I am desperately waiting for a DS3621xs updated with 2x 10Gbe and 2+ x 2,5" Slot für Cache and a powerfull CPU (incl. Plex transcoding). Something that can compeate with Qnap´s TS-1685. But I like Synology DM over the QTS from Qnap. Please Synology.
I ordered this NAS but while in transit to my door, I saw this review and realized that it doesn't have the Hybrid RAID (SHR) that I guess ONLY the lower-end Synology NAS systems come equipped with. Why on Earth would Synology take OUT this useful feature from of a higher end model is beyond me! I hope that the folks here at NASCompares really sticks it to Synology so that they implement it into future higher-end NAS boxes. I understand that SHR is perhaps not the most efficient of RAID configurations, but anyone who has HDDs of varying sizes like I do needs to use a Hybrid RAID otherwise there will be tons of wasted space. So instead of keeping the functionality in the higher end systems and allowing the user to decide what they want to use, Synology removes the feature and forces us to use a traditional RAID configuration where all the HDDs need to be the same size to fully utilize the space. So, Synology, instead of getting $1,700 from me, you're going to only get $700 on a lesser model when I return this one for one that has SHR.... and I'm then not as happy of a customer for getting something less than I was expecting. Boo Synology, Boo!
I'm holding out for their rack mount NAS also. What i don't like about where Synology is headed is the use of older CPU's. They are continually releasing new hardware with 5-7 year old CPU's. The addition of the 10GBe is a milestone.
I'm hoping they release a NAS that is worthy of an upgrade from the RS1619xs+. Otherwise a lower end Synology NAS with 10GBe card for SOHO and QNAP for media server.
When your buying something like this, SHR is less important as your not likely going to be mixing different size disks when using this, RAID6 works fine even if your expanding the disks at at later date you just unplug each one put the bigger HDD in and let it rebuild and rinse and repeat once all disks are installed expand the storage to fill the new array size
@@jusia80 I agree SHR is more a consumer feature then a business feature, unsure if there is any reason what makes SHR not suitable for business as (bar loss of to many disks to fail the array) I haven't heard of any problems with SHR
@@leexgx The chance of a second disk failing during a rebuild and causing loss of data rises relative to the number of disks and the capacity of those disks. I haven't seen a clearer reason given anywhere but it is likely that Synology does not want to shoulder the responsibility of data loss happening with SHR since it is their branded technology, and their pain threshold can be found at the edge where units stop supporting SHR due to the increased number of bays. If an unrecoverable loss does happen, it won't be because of SHR if SHR is not supported. If a RAID5 sees two disks failing and loses data, it's much less likely that someone will directly blame Synology even though the unit was their make, RAID5 mechanics are universal and disks failing are usually attributed to the disks themselves
@@jusia80 but also the size of the disks increases th chance for another disk to fail or at least have an data error (you shouldn't be using raid5 beyond 2tb really as there rebuild times get longer so far higher chance if second fault But really should not use raid5 at all as it can't handle dual faults witch RAID6 can even when rebuilding a disk (with 1-2 hot spare it can stay quite resilience to multiple disk failures) i cringe whenever I see somebody using 8TB hard drives with Raid 5 One question I use LSI cards (mainly dell firmware ones, but I believe hole punch in a unrecoverable error is just a standard LSI feature, but dell seem to make it sound like it's a dell only when it seems it isn't) redundancy is loss but the disks are still working just with missing data where the unrecoverable error occurred does Synology support this "Hole punch" feature say you have raid5 with 4 disks and 1 fails so no redundancy now and you get a unrecoverable data error on another disk (say disk 3) but the disk 3 it self does not fail it just has spot on the drive that is unrecoverable (dual fault), how does the Synology react to that as on LSI raid cards they array will stay up but with the missing data where the data was stored (you have to delete and recreate the array to remove the broken array) will Synology stay up in failed raid hole punched mode or just crash the array? With raid6 most of the above is normally not an issue as even with a disk failed you still have redundant data to replace missing data if a data error happens while failed disk (as to why most say TrueNas Z3/{or mythical raid7 level} is still not needed today (as read patrol and consistently check should pick up on physical problems before a disk flat out fails)
as there has been said many times you mostly pay for the software but if you wanted a newer CPU in that nas like the i7-7700k it would jump in price with 1500 USD but remember you also pay A LOT for the logo just like with apple
The biggest problem with Synology is their chassis and obsolete hardware. If they offered 2 PCIe bays, they would sell a lot more of these. Say that though, QNAP are going to the other way, offering better hardware, but now trying to milk their customers by requiring them to purchase licenses for their basic software.
