In my last post I compared the performance of Synology DS1511+ against the QNAP TS-859 Pro. As I finished writing that post, Synology announced the new Synology DS2411+.
Instead of using a DS1511+ and DX510 extender for 10 disks, the DS2411+ offers 12 disks in a single device. The price difference is also marginal, DS1511+ is $836, the DX510 is $500, and the DS2411+ is $1700. That is a difference of only $364, and well worth it for the extra storage space, and the reliability and stability of all drives in one enclosure. I ended up returning my DX510 and DS1511+, and got a DS2411+ instead.
To test the DS2411+, I ran the same performance tests, using the same MPIO setup as I described in my previous post. The only slight difference was in the way I configured the iSCSI LUN; the DS1511+ was configured as SHR2, while the DS2411+ was configured as RAID6. Theoretically both are the same when all the disks are the same size, and SHR2 ends up using RAID6 internally.
iSCSI LUN configuration:
At idle the DS2411+ used 42W power, and under load it used 138W power. The idle power usage is close to the advertised 39W idle power usage, but quite a bit more than the advertised 105W power usage under load.
I use Remote Desktop Manager to manage all my devices in one convenient application. RDM supports web portals, Remote Desktop, Hyper-V, and many more remote configuration options, all in a single tabbed UI. What I found was that the Synology DSM has some problems when running in a tabbed IE browser. When I open the log history, I get a script error, and whenever I focus away and back on the browser window, the DSM desktop windows shift all the way to the left. I assume this is a DSM problem related to absolute and relative referencing. I logged a support case, and I hope they can fix it.
Script error:
Test results:
Device
|
ATTO Read
|
ATTO Write
|
CDM Read
|
CDM Write
|
PM810 | 267.153 | 260.839 | 256.674 | 251.850 |
DS2411+ | 244.032 | 165.564 | 149.802 | 156.673 |
DS1511+ | 244.032 | 126.030 | 141.213 | 115.032 |
TS-859 Pro | 136.178 | 95.152 | 116.015 | 91.097 |
The DS2411+ published performance numbers are slightly better than the DS1511+ numbers, and my testing confirms that. so far I am really impressed with the DS2411+.
Peter,I was wondering if there have been any developments (other than your post) concerning the Streamload/Mediamax fiasco? I lost a lot of files that I would STILL like to get back. I am sure that others would too. Thanks!
LikeLike