Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Network arrow EonNAS 1100 NAS Network Storage Server
EonNAS 1100 NAS Network Storage Server E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Network
Written by Bruce Normann   
Wednesday, 05 December 2012
Table of Contents: Page Index
EonNAS 1100 NAS Network Storage Server
Closer Look: EonNAS 1100
Insider Details: EonNAS 1100
Technology Details: EonNAS 1100
EonNAS 1100 Features
Hardware Specifications
Software Specifications
NAS Setup and Usage
NAS Testing Methodology
Basic-Disk Test Results
RAID 5 Test Results
Intel NASPT Test Results
Non-Traditional NAS Results
NAS Server Final Thoughts
EonNAS 1100 Conclusion

1GB Single-Disk Test Results

The bottom line for any storage device is the combination of capacity and transfer speed. For a network attached storage server, the differences are all about the infrastructure that is placed around the basic HDD array. Since capacity is something that's easy to define and measure, the real question for any NAS product is how fast will it Read and Write data. For this reason, Benchmark Reviews primarily measures NAS performance as the bandwidth achieved during a file transfer test. The first tests we perform utilize a single 1GB (1000 megabytes / 1,000,000,000 bytes) file in a transfer to and from the NAS.

With all the NAS units operating in single disk mode, many of the units have broadly similar performance. The differences are mostly down to CPU performance in this test, although some of the other infrastructure ICs do have an impact. The EonNAS 1100 is about 10MB/s behind most of the QNAP systems in the single disk read test. It's also about 10 MB/s faster than the ReadyNAS NV+ v2 device, so it's running in the middle of the pack here. The chart looks worse for the EonNAS 1100 than it really is, just because the QNAP's outnumber all the other NAS devices. Most devices performed better on the 1GB Read test with Jumbo Frames enabled, and the EonNAS is no exception, with an average read speed of 75.5 MB/s with Jumbo Frames and 71.8 MB/s without. Most people who buy a 4-bay NAS don't care too much about single disk performance, but it's useful to get an understanding of any possible issues with the basic architecture of the system. The EonNAS 1100 architecture falls behind slightly in Read performance; let's look at Write performance next.

Infortrend_EonNAS_1100_NAS_Server_Basic_1_GB_READ_01.jpg

Moving on to the 1 GB write bandwidth test, the EonNAS 1100 makes a big leap up in performance, especially with Jumbo Frames enabled. Some of the other units also had trouble in this test with the MTU at the normal setting of 1500, and it probably hurt the ReadyNAS NV+ v2 performance, too. With an average write speed of 95.8 MB/s, the EonNAS puts itself solidly in the second tier in 1GB Single-Disk Write performance. The QNAP TS-879U-RP posts the top numbers again, and in general, the Intel Atom-based models are performing better than the Marvell-based units.

Infortrend_EonNAS_1100_NAS_Server_Basic_1_GB_WRITE_01.jpg

Next up is 10 GB (1000 metric megabytes / 10,000,000,000 bytes) file transfer testing. Using the single-disk configuration in each NAS, and a Gigabit Ethernet connection, network throughput will be put to the test, and the effect of any system or hardware caches will be minimized.

10GB Single-Disk Test Results

Examining 10GB basic file transfer speeds, the mid-range QNAP models all got a boost, compared to the 1 GB file transfers. Their read speed went up by approximately 10 MB/s, to a combined average of 95 MB/s. The EonNAS only picked up a few extra MB/s when reading the larger file. Clearly none of these units were bothered by handling very large files, and most got a small boost. Later in our testing, we will look at some other NAS test protocols that feature small file sizes, which is a more common situation for backup applications. Once again, you get none of the advantages of redundancy with a single disk or JBOD configuration, and most NAS users will go for one of the RAID configurations. These figures are not exactly what the average user will experience; those will be seen later in our RAID 5 tests.

Infortrend_EonNAS_1100_NAS_Server_Basic_10_GB_READ_01.jpg

In our 10GB write performance tests, the performance of all the NAS units is similar to their showing with the smaller sized, 1 GB file. The EonNAS 1100 hits a slightly higher performance level, at 74.2/98.4 MB/s with 1500 and 9000 MTU values. What's really impressive here is the performance compared to all the other QNAP models running Intel Atom and Marvell CPUs. The EonNAS 1100 beats all of them at 9000 MTU by at least 15MB/s, which is a considerable margin. Performance without Jumbo Frames still lags behind, only achieving an average write speed of 74.2 MB/s. We'll have to validate this trend, with results from RAID5 testing, but it looks like Jumbo Frames is a key component to getting best performance from the EonNAS 1100.

Infortrend_EonNAS_1100_NAS_Server_Basic_10_GB_WRITE_01.jpg

Next we're going to look at RAID 5 performance, where the EonNAS will have to compete with some heavy-duty challengers from QNAP and Thecus. Since the QNAP TS-259 Pro and TS-219P+ don't support the RAID5 configuration that we normally use to test large format NAS products, we won't be including their results in this next comparison.

NAS Comparison Products



 

Comments 

 
# socalbadboyErnest Ngalula 2012-12-06 16:53
I didn't know Infortrend make NAS... I thought they have always focused on enterprise-level storage? This looks pretty interesting... Can't believe they are using ZFS with dedupe, compression, ZFS checksum on an 1U server that's so cheap.

Very interesting....
Report Comment
 
 
# Me too...Bruce 2012-12-08 18:41
I was surprised myself when I first saw the press release for the new EonNAS 1000 line. THIS is something new, I said to myself, at the time. Then another reader commented that he wished some NAS maker would see the light and start using ZFS. I put 2 & 2 together and said, we have to review this!
Report Comment
 
 
# Self-Made Geekzack 2012-12-06 17:19
great review. my start-up has actually been looking into a ZFS storage solution, but didn't know if it was worth the cost. really glad i read this review, now actually considering trying this product out.
Report Comment
 
 
# Just curiousBruce 2012-12-08 18:43
Were you looking at strictly commercial products or were you considering a DIY solution with FreeNAS, or another open source software?
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