QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage Server E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Network
Written by Olin Coles   
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Table of Contents: Page Index
QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage Server
QNAP Turbo NAS Features
QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Hardware
QNAP TS-459 Pro Software
QPKG Center Software Expansion
Closer Look: QNAP TS-459 Pro
QNAP v3 User Interface
NAS Testing Methodology
Basic-Disk Test Results
RAID-5 NAS Test Results
NAS Server Final Thoughts
QNAP TS-459 Pro Conclusion

QNAP v3 User Interface

QNAP has recently launched the v3 Graphical User Interface on their Turbo NAS servers. As a long-time NAS product tester, my experiences with the many GUIs used on the server products has been quite extensive. For the past three years, which is essentially the time period NAS products have gained in popularity to the point where network administrators consider them mainstream appliances, the one company that has always set the standard for software and menu navigation has been QNAP. So should it surprise me that a new version of their already-popular software interface was even better than the last?

QNAP is equally impressed, and has launched a demo site especially for the v3 GUI firmware, and as of this writing a new v3.2 beta firmware is available with expanded functionality. If you're considering a QNAP NAS product, I highly recommend that you browse over the demo site to get a better understanding of how nice the new GUI is.


The very first thing I noticed different once I updated the firmware was a new Administration logon screen. For a moment, I thought that I had logged into my media server, which has a similar iPhone-ish feel to it. The QNAP v3 User Interface borrows the nice rounded GUI design made popular by the Apple smart phone, and adds a myriad of sub-menus behind it.


Finding what you need has never been so easy! Whenever I test NAS products, the very first thing I must do (after updating the firmware) is to configure network settings and build the drive array. Usually this takes a few minutes of searching through the menu, even the older QNAP v2 GUI took some time, but the latest navigation interface is unbelievably easy to work with.


While many of the new aspects behind QNAP's v3 Graphical User Interface are cosmetic, it's nice to have the ability to customize the interface and build a color theme that best suites your mood. Normally I wouldn't pay this much mind, but when you work in the GUI so much that it becomes a regular stop on your Web Favorites list, it's nice to have a things tuned to your own needs. QNAP offers a live video demonstration of the v3 firmware GUI for those wanting more hands-on.



# Benchmark with 2 x gbit bonding^-Super_Treje-^ 2010-03-22 23:58
can have a test with two network cards joined together to double the performance?
gbit + gbit = 2 gbit lan connection
Report Comment
# RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage ServerOlin Coles 2010-03-23 06:56
Network adapters don't work like that, so it can't be done (on any computer).
Report Comment
# RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage ServerJturco 2010-03-23 08:29
I notice there are no Windows Home Servers used in your comparisons. Is there value in looking at these devices in comparison to the NAS units tested? It would be a good data point as these devices are avaliable, have comprable features, and competitivly priced.
Report Comment
# RE: RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage ServerOlin Coles 2010-03-23 20:40
You've got to consider the costs involved. For $900 before hard drives, you get everything needed for a full-fledged server with the QNAP NAS. With a Windows box, you've got to buy the software and licenses, buy the hardware, and build the computer. The cost will be nearly double, without the drives.
Report Comment
# RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage Server^-Super_Treje-^ 2010-03-23 12:54
actually not true because under Linux you can use the same network cards together ( "bonding"), moving at speed 2 Gbit / s
Report Comment
# Rare exceptionOlin Coles 2010-03-23 13:00
With the exception of Linux bonding, PCs and the NAS itself will not support this feature. I'm not aware of another NAS product that allows for this, either. Additionally, you'd need network appliances that can accept greater than 1Gb Ethernet LAN connections. Presently, only 10Gb will do this to my knowledge.
Report Comment
# RE: Rare exceptionBarry 2010-05-17 19:44
Netgear ReadyNAS Pro will bind the two gigabit interfaces
Report Comment
# Netgear ReadyNas Pro^-Super_Treje-^ 2010-05-17 23:26
yes but the netgear can not exceed 50 MB / S because it inside a Windows operating system!
Report Comment
# Netgear doesn't run Windows OSaponcel 2010-11-12 13:06
Netgear runs NETGEAR RAIDiator Operating System:

Report Comment
# RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage ServerJturco 2010-03-24 06:18
If you look at HP's Line of MediaServers I think the costs are comperable to the NAS systems. If you look at using an Old PC and reconfiguring it to host a WHS system the costs could be much better than the NAS.

