Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Interested in our products? Post your questions here. Let us answer before you buy.
Post Reply
drgenius
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:17 am

Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by drgenius » Tue Mar 10, 2009 3:51 am

Can anybody from QNAP provide reliable and comparable performance figures for the TS-439 Pro, TS-509 Pro and TS-639 Pro models? What is the impact of encryption or jumbo frames on performance?
I guess the TS-439 Pro and the TS-639 Pro have a similar performance due to their identical architecture. However, is it true that the TS-509 Pro is about 40% faster than the new models with the Atom processor?

drgenius
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:17 am

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by drgenius » Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:37 am

Nobody there from QNAP who could provide information? Without performance data it's hard for me to decide which product to buy.

User avatar
Don
Guru
Posts: 12083
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:56 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by Don » Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:04 am

However, is it true that the TS-509 Pro is about 40% faster than the new models with the Atom processor?

From my tests using SqueezeCenter this is true. See thread viewtopic.php?f=123&t=11519&hilit=639
Read the Online Manuals and use the forum search feature before posting.

Use RAID with external backups. RAID will protect you from disk failure, keep your system running, and data accessible while the disk is replaced and the RAID rebuilt. Backups will allow you to recover data that is lost or corrupted, or from system failure. One does not replace the other.

Submit bugs and feature requests to QNAP via their Helpdesk app.

NAS: TVS-882BR | F/W: 4.5.2.1566 | 40GB | 2 x 1TB M.2 SATA RAID 1 (System/VMs) | 3 x 1TB M.2 NMVe QM2-4P-384A RAID 5 (cache) | 5 x 14TB Exos HDD RAID 6 (Data) | 1 x Blu-ray
NAS: TVS-663 | F/W: 4.5.2.1594 | 16GB | 2 x M.2 NMVe QM2-2P RAID 1 (cache) | 4 x 4TB RAID 5
Apps: Boinc, DNSMasq, PLEX, iDrive, QVPN, QLMS, MP3fs, HBS3, Entware, DLstation, VS, +

drfruit
Easy as a breeze
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:27 pm

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by drfruit » Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:15 am

drgenius wrote:Can anybody from QNAP provide reliable and comparable performance figures for the TS-439 Pro, TS-509 Pro and TS-639 Pro models? What is the impact of encryption or jumbo frames on performance?

I am not from Qnap, but I tested my TS-439 with and without encryption and found a huge impact. Without encryption 43.9 MB/s write speed, with encryption 13.1 MB/s.

drgenius
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:17 am

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by drgenius » Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:32 am

drfruit wrote:I am not from Qnap, but I tested my TS-439 with and without encryption and found a huge impact. Without encryption 43.9 MB/s write speed, with encryption 13.1 MB/s.


Wow, that's really a big difference. Do you know the reason? Is it just the processor which is not fast enough?

... Still waiting for an official statement from QNAP regarding the performance...

drfruit
Easy as a breeze
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:27 pm

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by drfruit » Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:35 am

drgenius wrote:
drfruit wrote:I am not from Qnap, but I tested my TS-439 with and without encryption and found a huge impact. Without encryption 43.9 MB/s write speed, with encryption 13.1 MB/s.


Wow, that's really a big difference. Do you know the reason? Is it just the processor which is not fast enough?

I'm no expert in this field, but I suspect that processor speed is indeed the determining factor.

drgenius
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:17 am

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by drgenius » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:30 am

HELLO QNAP... WAKE UP, PLEASE!!!
I'm still waiting for performance data of the QNAP TS-439 Pro, TS-509 Pro and TS-639 Pro. Otherwise, I'm not able to decide which QNAP product to buy. I would look for a NAS system of another vendor, e.g. Synology or Thecus, in this case... :(

User avatar
AndyChuo
Experience counts
Posts: 2396
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:56 am
Location: Taipei, Taiwan

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by AndyChuo » Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:05 am

Hi drgenius,

Sorry for the late and because TS-439 and TS-639 are using the same CPU (Intel Atom) and I haven't got the performance chart handy
for TS-439 so here are the basic Samba/FTP read/write test reports I can show you first here.

TS-509 (Samba/FTP r/w under Single/RAID0/RAID5/RAID6)
performance-ts-509_01.jpg


TS-639 (Samba/FTP r/w under Single/RAID0/RAID5/RAID6/Encrypted)
performance-ts-639_01.jpg


Thanks and hope this helps

Andy
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
=============================================================>>>
TS-659-Pro [RAID6] rtorrent+SABnzbdplus+SickBeard+Couchpotato [Best PVR] Plex+PMS [Ultimate Streamer]
Apple iPad [Best Tablet] HTC One M8 [Mobile Phone] Samsung UA46ES6100 [My Screen] KRK Rokit 6 [Audio Speakers]
Chrome Cast [Screen Casting] Philips Hue [Personal Lighing]
Buffalo WZR-1750DHP [My Wifi Hub] D-Link DGS-1005D [Gbit Network]
=============================================================>>>

drgenius
Getting the hang of things
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:17 am

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by drgenius » Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:41 am

Thanx a lot for the performance comparison, Andy.
According to your measurements the TS-639 Pro seems to be faster than the TS-509. However, this is in clear contradiction to the measurements of Don (see http://forum.qnap.com/viewtopic.php?f=123&t=11519&hilit=639) who figured out that the TS-509 Pro is about 40% faster than the TS-639 Pro. What can be the reason for the different results? Have you measured both devices under exactly the same conditions?

