New to the forums, long term Plex user running on windows based machine. I want to purchase a dedicated NAS for Plex along with surveillance station. I want the best possible NAS that will be able to handle 4K etc, money is not an object but I don’t want to go overkill if I don’t have to. Needs to be able to handle at least 5 devices accessing at any one time.
Would appreciate your suggestions.
the best NAS for Plex? QNAP.
a) cpu power
b) superior tech support by miles.
I have had a DS1815+ now for a while. I switched to QNAP TVS-1282 (large step) because I need the transocding. I wasn’t going to pay Synology’s price for the older processor (launch date) and inferior support.
@ChuckPA said:
the best NAS for Plex? QNAP.a) cpu power
b) superior tech support by miles.I have had a DS1815+ now for a while. I switched to QNAP TVS-1282 (large step) because I need the transocding. I wasn’t going to pay Synology’s price for the older processor (launch date) and inferior support.
What a monster…
I was looking at qnap but i don’t really need 12 bay but want to future proof. Is the i7 what i should be looking for if i want 4K?
Yes, My machine is a monster. With what I do here at Plex, it’s warranted.
I run VMs for tech support (different OS distributions I can spin up instantly).
If you want HEVC, you need the i7-class Skylake (microarchitecture) processor or above to play to those devices which do not support HEVC natively yet. IMHO, avoid HEVC unless you’re using the dedicated player OR able to DirectPlay to the TV.
Of interesting note, the TVS 1282 has 3 video outputs, 1 is 4K capable.
With 4K and H.264, you have some breathing room in the other i7-class machines provided you only transcode a couple streams.
QNAP does make some models in desktop format which you can upgrade the CPU.
In reviewing, the TVS-1282 is the top of the desktop with Skylake. If you want to push beyond that, you’ll want the KabyLake microarchitecture
The TVS-1582 might be of interest as well as the TVS-882.
Specifically, you’re looking for any i7-7700 series (KabyLake). i7-6700 series is SkyLake.
Using the developer-drop PMS 1.6.0 version which has hardware transcoding, The 6700 handles 5 4K H.264 -> 2K H.264 with ease.
FWIW: I am converting 40+ Mbps video -> 20 Mbps in that step. The only CPU involvement, other than shoveling the data, is audio conversion.
I prepare my media for DirectPlay / DirectStream wherever possible. Why transcode the video every time if I don’t need to.
QNAP folks are VERY helpful in product determination. They won’t oversell you either (VERY pleased).
State your needs (they are very aware of PMS), and they will help you. When I was making initial inquiry, their attention to detail made the difference. I’ve since discovered a few bugs in QTS and their responsiveness is, as i said, superb. I’ve had more feedback from QNAP in the 2 months I’ve owned it than I’ve gotten from Synology in the 3 years I’ve owned one.
I’m sure other Qnap & Synology users will correct me where I"m mistaken or have omitted but nothing in the Synology line compares with QNAP’s hardware. QTS 4.3.3 got a huge step up. It’s more ‘tech oriented’ than Synology’s DSM by giving you access to things directly in the GUI.
I hope I’ve helped and not babbled.
Just want to put in an other option: If you’re not looking for that many bays for storage but do want to use a high-end cpu, you can also look for a combination with a cheaper, low-powered NAS with the storage you’re looking for and get yourself a recent Intel NUC with a skylake/kabylake CPU to run PMS on. I would go for a kabylake i5, power/performance ratio is a bit more bang for the buck compared to the i7 and both run the same intel iris GPU featureset (Iris 640 for the i5, 650 for the i7, with the only difference that the 640 is clocked a bit lower. I would go for kabylake because they support HW decode 10-bit HEVC video; skylakes do not if I recall correctly…
Most NAS systems will always be relatively underpowered, until you’re willing to spend a lot of money on them. Downside is that if you run PMS on a different computer you`ll have manage two systems.
The SkyLake can handle HEVC just as the KabyLake can. It’s just not quite as good doing it in the GPU. All of this is predicated on using HW assisted decoding or transcoding in the GPU. Both are harder to run 2 with software decoding (CPU-only)
Regarding the QNAP TVS-1282 & similar units. It does a better job at PMS than my i7 desktop ever could.
Thanks for posting the info Chuck! I really don’t want to hijack the thread, however I don’t feel it’s necessary to create a fresh thread for this question (which might aid the OP).
I’ve been a Synology user for quite some time (I’ve purchased 4 NAS units over the past 8 years or so). I’ve always been fairly fond of the GUI and how easy everything was to use. Obviously familiarity is something we all like, however the lack of adequate hardware has had me pondering moving to either QNAP or my own NAS build. I’m looking for a little guidance in what I should do on my next “upgrade”.
With QNAP, my perception has always been that the hardware is much better than Synology, but the software is really lacking. Do you feel this is the case? I use quite a few of the Synology packages and apps and noticed that QNAP offers many of the same features… Are they comparable is your opinion? Is there anything you prefer about Synology over the QNAP?
