NAS vs. Microserver

OpenToSuggestions

OpenToSuggestions

OpenToSuggestions

Soldato
Joined
5 Aug 2006
Posts
11,421
Location
Derbyshire
Hi all.
I posted on here recently as I wanted a NAS.
I still do...but I have noticed that the HP ProLiant Gen8 G1610T Micro Server can be had brand new for £180, which compared to £140 for the Synology NAS I was looking at seems like a lot more functionality for little extra cost.

I live alone, have a gaming PC upstairs and a clapped out old Core 2 PC under my TV.
What would I benefit from this though? Would a Micro Server up my leccy bills by much compared to the NAS?
 
Microserver is by far the better option. There isn't much of a difference in cost of running them but you'll be glad of the scalability of the microserver and the flexibility as well. It's great being able to run a full OS.

I began with a micro server, then bought another and then built a "big" home server whilst still using the other 2 MS's. Well worth it.
 
I can build PCs fine but have never done worked in IT.
I agree that for £180 the HP Microserver is a stonking deal.

What does a Microserver alow me to do that a NAS doesn't?

I have never even made a website. I could use it for torrent downloads (which on fibre are quick anyway) and a general NAS.
 
I've gone from a server (essentially the same as a microserver) to a Synology NAS.

For me, Synology wins hands down.

Simplicity
Native NFS shares
Super low power usage
Native sql db

I found with a full blown server for my usage, I was fiddling too often.

Now I use my old server for about an hour a week to make a backup of my Synology
 
Note that the Microserver comes with no OS whereas the NAS does, so that will make the HP box considerably more expensive.

I have to say that I like the look of the chassis, but I'd want to upgrade the CPU and RAM. Can the CPU be upgraded? Does the motherboard support VT-D? Do OCUK do a similar chassis?
 
Ease of use of the NAS will be hands down greater, which if you just want file storage and torrenting (and a few other bits) will be a huge bonus.
 
I'm in the process of moving from my micro server to a nas, I don't make use of it and just need a simple file share
 
Last edited:
Hyburnate said:
I love my microserver, I can have 5 hard drives in it for a few hundred cheaper than a NAS.
Click to expand...

Same here, originally had a NAS with 2 drive bays but then upgraded to the micro server, threw on Hypervisor and ran with some VM's ( 2 x NAS VM's and a Windows 7 running as a media server).
 
The place I have seen the Microserver on is now 150 pounds due to a cashback offer.
I would actually prefer a 2 bay NAS but at this price I think the potential future expandability and the ability to hold 4 3.5" hard drives a big bonus.

Could I just replace the aging Core 2 Duo PC under my TV with the Micro Sever? I would only use it for watching HD material, Youtube, Spotify etc.
 
i moved from a DS1010+ to a HP N40L.

main 2 points for me were:

1) cost - the microserver was significantly cheaper to expand
2) flexibility - the microserver was infinitely more flexible, can host VMs etc

however things i miss from the NAS:

1) performance - my N40L SUCKS at media transcoding (plex etc), whereas the DS1010+ flew through it (built in DNLA).
2) simplicity - pretty much plug and play and tick the options you want enabled.
 
Simplicity of the NAS wins hands down for me - I messed about with a lot of options like microservers, cheaper NAS, etc. and wish I'd just saved myself the hassle/money and bought the QNAP in the first place. The other stuff I might do on a microserver I felt was better split off to a discrete system in the end anyhow.

Might not be the story for everyone however - microservers do have a lot of positive depending on what you want from the NAS.
 
What QNAP model did you go with in the end?
What do you use it for, just networked storage, or any other functionality?

I'm looking to replace an old PC, which mainly runs plex server to make my media files available over the network. Trying to decide whether to go the microserver or nas route. I know the older microservers had some issues with transcoding, but I'm hoping the gen 8 will be plenty powerful enough.
 
It is horse for courses. I have both and in the end I use the my 2 bay Synology NAS box file sharing, media server etc, and re-purposed the Microserver N36L as a ESX host.
The G8 has much more grunt and you could put Synology OS on the G8.

As most people here as said, NAS is simpler to operate, media server, iSCSI support etc. The G8, you can use for anything you want later on if you like.

To be honest, if I was to choose again, I would have gone for a 4 bay Synology. Enough storage to last a long time, large # of media and iSCSI drives.
 
HP Microserver currently £150 with cash back you wont regret it.

If you buy it and end up not getting on with it then just sell it and buy something else.
 
edGfaCTor said:
HP Microserver currently £150 with cash back you wont regret it.

If you buy it and end up not getting on with it then just sell it and buy something else.
Click to expand...

I agree based on your budget, get the Microsrver. As people has said, it all depends how much you like to tinker and how tolerant other users are of tinkering, fettling,etc. If, in the end you get fed up tinkering you can sell it or use it for something else like a home lab or media centre.
 
Would the Microserver work well replacing my old Core 2 living room PC?
I know it will be faster but I don't think there is sound on the Microserver.
I have a fairly recent low profile video card which will fill the only PCIe slow as I need HDMI. Will that sort the sound?

Edit: Video card is a GeForce 210.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom