Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Network arrow QNAP TS-419P II NAS Network Storage Server
QNAP TS-419P II NAS Network Storage Server E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Network
Written by Bruce Normann   
Tuesday, 01 November 2011
Table of Contents: Page Index
QNAP TS-419P II NAS Network Storage Server
QNAP v3.4 New Features
Closer Look: QNAP TS-419P II
Insider Details: QNAP TS-419P II
QNAP Turbo NAS Features
QNAP TS-419P II NAS Hardware
QNAP TS-419P II Software
QPKG Center Software Expansion
NAS Testing Methodology
Basic-Disk Test Results
RAID 5 Test Results
NAS System Overhead Measurements
NAS Server Final Thoughts
QNAP TS-419P II Conclusion

Network Terminology

Benchmark Reviews primarily uses metric data measurement for testing storage products, for anyone who is interested in learning the relevant history of this sore spot in the industry, I've included a small explanation below:

The basic unit data measurement is called a bit (one single binary digit). Computers use these bits, which are composed of ones and zeros, to communicate their contents. All files are stored as binary files, and translated into working files by the Operating System. This two number system is called a "binary number system". In comparison, the decimal number system has ten unique digits consisting of zero through nine. Essentially it boils down to differences between binary and metric measurements, because testing is deeply impacted without carefully separating the two. For example, the difference between the transfer time of a one-Gigabyte (1000 Megabytes) file is going to be significantly better than a true binary Gigabyte (referred to as a Gibibyte) that contains 1024 Megabytes. The larger the file used for data transfer, the bigger the difference will be.

Have you ever wondered why your 500 GB hard drive only has about 488 GB once it has been formatted? Most Operating Systems utilize the binary number system to express file data size, however the prefixes for the multiples are based on the metric system. So even though a metric "Kilo" equals 1,000, a binary "Kilo" equals 1,024. Are you confused yet? Don't be surprised, because even the most tech savvy people often mistake the two. Plainly put, the Kilobyte is expressed as 1000 bytes, but it is really comprised of 1,024 bytes.

Most network engineers are not fully aware that the IEC changed the way we calculate and name data chunks when they published the new International Standards back in December 1998. The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) removed the old metric prefixes for multiples in binary code with new prefixes for binary multiples made up of only the first two letters of the metric prefixes and adding the first two letters of the word "binary". For example, instead of Megabyte (MB) or Gigabyte (GB), the new terms would be Mebibyte (MiB) or Gibibyte (GiB). While this is the new official IEC International Standard, it has not been widely adopted yet because it is either still unknown by institutions or not commonly used.

NAS Testing Methodology

All the NAS devices we test cannot accommodate all the different disk configurations, so our current test protocol has been based on two of the most popular setups: a basic (single) disk and RAID-5 configurations. Since this four-bay device easily supports RAID 5; I tested both disk modes this time. During initial setup, the NAS was upgraded to the latest v3.4 firmware by flashing the DOM with binary files on the included CD-ROM. The supplied firmware for the TS-419P II was v3.4.3 (0331T)

Connected directly to the Realtek 8112L Gigabit LAN controller in the test-bench system by a ten-foot CAT6 patch cable, the NAS product receives one test transfer followed by at least three timed transfers. Each test file was sent to the Western Digital Caviar Black 750GB (WD7502AAEX) hard drives installed in the NAS for a timed write test, and that same file was sent back to a Western Digital VelociRaptor 150GB 10,000 RPM (WD1500HLFS) hard drive in the test system to perform a read test. Each test was repeated several times, the high and low values were discarded and the remaining results were recorded and charted.

This is the start of NAS testing where we are going to exclusively use Windows 7 as the testing platform for the host system. The performance differences between Win7 and XP are huge, as we documented in our QNAP TS-259 Pro review. The adoption rate for Win 7 has been very high, and Benchmark Reviews has been using Win 7 in all of our other testing for some time now. It's definitely time to make the jump for NAS products.

QNAP_TS-419P_II_Turbo_NAS_Server_WD_750_in_Tray.jpg

The two transfer tests: read and write, were conducted on each NAS appliance using the 1 GB file and then a 10 GB file. Additionally, a second set of tests were conducted with Jumbo Frame enabled, i.e. the MTU value for the Ethernet controllers was increased from 1500 to 9000. All the NAS products tested to date in the Windows 7 environment have supported the Jumbo Frame configuration. I also include a baseline of sorts, which is the internal file transfer from the Corsair P64 SSD to the Western Digital 150GB VelociRaptor installed on the Intel P55 motherboard SATA connections, where the Intel P55 chipset provides the SATA 3Gb/s interface, and a Marvell 88SE9123 controller provides two ports of SATA 6Gb/s connections.

NAS Comparison Products

Support Equipment

  • (4) Western Digital Caviar Black WD7502AAEX 750GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6Gb/s 3.5"
  • 10-Foot Category-6 Solid Copper Shielded Twisted Pair Patch Cable
  • 1 metric Gigabyte Test File (1 GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes)
  • 10 metric Gigabyte Test File (10 GB = 10,000,000,000 bytes)

Test System

  • Motherboard: ASUS P7P55D-E Pro (1002 BIOS)
  • System Memory: 2x 2GB GSKILL Ripjaws DDR3 1600MHz (7-8-7-24)
  • Processor: Intel Core i5-750 (OC @ 4.0 GHz)
  • CPU Cooler: Prolimatech Megahalems (Delta AFB1212SHE PWM Fan)
  • Video: ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB GDDR5 (Catalyst 8.840.3.0)
  • Drive 1: Corsair P64 SSD, 64GB
  • Drive 2: Western Digital VelociRaptor WD1500HLFS 150GB 10000 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3Gb/s 3.5"
  • Optical Drive: Sony NEC Optiarc AD-7190A-OB 20X DVD Burner
  • Enclosure: CM STORM Sniper Gaming Case
  • PSU: Corsair CMPSU-750TX ATX12V V2.2 750Watt
  • Monitor: SOYO 24"; Widescreen LCD Monitor (DYLM24E6) 1920X1200
  • Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate Version 6.1 (Build 7600)



 

Comments 

 
# RE: QNAP TS-419P II NAS Network Storage ServerRichard Fitzmaurice 2011-12-01 05:17
Excellent article which will require me to read it a second time to gain all the information presented! I thoroughly enjoyed reading your article.

The TS-419P II is a well designed software solution with a wealth of functionality. The case is well made and looks great but uses yesterday's processing hardware. Why USB V3.0, Dual CPU and SATA6 are missing is a turn off for me. SATA6 is probably of little value but it's the industry trend with disk drives and may prove useful in the future. Intel hardware is a plus for me.
Report Comment
 
 
# There's so much there.....Bruce 2011-12-02 07:43
Funny, you should mention having to read it twice. There's so much functionality built into these devices that sometimes I feel like I'm writing two reviews. LOL

USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gb/s are all available on the more high-end QNAP servers. I don't know of any Dual CPU units made by anyone, but if you mean dual-CORE, then that's also available on the pricier units. Most of the "Pro" models have the Dual-Core Intel® Atom? (1.80 GHz) in them. The really hardcore models have a Quad Core Intel Xeon E3-1225 at 3.1GHz Processor or a Dual Core Intel® Core? i3-2120 Processor at 3.3 GHz.
Report Comment
 
 
# Best media NASKeith 2011-12-09 20:34
I have been reading a lot of reviews on Home servers/NAS but really haven't seen any reviewers basically make their recommendations based on useage situation. For example I'm looking to build or buy a homer server that can serve up my media and DVR recordings throughout the house and when I'm on the road. Also it'll be used for photo, video and general back ups.

The software on this unit looks great and has a lot of functionality and great access ability.

