QNAP TS-251 File Transfer Performance Report


QNAP TS-251 is the first Intel Celeron J1800 I have test. It supports up to 8GB RAM and the 64-bit QTS is capable to handle more than 4GB RAM. Although TS-251 and J1800 both support up to 8GB DDR3L RAM, I wonder how 32-bit QTS could manage RAM beyond 4GB?

Below is the unix name and version info for QTS on TS-251:

[~] # uname -a
Linux NASE4DDCE 3.12.6 #4 SMP Thu Jun 5 00:31:44 CST 2014 x86_64 unknown
[~] # uname -m
x86_64

Anyway, let’s see if it could outperform other Intel Atom processors on file transfer!

Processor and RAM Difference

TS-251 has a J1800 at 2.41GHz burst to 2.58GHz; N2560 has a CE5335 SoC at 1.6GHz; TS-112 is based on a Marvell 88F6282 SoC at 1.2GHz; TS-119PII and TS-212P are Marvell 88F6281 at 1.6GHz and 2.0GHz respectively; TS-269L is Atom D2701 at 2.13GHz; N2310 has a single core APM86491 running at the lowest 800MH.

J1800 is based on Bay Trail which is part of the Atom family. It has 2 cores but without hyper-threading technology which means it may serve only 2 threads concurrently. The 1MB cache size is still the same to D2700 but officially support for 8GB RAM which is double to D2700. CE5335 SoC and D2700 are based on Berryville and Cedar Trail respectively. Both have 2 cores with hyper-threading technology. The former has 512KB L2 Cache and supports 32-bit physical addressing while the latter has 1MB and supports 36-bitAPM86491 is based on Power465 with FPU and has 64KB L1 cache with 256KB L2 Cache. Marvell 88F6282 SoC and Marvell 88F6281 both have 32-bit instruction set.

Both TS-251 and TS-269L come with 1GB. TS-251 is expandable to 8GB while TS-269L is 3GB. The 64-bit QTS could manage RAM beyond 4GB. TS-119PII, TS-212P, and N2310 are fixed to 512MB;  N2560 is 2GB; TS-112 is just 256KB.

Test Method

I connect NAS to computer directly, use the same test sample in File Transmission with Different Sharing Solution on NAS, and use Linux command mount for better performance.

Two protocols are used in this test: Samba and NFS. You may learn more about how to setup the test with NFS and Samba to do your own test.

TS-251 is configured with Seagate Desktop HDD 500GB * 1. Others are listed in comparison table.

According to my MTU test, I keep it to use default 1500.

I also add test result from following as reference:

  1. File Transmission with Different Sharing Solution on NAS
  2. Performance Comparison on Backup Linux Files to QNAP TS-212P
  3. QNAP TS-119PII File Transfer Performance Report
  4. QNAP TS-269L File Transfer Performance Report
  5. Thecus N2310 with Firmware 743 File Transfer Performance Report
  6. Thecus N2560 File Transfer Performance Report

Performance

File transfer performance on QNAP TS-251 via Samba with mount command.
File transfer performance on QNAP TS-251 via Samba with mount command.
File transfer performance on QNAP TS-251 via NFS with mount command.
File transfer performance on QNAP TS-251 via NFS with mount command.

Analyze

TS-251 single drive is very closed to TS-269L with RAID 1 on both Samba and NFS transfer. Just a little bit slower. It is about 15% slower on NFS reading than N2560 and N2310 but faster anything else.

TS-251 is faster than TS-212P and other 1 bay devices on most items but TS-212P and TS-119PII is about 3% faster on NFS reading. Since the difference is less than 5%, I choose to ignore.

Other Thoughts

For file transfer, if you preferred metal case which feels more solid, you might want to keep your TS-269LBut what make TS-251 shine is Virtualization, you may install Virtualization Station because J1800 support VT-x.

It is a big improvement on NAS because you will no loner be restricted by QTS. You may run your applications in a virtual machine without waiting QTS to support. There are many applications already many virtual machines available in TurnkeyLinux. No need to wait for QPKG not QTS upgrades, just run the virtual machine in your NAS. It is a perfect solution for server appliance!

For those who need more RAM to run applications, TS-251‘s capability to support 8GB RAM is charming. But without QTS support, I must test before telling you all 8GB is accessible.  The 64-bit QTS is capable to handle more than 4GB RAM.