For purposes of evaluation and comparison only the packaged WHS systems like HP or Asus could be compared to the NAS systems. It would be impossiable to quantify the wide variation of surplus "Old PC" configurations and evaluate performance. It would also be interesting to look at a New Build cost for a WHS box using low-cost components.
Report Comment
# RE: RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage ServerOlin Coles 2010-03-24 07:12
I suppose that if all you wanted to do was share files, there are several less-expensive ways to do it... including much more affordable NAS devices that don't offer as many features. Keep in mind that the QNAP TurboNAS series brings a lot more than simple file sharing to the table... just take a look at the firmware demo.
Report Comment
# RE: RE: RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage ServerJturco 2010-03-24 07:54
Ditto for the WHS...It is a Windows Server 2003 core and performs backups, serves media, and uses a more efficient method of file redunduncy rather than a RAID 5/6 setup (definetly a debatable point to say it is equilivant in security).

The HP includes an iTunes server and Twonky media...it can host a website, FTP, print server, and remote access any capable machines on the network (requires XP pro, Vista Pro or Ultimate or Win 7 equilivant).

I am not really debating the merits of either typs but I wonder how it stands up to the speed of these NAS boxes.
Report Comment
# RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage ServerAWoroch 2010-03-25 13:14

* No NIC Teaming
* No 4 Disk RAID5 (to benchmark maximum transfer)
* No NIC teaming on the side connecting to it - like a server connecting to shared storage, at an entry level.
* No testing with multiple clients connected.

Needs more testing guys....
Report Comment
# RE: QNAP TS-459 Pro NAS Network Storage Server^-Super_Treje-^ 2010-03-25 23:30
no modding the kernel (to overcome certain limitations), and is a Linux kernel!
Report Comment
# Not the fastestBengie 2010-04-02 13:01
Teaming/Bonding a NIC can be done, but it has to be supported by the NIC & Switch.

As to bonding making the benchmarks faster... no. 1gbit is good for ~125MB/sec minus overhead of the protocols.

My Win7 machine can copy to/from my wife's Vista machine 110MB/sec. 60-70MB/sec doesn't seem all that fast. I can copy my 3GB Win7 ISO in under 30 seconds.
Both of our machines have only a single HD, not raided, and both are low end Dells. Nothing says low end like an i7 with ATI 4850 and a 360watt PSU
Report Comment
# Not the Fastest?AWoroch 2010-04-02 17:20

We do teaming all the time on Dell PowerEdge servers and switches, and it certainly makes a difference. While Gigabit maxes out at about 90MB/sec (that's the overhead from 125MB/sec), it would be nice to get more. Especially if you had a couple of systems transferring data to/from the device. I'm not saying I expect these QNAP's to be comparable to an Equallogix PS5000 SAN, but it would be nice if we could get them half-way.

While your single PC to single PC transfer is very good, *I* am more interested in full out sustained MB/sec and/or IOPS to determine if these would be good for say shared storage between two ESX servers in a lab, to test out vMotion, HA, DRS, etc.

This is the other reason why I would have liked to see the tests with all 4 ddrives in use, to get a feel for it's max throughput.
Report Comment
# The RAID would helpBengie 2010-04-02 18:49
The transfer tests they showed were of single copies of large files. While my transfer may drop drmatically with multiple clients, I could buy an SSD and upload a consistent 110MB/sec.

I'd like to point out my 110MB/sec is ACTUAL transfer speeds via windows file sharing and only 4% kernel time to boot.

My plan is to get a server, use my MSDN to drop Windows server on it, plop a few SSDs with a fast RAID controller. I'm thinking I'll have to get a 10gbit card and a nice switch
Report Comment
# RE: The RAID would help^-Super_Treje-^ 2010-04-02 23:22
switch 'No' Gbit ports and bonding with management and external connection of the same class 10Gbit.
I also use the Dell Power Edge and if I could access a QNAP, which is 4 or 8 slot tower to rack, 2 rather than 1 Gbit Gbit would be great because it saves lots of money.
Report Comment
# MrNick 2010-07-10 05:11
I purchased the unit as a cheap file server to host my website at home myself. with some of these cheap cable internet deals from optusnet I think I will have a verrry cost effective hoisting system that should outperform any shared hosting package anywhere out in cyberspace. WIll update things as it progresses.

Regards Nick Pidoulas
Webmaster, owner and founder of
Report Comment
# PDU makes buzzsl0n 2010-09-13 10:54
I just bought ARM based TS-410 which has the same PDU as the reviewed device - EDAC EA11351A-120. The first sound I heard having powered on the device was high pitched noise produced by AC/DC PDU, after ~ 20 hours of running the noise is still there ... I'm quite disappointed, going to send it back to the shop where I bought it.
Report Comment
# add virtual Windows server for appsQnap VM 2011-01-19 14:44
Tested: virtual Windows OS on linux VMware is OK for light applications as license servers and alikes. Don't know if Wine emulator would work or if this is tested on Qnap.
Yet, as you'd probably have to buy a retail Windows OS box (instead of OEM), it is still an over expensive rip-off.
Report Comment

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews

Like Benchmark Reviews on FacebookFollow Benchmark Reviews on Twitter