 |
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||
Today we have a rather interesting quad-core powered NAS from QNAP that isn’t powered by the usual suspects such as Intel, Marvell, Freescale or even Annapurna Labs. Rather AMD can be found powering the new TS-x63 range from QNAP with their embedded G-Series quad-core 2.0GHz SoC. Thanks to AMD-V technology support the TS-563 that we are looking at today can run multiple Windows, Android, Linux and UNIX virtual machines... Since being announced a few months ago at Computex 2015 we have been keen to get our hands on a member of the TS-x63 series for the simple reason that it is one of the first AMD powered NAS to hit the market.
 The TS-563 is available in one of two base configurations. The TS-563-2G that we have for review comes with 2GB of DDR3L RAM pre-installed. The more desirable TS-563-8G features 8GB of DDR3L RAM out of the box. That said both models are upgradable to 16GB RAM, the more expensive TS-563-8G only requires a single extra 8GB module to achieve that capacity. Other than flexible memory options the TS-563 offers a number of other interesting features, such as support for a 10GbE PCIe expansion card, hardware-accelerated encryption, SSD-caching, Virtualization Station and expansion support using the QNAP UX-800P for 21 drives.
 Something we are interested to look at is power consumption, as the AMD G-Series 2GHz processor features a 25w TDP rating which is considerably higher than the 10w Celeron J1800 that many of the previously released QNAP models have featured. It probably isn’t that surprising then that QNAP states a 48 watt load consumption for the TS-563, whereas the TS-451 received a 31 watt rating, 35% less. Power rating aside we are very keen to see how the TS-563 performs in relation to products such as the TS-451, Synology DS1515+ and Asustor AS-5104T for example. Pricewise the TS-563 costs $560 for the humble 2GB model and $710 for the better equipped 8GB model. In comparison the TS-451 costs $510 (4GB), the Synology DS1515+ is fetching $770 ($650 for the non-plus model) and the Asustor AS-5104T is priced at $590 (2GB). Therefore the primary competitors of the QNAP TS-563 will be the Synology DS1515 and Asustor AS-5104T. |
|||||
|
|
ProX |
Posted on: 08/28/2015 12:50 AM
That power consumption is pretty bad, I wouldn't want that running 24/7 at my house. |
|
Ricky |
Posted on: 08/28/2015 11:21 PM
I just picked one of these up. QNAP make great NAS products and the TS-563 is cheap for a five bay NAS. My TS-563 has five WD Red 4TB NAS hard drives in a RAID 5 setup, so pretty much the same as this review. |
|
Remi |
Posted on: 09/01/2015 02:16 AM
Keep in mind 4 hdd setup. Each red drive eats approx 10Watt when read/write mode (from WD RED data sheet). So if you have 4 drives that's already 40watt. From review take those 40watts from 60 and you have 20watts machine (compare hdd setups on other machines in review and safely ignore power charts as that don't make any sense until all machines have same hdd setup). Want to have low power setup go with SSDs then you'll have machine just under 30watts. For such powerful machine 20watts is nothing. Just ordered one.... |
|
Steven Walton Posts: 104 Joined: 2010-02-08 |
Posted on: 09/01/2015 06:35 AM
Posted by Remi on 09/01/2015 03:16 AM
What do you think the other NAS devices were tested with? Moth Balls? The very page you are talking about features a little paragraph at the top that states; “Every NAS tested is filled with WD Red 4TB hard drives unless specified otherwise. NAS devices with just 2-bays are tested using RAID1, while devices supporting three or more drives will be tested using RAID5.” Taking that into account what makes you believe the Synology DS415+ and DS1515 for example were tested with anything other than four WD Red 4TB hard drives? Again all NAS devices with four or more bays were tested using the same four WD Red 4TB hard drives. FYI under maximum load the 4TB Red drives consume a little less than 7 watts and in our test they would be consuming even less than that, so nothing like the 10 watts you claim. QNAP themselves claim almost 50 watt consumption using 2TB hard drives. Also I have to wonder why you would install only SSDs in such a slow NAS :S |
|
Remi |
Posted on: 09/02/2015 09:59 AM
SSDs for SSD cache (hence 'slow unit' become fast) nothing stops opt for 4x1GbE or 2x10GbE if going for speed. For that money you pay for it and have all these features it's not bad at all. AMD and power is always a question, but will see what can be done to tweak that if possible at all. But if you run couple VMs on this unit that's already power saving saving I guess... Thanks for review. |