For the average home user with a decent amount of tech knowledge, working within a win7 environment at home but an iPhone/iPad on the road what would be better; windows home server or a product like this? And in your opinion would building a box myself with better parts( processor, memory) bet the better option?
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: Best media NASRichard Fitzmaurice 2011-12-11 08:56
Bruce,

Yes, I meant dual core, I know better. I would be happy with an Intel 2120, but never an Atom anything.

Disk drives sure jumped in price due to unfortunate weather!


Keith,

If the sofware was offered separately, the answer would be easy. I'm in much the same position as you. I don't like the processing capability until the price is more than I want to spend.
Report Comment
 
 
# Future of Windows Home ServerBruce 2011-12-11 13:13
I'm sure someone will jump in and tell us how much you can do with tWindows Server (...one of the four versions they sell...), but IMHO, there's a whole lot more dvelopment going on in the NAS world than there is for Windows server. There is a good amount of competition in this sector, and it's driving more and more features into the NAS software packages. Windows server has been pretty much moribound in the same time frame. So, today I like the features that QNAP has to offer, and I suspect that in the near future this trend will accelerate.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: Future of Windows Home ServerRichard Fitzmaurice 2011-12-11 14:18
Bruce,

I totally agree with you. I will probably break down and pay the higher price for improved processing because the software is impressive!
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: RE: Future of Windows Home ServerRichard Fitzmaurice 2011-12-16 06:47
Bruce,

I just now ordered the TS-659 Pro II. Didn't get everything I wanted but got everything I could afford. I will have a toy to play with tomorrow. I should have purchased the TS-659 Pro+ because it's a much better buy, but common sense failed.
Report Comment
 
 
# Hold on to your hats, because...Bruce 2011-12-16 08:01
I just got the QNAP® TS-879U-RP in house, for testing. This thing should COOK! I've got to build a better test platform to mate it with, something with honest-to-God SATA 6G performance.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: QNAP TS-419P II NAS Network Storage ServerAnna 2012-01-21 10:24
When you compare this one to the TS-419P+, is the TS419 II worth the money? Because I doubt between an TS-419P+ and a TS419 II.
Report Comment
 
 
# Depends....Bruce 2012-01-21 13:12
... on what your primary usage is, and if you are going to use it almost exclusively for one thing, or do many things, either singly or all at once. The 25% increase in CPU speed only matters in some use cases. In others, it's not a factor.

What is your intended use(s)?
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: Depends....Anna 2012-01-21 20:19
- Downloading
- Music/movie streaming
- Backup
- Central storage
- Near future hosting my own website
Report Comment
 
 
# In that case....Bruce 2012-01-21 21:34
Depending on how heavy the backups are (are you doing daily backups for 5 machines, let's say...?), I think the TS-419P+ would do the sum total of those things pretty well. The CPU gets hammered during RAID 5 Write activity; that's why the backup tasks are the key differentiator. You need to act quickly, because I think the only TS-419P+ units you will be able to buy are what's left in inventory.

What's the price difference - about $100, right?
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: In that case....Anna 2012-01-22 12:46
Tnx for the info, and yes the price difference is pretty big.
Report Comment
 
 
# Differences in QNAP's lineupBKK 2012-01-22 10:15
Bruce, thank you for a great and comprehensive review. I've been going back/forth researching NAS for a year and it's time to make a decision. I'm trying to get my head around QNAP's line up between 419P II, 439 Pro II+, 459 Pro II - besides the processor and memory are there significant difference really from a functionality stand point? I'm a small business running out of my home, but I have one partner who is remote and ideally I'd like for him to able to use the NAS as a remote file server and access it in a secure manner. We also travel a lot for business so remote access is needed. Intention is to use the NAS as a primary file server (i.e. not having to store everything on the laptop HDD) and a consolidated backup server for the various laptops (3 laptops and 1 desktop, backups daily or no later than every 3 days); the NAS would then be backed up to S3 or some other cloud backup service. Also looking to use the NAS to store all of our digital photos (RAW and JPG format). Given that, is the 419P II a good solution? Or should I be considering one of the other QNAP products? One potential use in the medium term is to use the NAS as a web app server for product demos (but we wouldn't use it for production deployment of the product however). Budget is around $2000 with the HDDs. Appreciate your sage advice.
Report Comment
 
