NAS for Media streaming

bloodline76

bloodline76

bloodline76

Soldato
Joined
7 Feb 2004
Posts
9,492
I am looking to purchase a NAS for media streaming, I have been using my main pc for a few years and it does tend to wear out the hard drives.

I have less than 4TB of data, so two drives (Main and backup) should be fine, but I would go up to four if it offered better functionality.

I see there are a few deals for WD NAS devices, although they seem a little old.

Can anyone advise what you would recommend. I use Plex for the management side.

I was looking at these two:

My Cloud EX2 Ultra 2-bay NAS​

Synergy DS220J

Thanks in advance. :D
 
Last edited:
I don't think anyone here would recommend a WD NAS. The best makes are Asustor, QNAP & Synology (not Synergy). The DS220J is the entry-level model but should handle what you want as long as you don't need transcoding in Plex. You should set the drives as RAID1 (mirror). Note that you can't just move the drives from your PC without losing the data as the first thing the NAS will do is format them. Don't skimp on the drives; go for WD Red Plus or Seagate Ironwolf and buy at least one size up from what you currently need i.e. 6TB or 8TB.

Shameless plug: I have an Asustor NAS or two in the MM and the 4-bay is much more capable than the DS220J.
 
With Black Friday coming up you can be almost certain there will be deals on the Synology range, that's when I bought mine last year, saved quite a bit.
 
Snapshot said:
I don't think anyone here would recommend a WD NAS. The best makes are Asustor, QNAP & Synology (not Synergy). The DS220J is the entry-level model but should handle what you want as long as you don't need transcoding in Plex. You should set the drives as RAID1 (mirror). Note that you can't just move the drives from your PC without losing the data as the first thing the NAS will do is format them. Don't skimp on the drives; go for WD Red Plus or Seagate Ironwolf and buy at least one size up from what you currently need i.e. 6TB or 8TB.

Shameless plug: I have an Asustor NAS or two in the MM and the 4-bay is much more capable than the DS220J.
Click to expand...
Hi, what would you recommend for hard drives in a NAS please? Im looking at getting a Zappiti Neo over black friday (no idea if it will get a discount, but im happy to wait a few days to see!). Spoke to their sales people and they recommend WD drives, so was looking at a 20tb WD red. thats the max size the Neo can take (According to the sales team), and i dont really want anything smaller as i have several hundred discs (bluray, dvd and 4k) to go on
 
Snapshot said:
I don't think anyone here would recommend a WD NAS. The best makes are Asustor, QNAP & Synology (not Synergy). The DS220J is the entry-level model but should handle what you want as long as you don't need transcoding in Plex. You should set the drives as RAID1 (mirror). Note that you can't just move the drives from your PC without losing the data as the first thing the NAS will do is format them. Don't skimp on the drives; go for WD Red Plus or Seagate Ironwolf and buy at least one size up from what you currently need i.e. 6TB or 8TB.

Shameless plug: I have an Asustor NAS or two in the MM and the 4-bay is much more capable than the DS220J.
Click to expand...
Yeah, its a little pricy for my choice at the moment plus a new one is only a little bit more expensive. Obviously you put some RAM in, which i don't know the price.
I will wait for the Black Friday sales to see what they reduce too. Thanks for the advice, appreciated.
 
Mallers said:
Hi, what would you recommend for hard drives in a NAS please? Im looking at getting a Zappiti Neo over black friday (no idea if it will get a discount, but im happy to wait a few days to see!). Spoke to their sales people and they recommend WD drives, so was looking at a 20tb WD red. thats the max size the Neo can take (According to the sales team), and i dont really want anything smaller as i have several hundred discs (bluray, dvd and 4k) to go on
Click to expand...
What is so special about the Zappiti Neo?

Why not get a Synology or Qnap NAS, pair of hard drives, and a Nvidia Shield or Apple TV to use as a client - all that lot would still probably be cheaper, and can do a lot more than just be a media player (with a single hard drive that's you know is going to fail at some point)
 
bloodline76 said:
Other than keeping your computer on all the time. What is the difference between using a NAS and just putting a NAS drive in your computer for the media?
Click to expand...
A NAS is purpose built for the job, very stable, very low energy compared to a PC. A good modern 2 bay NAS will idle at 3w to 6w and when in use (being read etc) rarely exceed 20w contrast this with a modern PC.

NAS are designed to offer RAID security, which is more tricky to setup and manage on a PC, though obviously doable. The NAS are just specifically designed to do this, which a PC is not, so perhaps offers a little more security, I say perhaps. They are certainly easier to use for a more novice user. if 1 drive fails, you don't lose your data, basically, which you would with a single drive solution.

You can also locate the NAS anywhere with a LAN connection. Mine is in a cupboard, silent, out of sight and out of mind.

A modern NAS (talking Synology, QNAP etc. (not the WD rubbish), can also be accessed from anywhere safely, inside or outside if you enable it, and by virtually any device, phone, tablet, TV etc.

Not all NAS can transcode media, but most or all can run PLEX. That depends on the processor.

The software environment is key for a NAS, generally Synology is considered the best software, with many 'apps' that can be installed and used. for example, cloud backup, share sync between NAS devices etc.

