Page 1 of 1

VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:03 pm
by julientom
Hi everyone

I am a pro film maker, editing Canon Cinema Rawlight 4kfiles in FCP X - that need a STABLE bandwidth above 200 mb/S
My files size of this can go up to 100 go. My biggest project is 4,5 to. Usually much smaller, around 1to
I work on 1 iMacPro - 10 cores - 2to - 64 RAM, Thunderbolt 3 and 10Gbe connection.
I am about to invest in a QNAP because I am still having stuttering with a OWC thunderbay 6 ( with 6 x 5400 rpm drive and NVMe )
I want to use a 10meters RJ45 - class 7 - because I want a ultra quiet room to work in.
I could also, in the futur, imagine to create a render farm for After Effect ( iMac Pro / QNAP / MacBook Pro i7 )

I am looking at 2 or 3 models :

(725 euros) TS-832x : 8 bays, 10 gbe, Alpine Quad core 64bit-> Available in 2 or 8 go of RAM ( +190 euros )
(1560 euros) TVS-672XT : 6 bays, Tb3 and 10 gbe, i3, 8go RAM
(2008 euros) TVS-872XT : 8 bays, Tb3 and 10 gbe, i5, 16go RAM

Of what I understood, and red from Bob Zelin, FOR VIDEO EDITING :
1/ the CACHE system and QTIER does NOT improve the performance
2/ 10Gbe is the adviced connection for STABLE BANDWITH ( vs Thunderbolt 2 and thunderbolt 3 )
3/ I just have to maximize the number of spinning drive to make just 1 big RAID array ( raid 5 or 6)

My questions are :
1/ If I use a 6 WD RED 10to ( WD100EFAX ) and 10gbe connection, Would I get better performance to playback and edit with TVS-872Xt vs TVS-672xt vs the TS-832
2/ If I use 10 gbe connection, should I stay with a 6 bays (and save 350euros) instead of 8 bays ( because 6x200mb/S ( the read speed of WD 10 to RED ) would already saturate the 10 Gbe
3/ The use of the QNAP rendering while using FCPX seems unclear to me, very few notes about it -> is there really a benefit of having i3 or i5 proc ?

I have the feeling that :
-> TS-832x should be good enough ( 2 or 8 gigas of RAM ?)
-> the TVS-672xt is also a good price for what is offers
-> the TVS-872xt is maybe to good for my need ( + 500 vs 672 is a lot )

What do you guys think ?

thanks a lot


Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2019 11:57 pm
by dolbyman
1/ definately use faster drives..regular red are only 5400rpm
2/the more disks the better ..saturating 10GbE with spinning disks is not as easy as it sounds
3/ unclear what you are talking about

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:52 am
by Trexx
Hopefully Bob Zelin will chime in, but I know from his sharing of past experience he has NOT been real enthusiastic about using ARM based devices for video editing due to their lack luster performance.

Now the TS-832x maybe different, but in the past they other arm based units couldn't move the data fast enough to come close to 10GbE speed.

For true 10GbE throughput, spindles matter. Get the TVS-872XT, 7200 RPM NAS rated drives, and 10GbE connection. I am not sure if Bob has seen a difference related to i3 vs. i5.

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:56 am
by Bob Zelin
of the models you listed, the only model you can use the TVS-872XT-16G.
You need 16 Gig of RAM
you need a switch to connect more than one computer to this, because there is only one 10G port. Buy a QNAP QSW-1208-8C if you are on a budget.
You need EIGHT DRIVES, not six. These drives must be 7200 RPM drives, not 5400 RPM drives. This means Seagate Ironwolf or Western Digital RED Pro's.
The TS-831X is a useless piece of do do. I can only assume that the TS-832X is a similar product.
You work on an iMac Pro that has a native 10G port (using the Aquantia AQC-107 chip). Your iMac Pro has either an AMD Vega 56 or AMD Vega 64 card.
This is useful for GPU rendering for FCP X, Davinci Resolve, Cinema 4D and Autodesk Maya. It does NOTHING for any Adobe CC software like After Effects.
If you want faster rendering for FCP X, Davinci Resolve, etc. you get a Sonnet eGFX 650 box with an external AMD Vega 64 card. This improves your rendering.
The QNAP will do absolutely nothing for you as far as increasing your render speeds. And you cannot install a GPU card in a TVS-872XT, or any model you listed.