With custom built NAS (I presume running FreeBSD), I feel I could get the best value and most flexibility from a hardware perspective, but am a bit worried about the software side. I’ve built ~10 or so computers in my lifetime and really enjoy doing it, however I’ve loaded Windows OS on every one of them which I am incredibly familiar with. I’m a little worried that going this route might be a headache, as I’m really not familiar with the stability or feature set of FreeNAS.
Are any of these options more/less friendly with Plex?
Any advice you could share would be greatly appreciated!
Anything contributory is welcome as long as it’s on topic. 
(all I ask anyway)
If you’re going with a solution:
@ChuckPA said:
the best NAS for Plex? QNAP.a) cpu power
b) superior tech support by miles.I have had a DS1815+ now for a while. I switched to QNAP TVS-1282 (large step) because I need the transocding. I wasn’t going to pay Synology’s price for the older processor (launch date) and inferior support.
IMO, Asustor.
What I do with mine puts a lot of higher end machines to shame, hands down. (and I have a lot of “how to” posts on both these and Asustor’s forums to help someone out.)
Lesser known, but just as capable, and a lot better UI to work with than QNAP. (Having used both.) Even though it still uses a flavor of BusyBox, it’s still a Linux core.
Right now I’m using PMP on the 7004T to watch something through PMS (on the same box) and using only 15%-20% total resources of one CPU even while transcoding. (With the HW Transcoding beta.) (I thank people like @father.mande on the Asustor forums for the work they have done to further the capabilities of my system beyond what I could have imagined.)
Regarding bays: Take the storage you THINK will need and double it, and plan on the bays to handle that. I bought a 4-bay and am now wishing I had gotten the 8 or even the 10 bay model. At 30T+, I have quite a few external enclosures hanging off of the base NAS.
Mike is 100% correct on the PMP and planning ahead on storage. I started with 5x 4TB. I started ripping my discs. Before long I had all 8x 4TB. Only thing I was unaware of was mpv. The Syno couldn’t do the work. I moved to the QNAP for two reasons; storage (the second NAS) with 8x 6TB and the bigger CPU for transcoding.
Along comes PMP with mpv at the heart. I only need the big cpu for things like the TV and Roku. Whatever I play on the computer is done locally by PMP/mpv.
You’ll quickly see the overlapping hardware.
At Mike’s suggestion, I compared the 7004T to an equivalent (I hope) QNAP. Prices match up so it comes down to which interface you’re happier with. Translation: Test drive both their online demos and see which you like.
This is What I compared to the ASUSTOR 7004T (i3 version).
QNAP TVS-471-i3-4G-US 4-Bay Intel Core i3 3.5GHz Dual Core, 4GB RAM, 4LAN, 10G-ready (TVS-471-i3-4G-US)
@ChuckPA Thanks for the advice Chuck… you make some great points. I’m likely going to shy away from a DIY approach until I have more free time in my life. I feel you likely have a better ability to answer the questions I’m looking for (than just looking at individual reviews of products) as you’re someone who’s been a heavy user on both platforms. Would you mind answering these questions for me?
Do you agree that Synology beats QNAP on the software side? Or would you say they are equally capable and it’s just a difference of GUI?
Is there anything you miss about your Synology NAS?
Thanks!
@“MikeG6.5” I’m relatively new to Asustor. In going through their product catalog, it appears their hardware is more in line with Synology. How are you able to get more out of that than a QNAP with an i7-7700? I’ve built a number of computers so I know that specs don’t always equate to performance, but there’s usually clear reasons why this is the case (for instance I was able to get better/faster transcoding out of a lesser powerful Intel CPU that had QuickSync than a beastly Xeon). Can you explain a little further what allows the Asustor to far outperform a QNAP with much better specs?
Thanks!
From a UI ‘pretty’ factor (Human Factors / Ergonomics Engineering), Synology is very “MacOS like”. It hides a great deal from you / does a lot for you. That said, it does limit you from doing many things which the QNAP allows.
If you approach Synology from a "Windows / Mac user’s perspective where everything is point & click while approaching QNAP from a Linux user’s perspective (being the magician and ‘hands on’ technical ) you’ll be very on target.
QTS 4.3.3 is a huge improvement over 4.2 from the UI perspective. It’s only been out a couple months and you will find a few small kinks. It took me longer to learn Synology’s thinking than to learn QNAP’s. This is why it’s very important to test-drive each vendor’s ‘live’ demo environment,.
There is nothing from Synology which I miss being QNAP based now.
Here’s the bullets as I see them from the technical perspective.
There are more but hope this gives you the big points as I see them.
@ChuckPA You’ve been a huge help. I’m thinking a QNAP is in my near future. I might have to wait for Santa though 
I’m currently rocking the DS2415+ and overall it’s been great but I’m ready for a big performance upgrade. I like the idea of using the DS2415+ as a dedicated offsite backup for my new QNAP.
That 469 MB/sec you referenced is ridiculous! I have a gigabit network and utilize adaptive load balancing on my Syno (don’t have a managed switch at home so LACP is out for now) and usually peak out around 120 MB/sec total coming into the Syno using 2 ethernet ports. I might have to look at grabbing a managed switch to get LACP up and running as that’s a huge throughput improvement!