QNAP generally offers more hardware for the money, and a good software package, but not as good as Synology. Synology hardware is generally a little more expensive. Pick your poison.

Personally I have 2 Synology NAS, at 2 different sites. The mirror live to each other, and both run and Transcode PLEX, plus backup my cloud files etc. I prefer to invest up front in the hardware I need, and then use the better Synology environment to achieve what I want, need easily.

They offer my access to my files from anywhere, security, and backup when combined together, plus a failover. I have replaced my PC's a number of times in the last few years, but with the NAS solution, dont have to worry about my data security being reliant on my PC.

It is not a perfect system, I am aware of that, but a NAS offers increased peace of mind, data access flexibility and security and cost savings re. elec.
 
Last edited:
martin363 said:
A NAS is purpose built for the job, very stable, very low energy compared to a PC. A good modern 2 bay NAS will idle at 3w to 6w and when in use (being read etc) rarely exceed 20w contrast this with a modern PC.

NAS are designed to offer RAID security, which is more tricky to setup and manage on a PC, though obviously doable. The NAS are just specifically designed to do this, which a PC is not, so perhaps offers a little more security, I say perhaps. They are certainly easier to use for a more novice user. if 1 drive fails, you don't lose your data, basically, which you would with a single drive solution.

You can also locate the NAS anywhere with a LAN connection. Mine is in a cupboard, silent, out of sight and out of mind.

A modern NAS (talking Synology, QNAP etc. (not the WD rubbish), can also be accessed from anywhere safely, inside or outside if you enable it, and by virtually any device, phone, tablet, TV etc.

Not all NAS can transcode media, but most or all can run PLEX. That depends on the processor.

The software environment is key for a NAS, generally Synology is considered the best software, with many 'apps' that can be installed and used. for example, cloud backup, share sync between NAS devices etc.

QNAP generally offers more hardware for the money, and a good software package, but not as good as Synology. Synology hardware is generally a little more expensive. Pick your poison.

Personally I have 2 Synology NAS, at 2 different sites. The mirror live to each other, and both run and Transcode PLEX, plus backup my cloud files etc. I prefer to invest up front in the hardware I need, and then use the better Synology environment to achieve what I want, need easily.

They offer my access to my files from anywhere, security, and backup when combined together, plus a failover. I have replaced my PC's a number of times in the last few years, but with the NAS solution, dont have to worry about my data security being reliant on my PC.

It is not a perfect system, I am aware of that, but a NAS offers increased peace of mind, data access flexibility and security and cost savings re. elec.
Click to expand...
Which Synology NAS's do you have? I think its the right move as my computer is overloaded with hard drives, would be nice to reduce the storage.
Still looking out for some bargains on Black Friday but nothing has jumped out for me.

I hear a lot of good things about the Synology DS920+. Bit more expensive but might be worth it in the long run for the extra hardware and space.
 
I have a 2 x 220+, 2 bay NAS with an intel Celeron, and I upgraded the Ram to 6GB in each. Because I have 2, at different sites I think to an extent they replicate the 4 drives to the 920+, but with the obvious benefit of having them at different locations. These are powerful machines, but obviously with only 2 drives each.

I think (I havent checked) that the 920 is basically the same as the 220+, but obviously with more drives. The upfront cost for me is the drives, more than the NAS. I use Ironwolf drives, no issues to date, each has about 30,000 hours of use to date.

I used to have a 218j, which was my first venture into NAS, and I learnt a lesson, assume you need more and buy more, hence where I am now. The processor enables the features. If you are just going to store information, then a low power NAS is fine, but want to transcode a 220j is the minimum currently (big step up from the 218j), but run virtual machines such as Home assistant in Docker, then you need one with the + designation.

buy the best you can. If you use it, you wont regret it. Skimp, and you may regret it, or may not, depending on what you use it for.

Can I ask why not the 420+?
 
Last edited:
martin363 said:
I have a 2 x 220+, 2 bay NAS with an intel Celeron, and I upgraded the Ram to 6GB in each. Because I have 2, at different sites I think to an extent they replicate the 4 drives to the 920+, but with the obvious benefit of having them at different locations. These are powerful machines, but obviously with only 2 drives each.

I think (I havent checked) that the 920 is basically the same as the 220+, but obviously with more drives. The upfront cost for me is the drives, more than the NAS. I use Ironwolf drives, no issues to date, each has about 30,000 hours of use to date.

I used to have a 218j, which was my first venture into NAS, and I learnt a lesson, assume you need more and buy more, hence where I am now. The processor enables the features. If you are just going to store information, then a low power NAS is fine, but want to transcode a 220j is the minimum currently (big step up from the 218j), but run virtual machines such as Home assistant in Docker, then you need one with the + designation.

buy the best you can. If you use it, you wont regret it. Skimp, and you may regret it, or may not, depending on what you use it for.

Can I ask why not the 420+?
Click to expand...
Just looked at ones that people recommended and got good reviews. The 920+ was just spoke highly of. No one mentioned the 420+

I have bought the 920+ as it was on black Friday, got two WD Red Plus's of 6GB each. Time will tell if I have made the wrong decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom