[SOLVED] Synology DS920+ or DS1019+

[velocci]

Hi, i'm trying to decide between Synology DS920+ and DS1019+. the new 920 has a faster CPU but the 1019 has an extra drive bay. so I don't which is more important to me. It depends on what that extra CPU speed is generally used for. is a fast CPU on a nas used for video transcoding in Plex or for extra people accessing the nas? I will only have at most 3 people accessing my nas. Will the faster cpu on the 920 be able to transcode 4k files to a lower resolution over the 1019? If neither one is able to do 4k transcoding without buffering, then I would just go wtih the 1019.

 

[SamirD]

More cpu is definitely for transcoding. Even my old nas units from years ago can nearly hit gigabit with very basic processors from those eras, so throughput is no longer cpu based, unless you're talking about saturating 10G. Hope this helps!

 

[kanewolf]

Hi, i'm trying to decide between Synology DS920+ and DS1019+. the new 920 has a faster CPU but the 1019 has an extra drive bay. so I don't which is more important to me. It depends on what that extra CPU speed is generally used for. is a fast CPU on a nas used for video transcoding in Plex or for extra people accessing the nas? I will only have at most 3 people accessing my nas. Will the faster cpu on the 920 be able to transcode 4k files to a lower resolution over the 1019? If neither one is able to do 4k transcoding without buffering, then I would just go wtih the 1019.

Typically devices requiring transcoding are handhelds. That means WIFI. It is more likely that your network will be a limiting factor than the CPU.

 

[velocci]

yes I have several handhelds. so is there any 4 or 5 bay synology or qnap nas that can transcode 4k files without buffering? budget is about $800 canadian, approximately.

 

[kanewolf]

yes I have several handhelds. so is there any 4 or 5 bay synology or qnap nas that can transcode 4k files without buffering? budget is about $800 canadian, approximately.

I don't know. As I said your WIFI will be more of a limitation.

 

[velocci]

ok thanks

 

[velocci]

one other question, not sure if you know. But I was watching a youtube video a while ago about the differences between synology and qnap and the guy said that with one of them, the hardrives in a volume have to be exactly the same, not just same size, but same brand and series. but with the other one, they don't have to be the same, they don't even have to be the same size. do you know which one is synology and which one is qnap?

 

[SamirD]

one other question, not sure if you know. But I was watching a youtube video a while ago about the differences between synology and qnap and the guy said that with one of them, the hardrives in a volume have to be exactly the same, not just same size, but same brand and series. but with the other one, they don't have to be the same, they don't even have to be the same size. do you know which one is synology and which one is qnap?

Those idiots in those videos sometimes don't know what they're talking about so take that with a grain of salt unless you can find official documentation or some forum posts to back it up.

This also depends on how you have your nas set up. If you're running the drives jbod, you can put whatever you want without any restrictions. It is when you are doing raid implementations that this starts to matter. I always run jbod and then manually keep the drives in sync and sync across different brand nas units. This eliminates file corruption through bit rot and leave me with more than enough copies even if a nas totally fails.

 

[velocci]

it was the channel called NAS Comparisons. this guy knows what he's talking about. I think he says it in this video, i'll have to watch it again later. if I find it, i'll let you know exactly when in the video he says it.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIGlumrE3m4&list=LL2seskcRNl0w9UZI-2zThCQ&index=20&t=6s

 

[SamirD]

this guy knows what he's talking about.

And how do you know this if you don't have a nas or documentation to confirm those statements in the videos?

It really amazes me how dumb people are getting--it was said in a video therefore it must be true? Really? Are we all getting that stupid?

 

[velocci]

this is why i'm asking this question, I'm hoping that someone has these devices and knows for sure if mixed hardrives can be used or not. It doesn't make sense to me that you can't create a raid 5 with a Baracuda, WD and Ironwolf hardrives if they are all the same size, but I'm pretty sure that's what was said in one of those videos and I just want to confirm.

 

[USAFRet]

one other question, not sure if you know. But I was watching a youtube video a while ago about the differences between synology and qnap and the guy said that with one of them, the hardrives in a volume have to be exactly the same, not just same size, but same brand and series. but with the other one, they don't have to be the same, they don't even have to be the same size. do you know which one is synology and which one is qnap?

" the hardrives in a volume have to be exactly the same, not just same size, but same brand and series. "

In my QNAP TS-453a, that is categorically false.

In the QNAP, I currently have 4 drives.
1x 480GB SSD - DataVol1 (system drive and shared space for client PCs)
3x 8TB HDD - DataVol2

Of the 8TB in DataVol2:
Toshiba HDWF180
Seagate ST8000AS0002-1NA17Z
Seagate ST8000DM004-2CX188


I strongly doubt Synology is any different. Both are Linux based.

 

[USAFRet]

In my initial config of the QNAP, there were 4x 3TB drives.
2x WD and 2x Seagate. All in a RAID 5, one Volume.

 

[SamirD]

The confirmation to me is that neither synology or qnap mention this in their documentation. Because if it was a real thing and they didn't mention it, it would be all over the Internet.

But there's your proof. If I had a second drive in my synology I would have added to that proof, but there's plenty of people out there running mixed drives in the synologies (synologys?) and I've not heard of any issues except in oddball cases.

It has always been a standing recommendation to use the same exact drive and firmware, etc., but these days it's not so much a requirement and even just a mild suggestion for performance reason more than compatibility.

 

[velocci]

ok thanks USAFret and SamirD. but just for kicks, I will try and find the part of the video and post it.

 

[SamirD]

ok thanks USAFret and SamirD. but just for kicks, I will try and find the part of the video and post it.

Definitely post it--so others know to ignore this fool.