Thanks again for sharing your time to help a stranger out!
Thanks for the detailed information guys, really helpful stuff! Looking at the specs QNAP blows Synology away with the different options available, i’m surprised Synology don’t have models to compete apart from DS3617xs??
@GoSpursGo said:
@ChuckPA You’ve been a huge help. I’m thinking a QNAP is in my near future. I might have to wait for Santa though
I’m currently rocking the DS2415+ and overall it’s been great but I’m ready for a big performance upgrade. I like the idea of using the DS2415+ as a dedicated offsite backup for my new QNAP.That 469 MB/sec you referenced is ridiculous! I have a gigabit network and utilize adaptive load balancing on my Syno (don’t have a managed switch at home so LACP is out for now) and usually peak out around 120 MB/sec total coming into the Syno using 2 ethernet ports. I might have to look at grabbing a managed switch to get LACP up and running as that’s a huge throughput improvement!
Thanks again for sharing your time to help a stranger out!
LACP works on a “Many to One” model. Many clients (IP addresses) to one central IP. This said, You cannot LACP 4 ports into a switch (as one IP) with another NAS also having LACP of 4 ports (again, one IP) and get 4 Gbps out of it. LACP is a ‘many lanes on the bridge’ mechanism. Each traffic lane is still limited to 1 Gbps. Having 4 lanes gives us the 4 Gbps.
When you work out the math, as we all see, 1 Gbit will usually max out at 115-120 decimal megabytes/sec. This is correct. The actual physical limit, starting with the binary base, and ending in the decimal is:
# 1024 Megabits / sec
# expr 1024 \* 1048576
1073741824
# Converted to bytes (raw physical capacity)
#expr 1073741824 / 8
134217728
# now deduct 10% for ethernet, ip, and tcp overhead (multiply by 90 then divide by 100)
# expr 134217728 \* 90
12079595520
# expr 12079595520 / 100
120795955
There’s our 120 MB/sec 
What does this say? 4 ‘lanes’ of gigabit can pull a theoretical max of 4 x 120 MB/sec (480 MB/sec).
There are some good switches which do it. Yes, they are managed. I have two. HPE-1280-8G and its bigger brother the 24G
The 8G is about $150 USD and the 24G is about $200 USD. I needed the 24.
In this shot, you see the QNAP pulling 3 legs stable. Next I add the 4th leg and the Syno struggles a bit to get going and then settle out. It’s never as solid as 3 legs but there is no reason to complain as we’re now above performance spec of the device.
Hope this helps
Edit: Note: “spec of the device” is “Specification performance limit of the Synology RAID delivering 4 independent data streams”
One caveat to the test drive of demos. Plex Media Server won’t be available on either of the demos. So you won’t be able to actually test Plex out.
That said, the interface is just a web front end for most NAS manufacturers. If you are heart set on one of these devices, I suggest you get the (free) tool WinSCP, which gives you access to PuTTY as well as another terminal type of window. It also gives you a more fleshed out file manager. And did I say it was free? (As is PuTTY.)
There are some things that can’t be done within the respective manufacturers front ends. The only way to do those things is either through scripts or command line. Take the time to look at some of the links I have in my signature to see the tutorials I have for Asustor. (Many of which will also work on QNAP or Synology, I understand.)
I’ve run all three of the brands talked about here. And Asustor is the only one I’ve had more than one device from that manufacturer. If that doesn’t say something, well…
Asustor is much closer to the QNAP interface with the ADM (Asustor Device Manager) than it is to Synology. (From what I remember.) The underlying OS is Busybox, which isn’t a truly fully capable port of any mainstream Linux. It does take a bit of work to get some commands to work for you. But, even with that extra work, I have PlexRequests (Now Ombi), PlexPy, Calibre and NextCloud all working on the box flawlessly… (As well as Plex Media Server and Plex Media Player out to my TV.)
PlexRequests (Ombi) took me a bit of work to make happen, due to the mono requirement, and some instabilities with the “official” Asustor Mono image. I now test the page to see if it’s up, if no response, the script kills all instances of Ombi and then starts a new instance.
I also run NetData on the box, which gives me a good RT idea of load on HDD’s, CPU, etc. So when I say a total of 20% load on the machine doing something, that’s what it really is. (Out of a 400% possibility, due to 4 cores.)
In any case, take a peak at the links in my sig. Regardless of which NAS you get, some of them are going to work for you.
Here are the live demos.
QNAP User: qnap, Pass: qnap
synology has a new virtual machine manager in beta. it works on the ds3617xs and allows ‘real’ vms. also not a docker fan myself.
i have just migrated from a ds1813+ to a ds3617xs and so far i’m quite happy.
Dantech, if you haven’t picked up your NAS yet, I recommend the Synology DS918+. Quad-core CPU capable of transcoding 4K video. Desktop unit with 4 bays. Option for addition SSD caching, which it shouldn’t need, but it’s there if you want it. Very happy with mine. (FYI, to decode Synology’s model naming convention, the last two digits represent the initial market year.)
