NAS Media Server that can handle 4K video transcoding and has a nice interface... but for less than £200? ($270)

[BradL1234]

Been wanting a NAS for the longest time but everytime I look at reviews for some of the cheapish ones, I get many mixed reviews. I have been recommended the Synology brand for a while now and even though I would love to get one, they are too pricey for my liking. I have seen the Western Digital My Home ones are around my price range but the only problem being I have seen many mixed reviews saying they can be often slow and the interface can be annoying to deal with.

 

Could anybody recommend a good NAS that isn't too pricey but also runs well? I am willing to up my budget a little more if the price isn't too high. Thanks!

[KingTdiGGiTTy]

Are you comfortable with a DIY FreeNAS box?

[Haraikomono]

I could be so terrible, and say synology

[Dutch_Master]

Build your own! Now, up front I can tell you that your budget will/can not include the actual storage (HDD's) as a single high capacity drive (8TB and more) is (well) over your budget alone.

 

So, with expectations suitably adjusted, pick up a used workstation machine from Dell, HP, IBM or Lenovo from wherever you can find it, install TrueNAS, your storage drives and away you go   (actually, install the drives before TrueNAS ) You need a minimum of 2 drives in RAID1. They can be from the same manufacturer, but it's advisable they aren't, to lessen the risk of simultaneous failures. If you add more drives, redundancy improves (and with that the risk of data loss decreases) as you can harden the RAID to allow for more drive failures. There is a point of diminishing returns and it's surprisingly low: 4 disks is pretty much the norm for RAID setups these days. See the following table (of sorts) for a relation between the number of disks and RAID level advised:

• 2 disks -> RAID1 -> capacity 1x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 1 disk
• 3 disks -> RAID5 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 1 disks
• 4 disks -> RAID6 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 2 disks
• 6 disks -> RAID51 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 4 disks
• 8 disks -> RAID61 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size-> redundancy of 6 disks
• 9 disks -> RAID55 (!!) -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 5 disks

A few years ago, the LMG storage server died, an LTT video was made to document the horrors Linus had to face solving that disaster. Why was it such a disaster? Because he used a RAID50 setup. in Win-OS no less! Any RAID level with a 0 in it is like playing Russian Roulette with your data, a catastrophe waiting to happen. So, compelling as it may sound to add the capacity of the various drives together to get more storage space, your data will be lost and you'll never expect it happening at the moment it does. Which is always sooner then you'd think So, if your data is critical or otherwise important to you, follow the 3-2-1 rule: keep 3 copies of that data on 2 separate locations, one of which is off-site!

[BradL1234]

20 minutes ago, Haraikomono said:

I could be so terrible, and say synology

hahaha. It isn't like I can't afford one by any means but for what I would be using it for, it just seems like a lot of money. I may end up caving and just buying one but I'm going to look at my options first

[BradL1234]

32 minutes ago, Dutch_Master said:

Build your own! Now, up front I can tell you that your budget will/can not include the actual storage (HDD's) as a single high capacity drive (8TB and more) is (well) over your budget alone.

 

So, with expectations suitably adjusted, pick up a used workstation machine from Dell, HP, IBM or Lenovo from wherever you can find it, install TrueNAS, your storage drives and away you go   (actually, install the drives before TrueNAS ) You need a minimum of 2 drives in RAID1. They can be from the same manufacturer, but it's advisable they aren't, to lessen the risk of simultaneous failures. If you add more drives, redundancy improves (and with that the risk of data loss decreases) as you can harden the RAID to allow for more drive failures. There is a point of diminishing returns and it's surprisingly low: 4 disks is pretty much the norm for RAID setups these days. See the following table (of sorts) for a relation between the number of disks and RAID level advised:

• 2 disks -> RAID1 -> capacity 1x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 1 disk
• 3 disks -> RAID5 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 1 disks
• 4 disks -> RAID6 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 2 disks
• 6 disks -> RAID51 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 4 disks
• 8 disks -> RAID61 -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size-> redundancy of 6 disks
• 9 disks -> RAID55 (!!) -> capacity 2x the smallest disk size -> redundancy of 5 disks

A few years ago, the LMG storage server died, an LTT video was made to document the horrors Linus had to face solving that disaster. Why was it such a disaster? Because he used a RAID50 setup. in Win-OS no less! Any RAID level with a 0 in it is like playing Russian Roulette with your data, a catastrophe waiting to happen. So, compelling as it may sound to add the capacity of the various drives together to get more storage space, your data will be lost and you'll never expect it happening at the moment it does. Which is always sooner then you'd think So, if your data is critical or otherwise important to you, follow the 3-2-1 rule: keep 3 copies of that data on 2 separate locations, one of which is off-site!

Thanks for the reply man. I will look into it. I haven't really made up my mind on what I am going to do yet. The server is mainly to backup some of my files and also to use it for Plex (Movies and Shows, 4K etc.) I may end up caving and just get a mid-range NAS from Synology or something along those lines

 

I do have my old PC parts that would be fine to use if I end up going the freeNAS route.

[BradL1234]

40 minutes ago, KingTdiGGiTTy said:

Are you comfortable with a DIY FreeNAS box?

I'm looking for something that runs well and doesn't take up much room. FreeNAS is something I have also been suggested a few times. I may look more into it as an option if I don't end up caving and buying a mid-range Synology NAS. I still have my old PC parts so I could probably buy a cheap power supply and some more storage and use that... I would just need to find the room

[tikker]

The general advice for 4k transcoding is still "just don't". Either get hardware that can Direct Play it, or store it in a format that can be Direct Played. There is more hardware that can do it, but it's still something you want to avoid in my opinion.

[Pixel5]

8 hours ago, tikker said:

The general advice for 4k transcoding is still "just don't". Either get hardware that can Direct Play it, or store it in a format that can be Direct Played. There is more hardware that can do it, but it's still something you want to avoid in my opinion.

in terms if prebuild NAS systems i would agree but even something as simple as an i3 10100 can transcode 5 4k streams at the same time easily.

[tikker]

1 hour ago, Pixel5 said:

in terms if prebuild NAS systems i would agree but even something as simple as an i3 10100 can transcode 5 4k streams at the same time easily.

Interesting. Full on transcode or just 5 streams? Also hardware or software, because hardware transcoding will require a Plex Pass as an FYI to the OP. I'm still and advocate for avoinding transcodes where you can.

[Pixel5]

1 hour ago, tikker said:

Interesting. Full on transcode or just 5 streams? Also hardware or software, because hardware transcoding will require a Plex Pass as an FYI to the OP. I'm still and advocate for avoinding transcodes where you can.

full transcode 5 4k streams without dropping frames at around 85% load on the iGPU so yea only works with hardware transcoding.

 

[tikker]

6 minutes ago, Pixel5 said:

full transcode 5 4k streams without dropping frames at around 85% load on the iGPU so yea only works with hardware transcoding.

 

Ah that's still pretty neat. Hardware has come a long way then. I have spoiled myself with Shield + AVR so there is hardly anything that won't Direct Play for me. Throwing away a perfectly fine 4690k felt bad, even though it's doing mostly nothing now that transcoding happens once in a blue moon.

[BradL1234]

2 hours ago, tikker said:

Ah that's still pretty neat. Hardware has come a long way then. I have spoiled myself with Shield + AVR so there is hardly anything that won't Direct Play for me. Throwing away a perfectly fine 4690k felt bad, even though it's doing mostly nothing now that transcoding happens once in a blue moon.

My i5 4690k is just sitting in my old pre built that I dont use anymore. I may just find the space and use my old build as a server. It would be a better option compared to a NAS. Would definitely run better.