NAS minimum spec question

[nightrider89]

First and foremost, I would like to say hello! First post!

Secondly, there is a wealth of information on this site and it has helped me through a lot of the questions that I have had regarding general/advanced computer questions.

Now here comes my question: So my goal is to set up a NAS on my home network. I will be receiving a media player/streaming device for christmas! (Super excited about that)

But onto the real question, I have seen a lot of talk about NAS and other related NAS questions but one that I havent found the answer to would be what is the bottle neck for streaming to my media player? My guess would be the WiFi signal between the NAS and media player might be the weak link but both units will be located in the same room as the router.

Also, I have read in other post that some members do fine with an older NAS set up for streaming files. So, my question is what would be the minimum I would need in terms of a NAS box? will one with 512mb ram do fine? Do I need more? What about for processing power? Do those have an effect on how fast it can turn over the information from the NAS to the streaming device?

Also to give some specs for my current set up, router has 10/100 ports and media player will be running on WiFi (if it doesnt give me any problems)

Let me know what you guys think!

 

[Fardringle]

What kind of media files are you going to be streaming? Full sized blu-rays, compressed DVDs, MP3s, etc?

What speed/type of wireless are you using? If it is G wireless then compressed DVDs should be fine, but high bit rate media such as blu-ray may have problems.

As far as the NAS itself, the speed of the hard disk(s) and the disk controller seem to be the main bottleneck. More RAM on the NAS is always helpful but is not as important as the speed of the drives.

 

[nightrider89]

1) I will be streaming a range of media from compressed DVD to a little more high end... mostly 720p and the occasional 1080p

2) I will be using N wireless. My router is an linksys e1200 so its capable of 300Mbps. its a bit older so it only has 10/100 ethernet ports.

3) for the NAS, I was planning on running WD red drives, which are from my understanding the way to go if you plan on running a NAS.

So I guess my question now is if I should be shelling out my money for a NAS say 200+ (lower end synology or qnap) or if I can get away with running a NAS under 200 (zyxel nsa325, best bang for the buck in terms of hardware) OR even get away with getting a used older NAS (older synology or something of the sort).

I have no preference to name brand but I wouldnt mind saving a couple of bucks here and there as I am setting this up

 

[Enigma102083]

Are you wanting to buy a NAS box or build one?

 

[taq8ojh]

If you want to buy whole box, no matter how low are your requirements, absolutely make sure you buy something with dual core CPU. The speed difference is night and day (I can't squeeze more than 70MB/s out of my Synology DS213).

 

[nightrider89]

I was thinking more along the lines of buying a NAS.

Building one seems to be a bit more expensive. It would consume more electricity than I'd like. At that point, would it be better to build a PC that can be used a primary computer as well as have all the files stored and shared among the network?

If you want to buy whole box, no matter how low are your requirements, absolutely make sure you buy something with dual core CPU. The speed difference is night and day (I can't squeeze more than 70MB/s out of my Synology DS213).

are you referring to use a computer as the NAS?

 

[taq8ojh]

Nope, I mean complete NAS box you buy from a manufacturer, like Synology. Mine has single core CPU and it sucks pretty bad.

 

[Ketchup]

... At that point, would it be better to build a PC that can be used a primary computer as well as have all the files stored and shared among the network?

To me, that would depend on how many devices would be connecting, how many devices would be connecting at one time, and how much HD space you need (to some degree).

As an example, here is a thread I created a little while back:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2357819

Now, as mentioned, a lot of it depends on content and compression, but I have no issues with that old Compaq. And while things are playing on the Blu-Ray, I can still access files and whatnot on other machines in the house without issue. Most of my movies I compress end up 1 -2 GB, mainly dependent on how much space I have on the drive at that particular time. Once I started doing this, the family is so spoiled. No more scavenging through dozens of DVD's to find the right one!

 

[nightrider89]

Nope, I mean complete NAS box you buy from a manufacturer, like Synology. Mine has single core CPU and it sucks pretty bad.

All the NAS boxes that I am looking at have the marvel single core CPU. the dual cores seem a bit out of my price range.

To me, that would depend on how many devices would be connecting, how many devices would be connecting at one time, and how much HD space you need (to some degree).

As an example, here is a thread I created a little while back:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2357819

Now, as mentioned, a lot of it depends on content and compression, but I have no issues with that old Compaq. And while things are playing on the Blu-Ray, I can still access files and whatnot on other machines in the house without issue. Most of my movies I compress end up 1 -2 GB, mainly dependent on how much space I have on the drive at that particular time. Once I started doing this, the family is so spoiled. No more scavenging through dozens of DVD's to find the right one!

Although I prefer the NAS box but I just assembled a micro atx PC consisting of case, 300W PS, Intel dual core 2.9 ghz sandy bridge CPU (with intel 2000 graphics), mobo, and ram for under 200.

At this price point, would it be more efficient of my money to go with a NAS box or this built NAS that is a bit more expandable. Also, what are the odds it will use more than 100W? And is there a way to have it wake up from sleep once LAN connection is tested?

Also with a built PC as a NAS, would i still be able to use the function of a PC and have a NAS running in the background at the same time or will I need to pick one or the other?



I wont be using my NAS all the time but would like it to consume less energy if possible.

 

[OlafSicky]

If you build your nas you still have to add the cost of the os

 

[Enigma102083]

If you build a NAS box, you'll run NAS4Free on it, which is a dedicated NAS OS, so it would not be functional as a regular PC. The point of it would be to stick it in a corner and just access your files.

 

[nightrider89]

If you build a NAS box, you'll run NAS4Free on it, which is a dedicated NAS OS, so it would not be functional as a regular PC. The point of it would be to stick it in a corner and just access your files.

I see. So I am thinking with the specs that mentioned above for a built computer should run the NAS quite well and function to be accessed by multiple units without a problem? I mean it has more processing power than most of the NAS box out there right?

Also would I need to add a GPU? or do you think the intel hd2000 well be able to process the higher end vid files?

 

[Mushkins]

I see. So I am thinking with the specs that mentioned above for a built computer should run the NAS quite well and function to be accessed by multiple units without a problem? I mean it has more processing power than most of the NAS box out there right?

Also would I need to add a GPU? or do you think the intel hd2000 well be able to process the higher end vid files?

Those specs are plenty. My NAS/Fileserver is essentially an ivy bridge i3 and some WD reds running Server 2012. It can easily handle the stuff I throw at it, which is a little fancier than what you mentioned (mostly realtime transcoding of 1080p blu-ray rips).

The intel HD 2000 is plenty if you're just doing direct video playback. If you're transcoding (aka your device doesnt support the type of video file you have and has to convert it to a supported format on the fly) you'll probably run into some mild stuttering on 1080p content depending on the source/destination formats. If you plan on running a bunch of high end videophile filtering software on top of the playback/transcoding, the HD 2000 most likely wont cut it.

But anyway, TBH theres tons of prebuilt NAS reviews here on Anandtech and nearly across the board they end up overpriced and underpowered. It's almost universally the case that out the door building a dedicated PC to act as a NAS/fileserver will give you more power and more robust features (including low-power options) for around the same cost as a prebuilt NAS.

 

[nightrider89]

what did you mean by the low powered features? are those within windows server 2012 os?

I think the plan right now to build a low powered system for under 200 not including the HDs. I think something in the microATX system should do it.

and if there is a bottleneck with transcoding... what would help eliminate it? more ram or better gpu. Could i also get a cheaper cpu say instead of 2.9 ghz dual core celeron and replace it with a 2.4 ghz dual core celeron?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Transcoding issues will usually indicate the need for more RAM or a better CPU. The 2.9 GHz sand bridge will probably be enough, how much RAM are you getting?