@@EViL3666 can't consider a qnap due to security problems with their firmware (still not seen a report on why so many qnap devices been easily compromised) until full security audit has been done to fix bad security practices won't touch a qnap (the fact they need a malware remover tool is not to confidence in the device)
@@leexgx I don't blame you, it took them months to disclose the cause of QSnatch, which turned out to be injected through a vulnerability in one of their media apps. The biggest problem is not even these vulnerabilities, it's the QNAP (and other vendors) are encouraging consumers to open their devices to the internet.
Bernt Espelien ....surely, what you really want to know (as I do!) is how these Xeon processors handle video/transcoding/plex using brute force processing rather than having assistance from a gpu, be that internal or external to the processor. Ie if the Xeon can transcode &/or run plex okay through its raw power, then maybe you don’t need to add that gpu?
Lawrence Dunn well... Without gpu support and without SHR, Im thinking the Qnap TVS-672XT might be a better alternative for a 10gbe, 6 bay Plex NAS, since the i3 comes with the UHD360 to begin with and most of my files are 4K
Bernt Espelien ....when I started looking at QNAP’s options (after initially looking at Synology to replace an old Synology DS-207+), I quickly zeroed in on the TVS-872XT, so pretty much like you, I just wanted the extra drive bays to future proof myself, and you get an i5 vs i3, and I think an increase in base ram, so the extra kind of made sense to me, but.... ....I then read about Quts Hero & the ZFS file system, & cut long story short, I then started getting interested in the TS-H886 (which comes with Quts Hero). The H886 is a few hundred pounds cheaper than the TVS-872XT, which would fund a faster network card to go in one of the PCIe slots. I’m actually thinking of going for a 25Gbe or even 40Gbe one instead of the 10Gbe one. The other thing that is making me think H886, is the speed of the two PCIe slots vs on the 872XT. The 872XT has a Gen 3 x16 & a Gen 3 x4 PCIe slot ( the gen 3 x16 being used for the thunderbolt card/ports, which could be replaced with something else). While the H886 has two Gen 3x8 PCIe slots. I was thinking of populating one with a high speed network card as mentioned, and potentially the NVMe 4 slot card at a later date if/when 4TB NVMe sticks become more widely available & affordable, for a high speed storage area for video use. So I think the more even spread of PCIe slot performance might be the way to go for me.
dt8884 the qnap is 75 watt vs 62 watt typical use.so no big difference here. 166 mm x 282 mm x 243 mm synology vs qnap 231,9 × 292,9 × 319,8 mm Both still small. The qnap in ZFS filesystem and way better hardware is no Brainer if you take a look what ZFS offers. 32GB vs 128GB, 2x SSD slots extra, GPU support on the Qnap. snap a nvidia card in it! ZFS, way better Virtual machine implementation. I Will replace my DS3018xs for sure with a qnap ts--h886
dt8884 no it is full redesigned New QTS Hero OS. Complete new product line. Good business Solution. But sure buy the synology if it Give a good feeling.
I really wonder how good the chances are for a lower specked ds 1621/1622+ or an 1822+? Too me a lower specked cpu would be o.k. don't necessarely need a Xeon. BUT i want to have at least 6 bays, SHR support, ECC ram, 10 Gbe RJ45, built in nvme and a PCI slot out of the box.
These cpu are already pretty low spec. (The one in this new NAS is 5 years old already) These are NOT Xeon that are used in servers. These are more or less Intel Pentium chips with ECC turned on.
@@Dave_CDN_IrishDAB I know but i also do not care that much how old or powerfull a CPU in my NAS is. Since i use it mainly for fileserving a XEON might be overkill anyway. ECC Ram is kinda important to me, so even a lower specked CPU with ECC support would do for me. At the moment i am using a DS620Slim and a DS 918+ and the CPU of the latter works fine for what i use the NAS for. A similar CPU with ECC support (no matter how old), 10Gbe and most important SHR would do for me - if a 1621+/1622+ with those specs would be enough for me.
Do they sell replacement power supplies? What are the best bang for the buck enterprise hard drives to use? Would like SSD but they may be too much $$. Thanks
@nascompares You like to say these are "Xeon" CPU's. To be clear they are NOT server Xeon CPU's. (I feel like it is a bit of a mislead to your less informed viewers.) They are Intel Xeon D Processor. A much lower performance cpu. These are more or less a Intel Pentium with ECC turned on. The chip in this NAS is also almost 5 years old. It was launched Q4 of 2015.
You are completely correct and perhaps I should be more relative. I should add though that XEON W and Silver CPUs are almost never desktop based due to the power required, cost affecting the entire system and the extent to which that process can be pushed in a desktop architecture (typically 8 bay max and comparatively compact) system. I agree with you though and should perhaps add that caviat in the interests of staying grounded.
you are the best.. :) and could you tell more about the memory upgrade ? 8gb is nothing, but this is not a problem for synology because we can upgrade it...