User avatar
Don
Guru
Posts: 12083
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:56 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by Don » Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:38 am

Very interesting results indeed. The 509 chart does not show what version of the firmware the test was run on. Andy's tests show network performance results. My tests used only CPU & disk, the network was not involved at all. I would have expected the 509 to do better on these tests. Maybe a difference in firmwares versions, ethernet chip sets, something else?
Read the Online Manuals and use the forum search feature before posting.

Use RAID with external backups. RAID will protect you from disk failure, keep your system running, and data accessible while the disk is replaced and the RAID rebuilt. Backups will allow you to recover data that is lost or corrupted, or from system failure. One does not replace the other.

Submit bugs and feature requests to QNAP via their Helpdesk app.

NAS: TVS-882BR | F/W: 4.5.2.1566 | 40GB | 2 x 1TB M.2 SATA RAID 1 (System/VMs) | 3 x 1TB M.2 NMVe QM2-4P-384A RAID 5 (cache) | 5 x 14TB Exos HDD RAID 6 (Data) | 1 x Blu-ray
NAS: TVS-663 | F/W: 4.5.2.1594 | 16GB | 2 x M.2 NMVe QM2-2P RAID 1 (cache) | 4 x 4TB RAID 5
Apps: Boinc, DNSMasq, PLEX, iDrive, QVPN, QLMS, MP3fs, HBS3, Entware, DLstation, VS, +

arp87
New here
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:44 pm

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by arp87 » Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:54 pm

Hi, I am a bit confused by these results. I am torn between the 509 and the 639 and the fact that these two tests show such vastly different results is not helping. Has anyone gotten any clarification on this? QNAP, do you have anything to chime in with? I will be using my NAS over wired and wireless network connections so that is the performance speed I am most concerned with personally, which is why I am hesitant to rely too much on Don's test as there are many other factors that could effect results over a network.

User avatar
Don
Guru
Posts: 12083
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:56 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by Don » Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:29 am

arp87 wrote:which is why I am hesitant to rely too much on Don's test as there are many other factors that could effect results over a network.

As I stated my results did not involve the network, only CPU and disk. I'd like to know what the testing parameters were for the network test (JF frames, same switch, pc specs, file size, etc).
Read the Online Manuals and use the forum search feature before posting.

Use RAID with external backups. RAID will protect you from disk failure, keep your system running, and data accessible while the disk is replaced and the RAID rebuilt. Backups will allow you to recover data that is lost or corrupted, or from system failure. One does not replace the other.

Submit bugs and feature requests to QNAP via their Helpdesk app.

NAS: TVS-882BR | F/W: 4.5.2.1566 | 40GB | 2 x 1TB M.2 SATA RAID 1 (System/VMs) | 3 x 1TB M.2 NMVe QM2-4P-384A RAID 5 (cache) | 5 x 14TB Exos HDD RAID 6 (Data) | 1 x Blu-ray
NAS: TVS-663 | F/W: 4.5.2.1594 | 16GB | 2 x M.2 NMVe QM2-2P RAID 1 (cache) | 4 x 4TB RAID 5
Apps: Boinc, DNSMasq, PLEX, iDrive, QVPN, QLMS, MP3fs, HBS3, Entware, DLstation, VS, +

StefaanD
New here
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:44 am

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by StefaanD » Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:14 pm

Another usefull thing might be to check the NAS Charts over at SmallNetBuilder

BTW i don't own a QNAP NAS yet, just had to fill one in when registering.

meulie
First post
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:15 am
Location: Sarpsborg, Norway
Contact:

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by meulie » Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:49 am

So perhaps it's a good idea to do encryption client-side instead of NAS-side? Especially if your client has a nice Core i7...


greetings,
Evert

P3R
Guru
Posts: 12565
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden (UTC+01:00)

Re: Performance comparison of TS439, TS-509, TS-639

Post by P3R » Mon Mar 07, 2011 7:56 am

arp87 wrote:I will be using my NAS over wired and wireless network connections...
Wireless will be the bottleneck. Even the slowest NAS models performs better than wireless.
RAID have never ever been a replacement for backups. Without backups on a different system (preferably placed at another site), you will eventually lose data!

A non-RAID configuration (including RAID 0, which isn't really RAID) with a backup on a separate media protects your data far better than any RAID-volume without backup.

All data storage consists of both the primary storage and the backups. It's your money and your data, spend the storage budget wisely or pay with your data!

Post Reply

Return to “Presales”