But let me make one thing perfectly clear to you. (make believe I had a hammer, and I was hitting you on the head with this while I was telling this to you, so it would
become very clear to you). YOU CANNOT DO ANY GPU RENDERING with Adobe software on a Mac. PERIOD. You can only get GPU acceleration from Nvidia cards for
Adobe software, and there is no way you can get an Nvidia card to work with a modern Mac OS on an Apple Product. SO - how do other people get fast renders with Adobe Premiere, Adobe After Effects, Adobe Media Encoder in professional use ? THEY USE A WIN 10 PC with an Nvidia card, like the GTX 1080ti or RTX-2080ti. Apple hates Adobe, and Adobe hates Apple, and I have no idea why, but Adobe simply will not contact AMD to figure out GPU rendering using the Vega 64 card. Everyone else has done it (FCP X, Resolve) - BUT NOT ADOBE. This will be one of the # 1 issues at the upcoming NAB 2019 show in Las Vegas. Will Adobe support AMD GPU acceleration, and will Apple support Nvidia GPU cards ????? !!!!! My guess right now - the answer will be no ! So what will the real answer for Adobe users become ? Start getting used to the Windows platform. Perhaps I will be wrong.

Don't base your decision on money. You see what happened when you purchased the OWC RAID array. It's not working for you. However, it appears that you had plenty of budget to purchase the insanely expensive Apple iMac Pro. What can I say.

Oh, forget those Cat 7 cables. Cat 6 works perfectly for up to 55 meters, and to extend to 100 meters, all you need is Cat6A. Cat 7 is not part of the 10G specification.

Bob Zelin

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2019 5:57 pm
by julientom
Hi everyone

In the mean time, I also discovered your very useful page :

I will take the TVS-872XT - You all convinced me !! :)
I 've known all the GPU Adobe VS Apple war, I thought I could mount a Nvidia GPU on the TVS-872xt as is says on the QNAP page -> TVS-872xt -> GPGPU: It shows plenty of Recommended GPGPU for TVS-872XT. ? I thought I would be able to do this upgrade if needed. Correct ?

I was going to buy 6 disks ( for a start ) WD 10to RED ( WD100EFAX ) quieter than IronWolf - good reliability
Yes there are in 5400rpm BUT they provide very good Speed Rate ( Around 200 mb/s )
Considering this speed rates, do you really think I should not take this disks anyway ? ... ategory=25

I understood, cache and ssd are not usefull for video editing. Ok
Is there a point, for access, browsing and other stuff, to still mount on Nvme N2 like a 1 To Samsung 970 EVO ?

"Cat 7 is not part of the 10G specification."
I already have a CAT7 cable, 10 meters, I guess this would do fine, correct ?

Thanks again everyone !
You are all a HUGE help considering QNAP France is not, (for now) very useful... ( not enough knowledge regarding video application)

have a excellent DAY !

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:20 pm
by Bob Zelin
Hi Julientom -
you are correct and I am wrong. You can put in a GPU card into the TVS-872XT, but the most powerful card supported is the GTX-1050ti
As per ... ategory=25
With that said, please allow me to clarify what happens here. You just don't plug in the card, and it works. You need to create a Virtual Machine on the QNAP, load Windows 10, load the Nvidia driver in the Windows 10 App, and then get the Adobe After Effects rendering software loaded for network rendering. It's not like on a PC or a Mac, where you just plug in the card and it works. And of course, on a Mac, you can't run an Nvidia GPU card (I don't care if it's the GTX-1050ti, or the latest RTS-2080ti). It does not work - the Mac won't recognize it. So you can't use it for Adobe software. It's SO MUCH EASIER if you want GPU acceleration, to just get a Win 10 PC and stick in an NViida GPU card.

As for the drives - what can I say - its up to you. You will get slower total aggregate bandwidth with 5400 RPM drives. Thinking that adding NVME or M.2 for caching will not make up for not having eight 7200 RPM drives. And yes, Cat 7 cabling will work fine - it's just overkill. You are trying to save money on drives, yet seem to have no issue spending money on M.2 Cache, expensive cabling, and a GPU card. And you have a deadly expensive blown out iMac Pro. That costs a fortune. And you can't afford 2 more drives ?

Bob Zelin

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:39 am
by julientom

About the GPU : Yes, I know I need to create a Virtual Machine. I found very interesting to be able to take advantage of the power of the i5 (16go) of the Nas

About the disks : No, I am not trying to save money : WD RED 10To are more expansive than Iron Wolf
I need something quiet and good performer. Not necessarily a rocket - just STABLE bandwidth : always above 200 mb/s
Of what I read : WD RED 10To ( even if 5400rpm ) get excellent results ! - please have a short look at this review ;
"And with the large-block sequential test the drive gave the best read performance with 1.76GB/s."

(And yes I will buy 2 more disks, I'll be able to do that in next month)

About the iMac Pro : Yes it's expansive :) :-0 But nothing works faster - with the CanonCinema Rawlight files - that FCPX !

Thanks a lot !

