Page 10 - NAS Performance, Power Consumption
For our network attached storage tests, I have used the renowned QNAP TS-470 connected to our central home network with CAT5e wiring. The QNAP TS-470 is one of the company's SOHO/SMB systems, and is one of the fastest NAS we have tested here at APH Networks. The client computer was configured with the following specifications:
CPU: Intel Core i7-4790K @ 4.6GHz
CPU Cooling: Noctua NH-D15S
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD3H-BK
RAM: Patriot Viper 3 Low Profile PC3-17000 4x8GB
Graphics: Gigabyte G1 Gaming GeForce GTX 960 4GB
Chassis: Fractal Design Define R5
Storage: OCZ Vector 180 240GB; Crucial MX200 500GB
Power: PC Power & Cooling Silencer Mk III 1200W
Sound: Auzentech X-Fi Bravura
Optical Drive: LiteOn iHAS224-06 24X DVD Writer
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro
Loaded with different hard disk drives, our QNAP TS-470 was ready to roll. According to the engineers at QNAP, and proven to be true in our performance benchmarks, Intel Gigabit LAN adapters -- at least on the client side -- traditionally performs better than their Realtek and Marvell counterparts. Therefore, to prevent any bottlenecks on the client side, our Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD3H-BK motherboard was connected to the network via its integrated Intel Gigabit LAN adapter. We also conducted the above test on our OCZ Vector 180 240GB solid state drive on the client side to ensure there was nothing limiting the performance of our QNAP TS-470 than the NAS itself. In the write test, the NAS HDD ST8000VN0002 came in a hair behind at the Red Pro 6TB at 110.66MB/s, versus the Western Digital's 111.88MB/s score.
As with our previous results, we had four WD40EFRX 4TB for testing, so a quad HDD RAID 5 array was built to see how the Red drives performed in a real life network attached storage system setup. Because running a RAID 5 array does have quite a bit of operation overhead, especially when it comes to write speed, it was perfectly reasonable to see a performance drop, as you can see in the first graph above. The speed drop was due to factors contributed by the NAS box itself, as well as the hard drives to some extent. I only have one ST8000VN0002 for testing, but it is safe to assume a similar performance drop if you were to place several Seagate NAS HDD 8TB drives in the same RAID 5 configuration.
In the read test, all drives in single mode came out to be extremely close to each other, with the Seagate NAS HDD ST8000VN0002 8TB came it a hair behind the WD Red Pro 6TB yet again at 111.03MB/s. With that in mind, let us see how it performs across the curve in our remote ATTO benchmarks.
ATTO disk benchmark provides valuable insight into evaluating disk performance; it is especially valuable since it is not local disk limited like Windows file copy -- but rather the network adapter itself. After first using it in our QNAP TS-559 Pro+ review back in 2010, ATTO has been an integral part of our storage benchmarks; used in everything ranging from USB flash drives to solid state disks. Venturing in the area of 117MB/s in read and write for pretty much everything 32K and up, remember that the theoretical maximum of Gigabit Ethernet is 'only' 125MB/s (1000Mbps / 8) with overhead -- this is downright impressive. Interestingly, the ST8000VN0002 had a slightly faster ramp up than the Red Pro 6TB, and a considerable improvement over its 4TB NAS HDD counterpart. With four Western Digital Red WD40EFRX 4TB hard drives running in RAID 5, there was a speed penalty at 32K and above, as expected. Again, I would assume a similar performance drop if four Western Digital Red Pro WD6001FFWX 6TB hard drives were configured the same way.
With one hard drive installed, our QNAP TS-470 consumed the most power with Seagate's NAS HDD ST8000VN0002 8TB installed; tying the HGST Deskstar NAS 4TB and the two Western Digital Red Pros, all of which are 7,200 RPM models. Consider most network attached storage systems will be running 24/7, and there will more than likely be multiple hard drives installed, every watt will definitely add up on your power bill. When idling, the entire system equipped with both regular WD Red variants took only 25W, whereas the same system configured with the speedy but hungry 7,200RPM drives from all three manufacturers took 28W -- a whopping 3W difference for just one drive alone. Interestingly, this was not the case in our load tests. The system equipped with the Seagate NAS HDD ST8000VN0002 8TB was not bad, considering its speed and capacity. At 37W, it was exactly the same as the slower 5,900RPM Seagate NAS HDD 4TB, which was tied with the WD Red Pro 4TB.
With four WD40EFRX installed, you can really see how it all adds up. While idling, the system took 35W; loading it up boosted this figure to 52W. How will this compare if we were to have four NAS HDD ST8000VN0002 8TB disks? To extrapolate the graphs a bit, this means running quad NAS HDD 8TB drives concurrently will probably take 47W idle and 56W load at my guess. The Seagate NAS HDD 8TB, a fast enterprise-based drive, will run you a few bucks more per month on your power bill. That said, while it did not consume the least power at idle, its load efficiency was surprisingly good.
Page Index
1. Introduction, Features, Specifications
2. A Closer Look, Test System
3. Benchmark: AIDA64 Disk Benchmark
4. Benchmark: ATTO Disk Benchmark
5. Benchmark: Crystal Disk Mark 3.0
6. Benchmark: HD Tach 3.0.1.0
7. Benchmark: HD Tune Pro 4.60
8. Benchmark: PassMark PerformanceTest 8.0
9. Benchmark: PCMark 7
10. NAS Performance, Power Consumption
11. Conclusion
