NAS or Server? Help me Decide!

greciandelts on 06/09/2013 - 14:08

Tossing up between Netgear ReadyNAS 104 4-Bay 16TB max. NAS Storage Diskless RN10400-100AJS on sale at shopping express for $289 or a HP MICROSERVER AMD N54L from ksonline for $339.

I'm torn between the 8tb capacity of the microsever against the 16tb capacity of the readyNAS. The plan was to load synology OS onto the microserver and run it as a NAS, possibly utilizing the server functionality at a later date (as well as having the flexibility of additional ports) . I have a feeling if i unload 289 for the readynas and have a need for further server trans coding functionality later on i am going to have to fork more money to have the capabilities.

thoughts, opinions would be appreciated. Power consumption isn't a huge concern but the capacity between the two is more the worry.

Poll Options

  • 2
    Netgear ReadyNAS 104 4-Bay 16TB max. NAS Storage Diskless RN10400-100AJS
  • 14
    HP MICROSERVER AMD N54L
Computing

Comments

  • PissLUR on 06/09/2013 - 14:31

    8tb capacity for microserver? wrong wrong wrong.

    it can be configured to handle 6 x 3 or 4 TB.

  • Flyingmoo on 06/09/2013 - 14:40

    Yeah you can fit 6 3.5inch drives in a Microserver without much effort.
    At 4TB each if you go max that is 24TB.

    Plus you can squeeze an SSD into the case too. I have a mircoserver and love it

  • ho-ly phuc on 06/09/2013 - 14:52
    +1

    Go with the microserver, it's a no-brainer really. Aside from price, the microserver wins hands down on all categories.

  • meroveus on 06/09/2013 - 15:09

    Don't have any 4TB disks yet, but 3TB HDs work fine in my microserver.

    The big advantage of the microserver over the readynas is it is much more flexible in that you can install up to 16GB of ram, run any distro or OS, and install whatever cards you want that fit the slots.
    I'm running an old original microserver with 8GB ram, 64-bit CentOS and have the remote monitoring kit installed.

    The only minus to the microservers is you don't have a whole lot of CPU grunt to play with if running VMs, but the readynas 104 is even weaker in that regard.

  • OZBer on 06/09/2013 - 16:00

    Can confirm that N54L works with 3T hard drives with no issue. Currently, I have 2x2TB + 2X3TB in it, totaling 10TB. You do have to spend extra money on RAM or USB3 card. But I love the flexibility as [meroveus] mentioned. But wait for Shopping Express's deal. I paid $269 for it with some harddrive combo deal several weeks ago. You'd be so keen to buy some harddrives anyway.

  • greciandelts on 06/09/2013 - 16:13

    thanks guys!

  • _Bruce_ on 06/09/2013 - 16:14

    Only reason to pick the dedicated NAS is if you want a simple 'just work' solution.

  • greciandelts on 06/09/2013 - 16:31

    Sidebar: anyone know an alternatives but similar spec to the n54l? Shopping express deal is not available anymore obviously, anyone have some alternative suggestions I can get a good micro server and some storage for under $350?

  • flyingtrapeze on 06/09/2013 - 16:35

    my microserver has 4x4TB = 16TB running ESXi 5.1

  • birnie on 06/09/2013 - 17:13

    If you're up for buying a few items, such as the server and a few drives, i wuldn't hesitate sending S.Exp a message to see if he could do the specials anyway.
    …or ask when the next one is.

  • greciandelts on 06/09/2013 - 17:15

    Done that already. No discount on the n54L as stocks are low

  • p1 ama on 06/09/2013 - 18:02

    To be honest if you're asking this question, then you should go with the microserver.

    NAS is more for people who want a plug and play type experience where you just set it up and forget about it. If you're someone who likes to tinker…etc. You'd be better off with a microserver. It will also perform better than a NAS and you can install Windows Home Server or any other OS on it, which will be better than a NAS firmware. If you're a student and you have access to Dreamspark, you might be able to get a copy of Windows Server 2012 as part of that.

    Also a microserver will be more expandable, you can set it up as a web server…etc. later on if you're interested in that. In terms of capacity, go for an SSD boot drive + 4 x 3TB or 4TB WD Red or Seagate NAS HDDs in RAID 5 and you'll have plenty of storage + redundancy.

  • KingstonTheNotSoWise on 06/09/2013 - 22:56

    I went with a NAS, originally had the RND4000 but it went faulty and they replaced me with the RN10400, I just went with the NAS because it was a quick and simple thing. All I do is stream videos from it and that's about it, but I wanted the addition of redundancy.

  • scotty on 06/09/2013 - 23:47

    I bought a QNAP a while a ago, and ended up running an almost full blown Debian in a chroot directory. Yes a NAS requires minimum setup to get going, but once you have something running permanently at home you would want it to do more than just idling at the corner when you are not using it. I wish I've got a Microserver…

  • netsurfer on 07/09/2013 - 09:27

    A microserver gives you more flexibility later on. However, you do need to spend time to set it up initially. You basically need to setup the server as a file server.

    I do wish HP update their low end microservers to include SATA3 ports and USB 3.0 ports. An HDMI or DVI would also be good.

    The people I know who have NAS setup at their homes generally wired up their houses with Ethernet cable (so there are ports everywhere in their houses). As I don't have that kind of setup at my place, I generally use USB3/eSATA external hard drives. NAS via wifi is simply too slow for me.

    • _Bruce_ on 07/09/2013 - 13:40

      NAS via wifi is simply too slow for me.

      NAS via gig ethernet is too slow for me! Why does 10 have to be so expensive?

      • TheGMan on 07/09/2013 - 15:44

        I dunno… I run RAID10 set up across gigabit, constantly pull through data at 120MB/s. Its actually not much slower than having a drive in your computer anyway.

        • _Bruce_ on 07/09/2013 - 17:24

          You realise that 120MB/s (960mbps) is the limit of gigabit? That would be why the rate is pretty constant.

  • imolared on 07/09/2013 - 16:38

    I have 3 N40L's and 2 ReadyNAS NV+ V2 for my home ESX lab. Wish I could go back in time and bought all Micro server's instead.

  • leeroys_dad on 07/09/2013 - 17:09

    i just set up an old pc as a hdtv next to the tv. was considering buying a microserver (probably the asus revo or something) but figured the upfront cost was not worth it given i have a functioning pc ready to go.

    with the microserver, it means the missus can watch catch up tv via the browser - a lot of devices struggle with this e.g. android. we use splashtop app to control it using tablet/mobile. easy :-)

  • dosada on 08/09/2013 - 01:08

    I am troubled with the same situation. What is wrong with taking some old computer and just set it up as microserver? A core 2 duo should do the job just perfectly with 4GB Ram and for sure can be bought for around 100.-?

    Anyone any thoughts?

    • netsurfer on 08/09/2013 - 07:06

      You certainly can use an old computer and set it up as a server (actually a good idea). A microserver is generally smaller (it uses a mini ITX like motherboard). It also comes with a CPU with lower power requirement. Also, changing the hard drives physically is relatively easy (due to the case design). Are those 3 minor advantages enough to entice you to buy one? If not, then an old PC is the way to go.

      • megadeth on 08/09/2013 - 18:23

        it uses a mini ITX like motherboard

        Can the N54L or N40L take a regular mITX mobo and be upgraded?

        It looks like the $$$ are being charged principally for the customised casing here.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join