 

[nightrider89]

the 2.9 sandy bridge will be a pentium processor, not one of the newer gens. Will this still be okay?

and I think i will start out with 2gigs unless I feel the need for more processing power OR i can find a nice deal on 4

 

[ch33zw1z]

Go with 4.

What OS and what software will you be using to transcode?

What are the clients that will need transcoding?

 

[nightrider89]

Go with 4.

What OS and what software will you be using to transcode?

What are the clients that will need transcoding?

I was either thinking about turning into as NAS with NASFree or using linux. but open to OS suggestions. I plan to use it to stream my media to a media box I just purchased (pivos xios)

also, i found my old desktop from 02... its a bit old. P4 and using IDE. would it be worth it to buy an sata power adaptor and sata controller and turning that into a nas box (im guessing the adaptors would only cost me 20 to 30) instead of buying a whole new system to dedicate to a NAS (200). my guess would be that the bottleneck for this option is going to be the RAM (im sure I can only put 1 gig maybe 2 on there)

SORRY for being on the fence with these options!

 

[ch33zw1z]

I was either thinking about turning into as NAS with NASFree or using linux. but open to OS suggestions. I plan to use it to stream my media to a media box I just purchased (pivos xios)

is this what you have? http://www.amazon.com/XIOS-Streaming.../dp/B0088IGPM8

also, i found my old desktop from 02... its a bit old. P4 and using IDE. would it be worth it to buy an sata power adaptor and sata controller and turning that into a nas box (im guessing the adaptors would only cost me 20 to 30) instead of buying a whole new system to dedicate to a NAS (200). my guess would be that the bottleneck for this option is going to be the RAM (im sure I can only put 1 gig maybe 2 on there)

SORRY for being on the fence with these options!

this is barely worth anything. If you can get by with running a straight file server, no transcoding, then this will probably be ok.

NAS4Free or FreeNAS, either one will do.

Any transcoding will need something more...much more.

 

[JackMDS]

NAS is a very general term it can be a few $$$ USB Flash drive stuck in a Wireless Router USB port up to very expensive and sophisticate Storage Server.

Op, you keep mixing Oranges, Apple, and Nuts and getting No where.

You also have to keep in mind that many suggestions on online forum are reflection of what the person that giving you and answer is doing in his/her Home rather than what you need.

First you have to decide precisely (none wishy-washy, may be this, or may be that) what you are going to do with the NAS.

Then, you can get a clear choice.

 

[nightrider89]

NAS is a very general term it can be a few $$$ USB Flash drive stuck in a Wireless Router USB port up to very expensive and sophisticate Storage Server.

Op, you keep mixing Oranges, Apple, and Nuts and getting No where.

You also have to keep in mind that many suggestions on online forum are reflection of what the person that giving you and answer is doing in his/her Home rather than what you need.

First you have to decide precisely (none wishy-washy, may be this, or may be that) what you are going to do with the NAS.

Then, you can get a clear choice.

i understand completely. i would like to know what others use and what works for them. which is why there are a plethora of options to take at this point.

my goals for this nas set up is to try to save money where i can without taking short cuts as well as a solution that will work long term. what i am trying to accomplish is to server a media storage unit (that can hold 4+tb of data) that can be accessed to anyone on my network as well as stream onto my media player.

on top of that I am trying to find something that will not use a whole ton of energy by staying on 24/7.

 

[Enigma102083]

i understand completely. i would like to know what others use and what works for them. which is why there are a plethora of options to take at this point.

my goals for this nas set up is to try to save money where i can without taking short cuts as well as a solution that will work long term. what i am trying to accomplish is to server a media storage unit (that can hold 4+tb of data) that can be accessed to anyone on my network as well as stream onto my media player.

on top of that I am trying to find something that will not use a whole ton of energy by staying on 24/7.

Do you want a NAS or a streaming server or a combination of both?