 
# They sure do make a lot of them....Bruce 2012-01-22 15:27
Those are all good choices. The features that you get as you move up the ladder probably don't matter much to you, except maybe Real Time Remote Replication, since you have somebody whos more or less permantly at a rempte location. This feature is available on all the Intel-based units. The other features you get with the high-end models, are primarily focused on advanced networking schems, such as: VMware Certification, Citrix Certified, Microsoft Hyper-V and Windows 2008 Failover Cluster. It doesn't sound like you need that, yet. The one other thing Intel units have is AES 256-bit Volume-based Encryption, but it's quite slow with the Atom CPU, and it may not be an issue for you, depending on your physical security situation.

Now, the OTHER thing you get as you spend more mony is WRITE speed. Take a look at QNAPs published write speeds:

Write Performance (MB/s) - Dual-Core Atom: 107, Single-Core Atom: 88, Marvell 2.0GHz: 75, Marvell 1.6GHz: 45

This has a direct impact on yur backup speeds, although the laptops may be the limiting factor anyways, if they have the typical 5400 RPM HDDs in them. They use less power, so it's quite common to use them instead of the 7200 RPM models.

The other thing you get for your $$ is USB 3.0. This may not have any impact on your intended usage, but for some, USB 2.0 is a deal-breaker.

Of course, you also know that QNAP released a couple new models at CES, right. I tell you, I can't keep up with them... LOL

Bottom line, like Anna above, I think your expectation for backup performance is the key discriminator here. That's the primary area (of the ones you listed), where spending more will get you more.
Report Comment
 
 
# Thanks!BKK 2012-01-23 16:08
Bruce, thanks for the advice. You make a good point about the real-time remote replication. I should look into that.

Presently I don't need the virtualization features.

Are the new models announced at CES listed in their site? I would assume so, as their site indicates the 459 Pro II as a new model.

And thanks for the link below.
Report Comment
 
 
# Forgot to sayBruce 2012-01-22 15:29
Here is a direct comparison between the units you mentioned:

qnap.com/images/products/comparison/Comparison_4BayNAS.html
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: QNAP TS-419P II NAS Network Storage ServerKeith 2012-01-29 07:52
A great point was made by Richard above regarding the software side of it (new features, etc...). When compared to say windows home server, which doesn't seem to be getting full attention from MS, if you had to make a nas purchase based solely on software or os , what would be the choice?
Report Comment
 
 
# Easy ChoiceBruce 2012-01-29 16:00
There's no doubt that the major NAS players are continuing to drive more and more and better features into the NAS side of things. QNAP just release version 3.6 at CES this month, which is two releases beyond what I tested in this review.
Report Comment
 
 
# 419P ii does have USB 3.0Ahmed 2012-04-09 16:34
I just purchased the Qnap 419p ii today and to my surprise it does have USB 3.0 ports! Two of the slots on the back are USB3.0

I first saw it on the box then when I opened and looked at the back of the unit, two of the ports are labeled USB3.0 The quick start guide also says USB3. This is very odd since their website and all reviews say only USB2.0

I do not know if the new units are shipping with USB 3 or is it Canadian versions. I am in Canada. Anyways I am thrilled. This unit offers so much for the price.
Report Comment
 
 
# That's Cool....Bruce 2012-04-09 18:02
That is a VERY NICE surprise!

Usually when the "Manufacturer reserves the right to update the product specifications" it's to take cost out of the product.
Report Comment
 
 
# Ditto the USB 3Rich 2012-05-05 09:47
I just got one of these in Germany and two of the three USB's on the back have been changed to USB3. The remaining USB 2 on the back is used by the UPS to trigger shutdown. No idea why they haven't updated their website as this resolves one of my major tradeoffs when I was selecting this unit.
Report Comment
 

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews
QNAP Network Storage Servers

Follow Benchmark Reviews on FacebookReceive Tweets from Benchmark Reviews on Twitter