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:07 am
by Bob Zelin
about the iMacPro - you say - nothing works faster - ?
Well, not true with Adobe software. Any cheap PC with an NVida GPU card works faster if you are using Adobe software, than a new iMac Pro with 64 Gig of RAM and a Vega 64 GPU card. Because Adobe does not support the AMD GPU at this time.

Bob Zelin

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:42 am
by julientom
Okay, (lol), tell me how much time you need on your cheap pc to render 5 minutes of 4 Canon Rawlight files ( I can provide those CRM files ) with resize (scale), a bit of sharpen and one basic color correction ? I'am already guessing the answer but... please... be my guest :-)

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:46 am
by julientom
and what about this article :

Would you encourage me to go for a very good sequential performance VS random, for video editing purely ?

thanks again for your feedback. It is very much appreciated

Best regards

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:58 am
by P3R
julientom wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:39 am
"And with the large-block sequential test the drive gave the best read performance with 1.76GB/s."
Yes when using iSCSI, WD Red had a fraction better read performance (less than 1 %) but at the same time had significantly (11 %) worse write performance . With SMB (as I suppose is what you'll be using) the Ironwolf was 9 % faster reading and 7.7 % faster writing than the WD Red in the same sequential test. The speed they've tuned the larger WD Reds for is impressive but 5400 rpm is still less than 7200.

Regarding the noise, the WD Red may be more silent than the the Ironwolf (I haven't compared them) but the faster WD Reds (the 10 and 8 TB models) are not nearly as silent as it's smaller brothers, particularly the 3 TB and smaller that are almost inaudible.

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:19 am
by julientom

I just installed the TVS-872xt !
Very happy, sounds a solid product !

Considering the noise, I immediately put it away thanks to the 10gbe connection.
On my 6 WD RED 10tb disks, one is dead and, as noise is no longer a issue I'll probably send them all back and buy 8 IronWolf instead ( 8 or 10tb ) - following your advice.

So, In RAID 5 - with 5 WD RED 10TB : I tested with AJA system test lite in 4K rez - codec Canon Raw or RedCode (3:1)

up to 4 GB -----> Excellent results : perfectly stable bandwidth on Read : Flat Disk Reads playback curve ! :DD
733 Write / 858 Read
(with minimum reads around 800 MB/sec)

16 GB and more -----> Strange and poor Read stability : the read speed starts very very slow, then goes up - but with lots of "drops out" :cry:
733 Write / 491MB/sec Read
( with minimum reads around 50 MB/sec )

As I will edit with large 4K files... this will probably be a problem.
Here is some details :

- NAS is 16 gig of RAM
- using 10GBE connection
- connected to the QNAP Directly to the 10Gbe port
- No switch, nothing else connected
- I did disable SMB ( I wrote a script in terminal do disable SMB signature )
- connecting via SMB signature ( Finder -> Go to > connecting to server )
- I have enable Jumbo Frame -> 9000 on both the NAS and the Imac
- I created only 1 volume -> RAID 5
- The Type of this volume is "thick volume" ( volume lourd in French )
- no SSD
- no M2nmve

EDIT : I can confirm I am not able to edit my 4K files, and I got a message on the NAS screen : " Error message pool threshold..."
I"ll look into that...

Thanks very much for your help

ps :
I did check the the "RAID speeds slower with large files" post but couldn't find the answer.

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 4:28 am
by Bob Zelin
your QNAP RAID takes 24 hours to optimize. It's still optimizing. Let it finish before you get picky.
Choose an uncompressed format - like 10bit RGB or 16 bit RGB - or go all the way up to 5K RED in AJA System Test.

Since you like RED cameras - go to
you will see that RED Ranger, Red Monster or RED Helium at 8k 24 fps is only 162 MB/sec for RAW playback
at 5:1 it's 259 MB/sec. So you are fine. And these are the most expensive 8K RED cameras that are available.

Bob Zelin

Re: VIDEO EDITING : TS-832x or new TVS-872xt

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:16 am
by julientom
"Bonjour" Bob

I don't get picky yet :-)
I'm sure everything will be fine; thanks to this forum :-)
I hope you're doing well. And thanks again for all your work and time helping people out !
Bob Zelin wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 4:28 am
your QNAP RAID takes 24 hours to optimize. It's still optimizing. Let it finish before you get picky.
I'm turning it back on, but I'me pretty sure the optimization was already finished : I saw this progression bar... optimizing... took about 2 hours though and then it said "READY"

Anything else I should check ?
The performance results on AJA are so perfect up to 4 Go ! looks like having an ssd !
I'm looking forward having the same good perf with large files
I m a Canon user :-) Not the money for RED. Very happy with the C200 and always shooting RAW light !
Great format in post also !

Best Regards