About QTS 4.1, I do encounter problems with TS-119PII but not with TS-251. On my TS-119PII, it stops responding during copying files to NAS via NFS several times. If I use SSH and top to monitor process during copying, files copied without problems. Therefore, I cannot identify the issue and downgrade to 4.0.7 which runs smoothly.

Reference

  1. AppliedMicro APM86491
  2. Asustor
  3. Connect NAS to your Computer Directly
  4. File Transmission with Different Sharing Solution on NAS
  5. Intel: Celeron Processor J1800 (1M Cache, up to 2.58 GHz)
  6. Intel Newsroom: Intel Launches System-on-Chip Storage Solution Designed for Simple Video Transcoding and Streaming
  7. Intel: New Storage Solutions Based on the Intel® Atom™ Processor CE5300 Series Simplifies HD Content Sharing and Delivery Between Mobile Devices and Smart TV
  8. Intel: Products (Formerly Bay Trail)
  9. Intel: Atom Processor
  10. Intel Atom Processor D2700
  11. Marvell: Marvell 88F6281 SoC with Sheeva Technology
  12. Marvell: Marvell 88F6282 SoC
  13. Maximum MTU doesn’t mean Best Performance
  14. Performance Comparison on Backup Linux Files to QNAP TS-212P
  15. QNAP
  16. QNAP: QTS
  17. QNAP: TS-112
  18. QNAP: TS-119PII
  19. QNAP TS-119PII File Transfer Performance Report
  20. QNAP: TS-212P
  21. QNAP: TS-251
  22. QNAP: TS-269L
  23. QNAP TS-269L File Transfer Performance Report
  24. QNAP: Virtualization Station
  25. Seagate: Desktop HDD
  26. Seagate Surveillance HDD
  27. Synology
  28. Thecus
  29. Thecus Forum: Third party modules
  30. Thecus: N2310
  31. Thecus N2310 with Firmware 743 File Transfer Performance Report
  32. Thecus: N2560
  33. Thecus N2560 as a ZurmoCRM Application Server Performance Report
  34. Thecus N2560 File Transfer Performance Report
  35. TurnkeyLinux
  36. Use BFNP Framework to Optimize your NAS File Transfer Performance
  37. Using Microsoft Networking via Samba with QNAP TS-112 and LevelOne GNS-1001
  38. Using Network File System (NFS) Service with QNAP TS-112
  39. Why NAS is Getting More and More Popular
  40. Wiki: Hyper-threading
  41. Wiki: Instruction set
  42. Wiki: LAMP (software bundle)
  43. Wiki: List of Intel Atom microprocessors: CE SoCs: Dual-Core CE SoCs
  44. Wiki: Network File System
  45. Wiki: Samba (software)
  46. Wiki: Secure Shell
  47. Wiki: Standard RAID levels: RAID 1
  48. Wiki: Thread (Computer)
  49. Wiki: top (software)
  50. Wiki: uname
  51. Wiki: Virtual machine
  52. Wiki: Virtualization
  53. Wiki: x86 virtualization: Intel virtualization (VT-x)
  54. ZurmoCRM

6 thoughts on “QNAP TS-251 File Transfer Performance Report

    • This is really a surprised to me! For file transfer, I see no reason to replace TS-269L. But as a server appliance, the build-in Virtualization Station is definitely a PLUS!

      Unfortunately, it requires 2GB RAM to launch. I will write another post to introduce this feature when I got extra RAM to test this feature.

      Thanks for your information!

      Like

  1. FYI, the both ram modules should be used the same size on the Bay Trail.
    It means that, you should use following matrix to install the ram modules on TS-251:
    1GB*2 or 2GB*2 or 4GB*2 (Max Memory Size is 8GB)

    Liked by 1 person

    • You are right. I use cat /proc/version and take it as x86 only.

      [~] # cat /proc/version
      Linux version 3.12.6 (root@NasX86-4) (gcc version 4.1.3 20070929 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu2)) #4 SMP Thu Jun 5 00:31:44 CST 2014

      Instead, I should use uname.

      [~] # uname -a
      Linux NASE4DDCE 3.12.6 #4 SMP Thu Jun 5 00:31:44 CST 2014 x86_64 unknown
      [~] # uname -m
      x86_64

      Thank you very much!

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s