby project) I'd go genuine Synology.
     
  25. Tech198 macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Australia, Perth
    #25
    I've been using QNAP for a few years (old model) though.. Still ok though.. TS-420 (very old model)


    Apart from iTunes not preserving edited files direct editing on NAS, (this could be an iTunes issue), then its either Nas is a good backup solution...
     

Share This Page