Im now torn between the 1819+ with the possibility of getting that 10g/Nvme Adapter Card and the 1621+ that everything included. Since I am going for low end 4GB Harddrives I am more concerned with the additional heat and noise the 21 produces, since I will be using this in an office environment. Also I would have liked to upgrade individual harddrives over time and the removal of SHR support seems counter intuitive to me since it was supported on lower end NASes allready. Does that mean that SHR support will also be removed in future models as well?
Been praying Synology release all NASs with both 10GBe or at least 2.5 / 5 and NVME drives but then they release a NAS with all this and still with a PCie card slot?? Really? So either they give customers nothing they want or then more than anyone would really need with all those features and still with a card slot?? Just crazy. God they drive me crazy sometimes.
NASCompares .....good to hear you have that comparison coming. It would be interesting to see how these Xeons cope with video/transcoding/plex I think, because these units are starting to deliver the sort of combination of hardware than many enthusiasts have been waiting for, but using Xeon, and the video/transcoding/plex performance is not so well documented using brute force from a Xeon vs guy enabled cpus.
@@nascompares I can now be the spokespearson of NASCompares whats coming next :) Joking aside I would be interested to know the security compares between the two. Thanks in advance and much appreciated as always.
Plex testing finished last week on this device (should have a video on it up by the weekend) and yeah, though the Xeon put alot of raw power into the task, it still didn't give the top tier usage Vs output of an 8th/9th gen i3/5. Still performed well and I would still rank it as the best Synology desktop plex machine so far, but still that lack of embedded gfx hurts.
NASCompares .....awesome! Thank you, looking fwd to watching that one. I guess if you throw even more raw power at the task, like an even better Xeon, then it can only help! I will have to compare the raw power of the Xeon in this Synology, to the Xeon in the QNAP H886 to see potentially how much better at transcoding/plex the H886 might be, and watch your video coming up very carefully to aid in that comparison.
I get confused with 10Gbe, what sort of cable does it use? I have 10gbe on my motherboard but it also accepts a regular ethernet cable, which I thought was RJ45. Will this plug into my motherboard's port?
@@rcast05 thanks, so in the video here you can see the 10gbe port does not look the same as the 1G ports. Is this a SFP+? My motherboard looks like it's plain RJ45
@@leevfx 10gbe is same port as the 1gbe (RJ45) on the back of the unit it's the 3 ports to the left of This unit (2x1gbe ,1x10gbe) For very short length you can get away with probably just a normal cat5e cable on 10gbe but more ideal if you use cat 6 or 7 cable more so) SFP/SFP+ is a different type of Socket then RJ45
@@leevfx That is a RJ45 port on that NAS. Note: if you get a Switch that has SFP+, you can buy adapter that are SFP+ to RJ45, and that is what I have. Also, SFP is limited to 1GLAN, make sure that says SFP+.
Is the chassis sturdy metal similar to the DS1618+ or rather like the DS1019+, cheap and noisy ? (I hope the first option but you never know with them). Thanks.
I own the DS1621xs+ and currently there are no PCIe M.2 cache cards that are supported. Their own E10M20T1 card is not even recognized with M.2 Drives present. Have you tested this or is it just me?
How does this compare to the RS1619xs+? Considering both for large storage and remote editor server purposes. Haven’t decided on SSD or HDD, but leaning towards HDD for larger storage.
Wonder how much faster the cpu actually is compared to a 4125. It has HT, ECC and supports 128 GB of Ram butit's also 5 years old and the 4125 is surprisingly capable for a Celeron. And it has a GPU and QuickSync. Geckbench didn't have a score for the Xeon.
@@nascompares :-) I didn't want to ask you for more work. You already do a ton. Was wondering if I missed any benchmarks for the Xenon. Its weirdly missing from most CPU benchmark websites. Love your content by the way.
Actually there are two extremely similar Xenons. D-1520 which is more or less the same but half a year older and has a geekbench of 3300 and the D-1521 which is a bit more powerful ( 2.4 instead of 2.2 GHz ) which has 5931. I kinda tend to believe the higher number because of the Hyperthreading. Which would make the D-1527 perhaps 50-80% faster than the J4125. www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-D-1520-vs-Intel-Xeon-D-1521-vs-Intel-Celeron-J4125/2662vs2712vs3667
I have a video on this very subject coming in a few days, but to confirm, I was successfully able to move a 4 disk SHR from a Synology DS420+ into the DS1621xs+. I had to reinstall the DSM.pat for the new NAS, but it maintained the SHR and files fine. Just make sure you have your backups in place dude!
Good video as usual. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. I wish this technic in a 4 bay NAS for 500 - 600 €. But I won't that see at Synology, I belive.
Which model supports 2.5Gb LAN as i have Asus Z590 E MB and Thunderbolt planning to use for CHIA Mining connecting to my personal gaming PC. Any advice is appreciated.
They are not dropping the service, it's just not available on their XS series. Unsure why. I addressed Synology about this last year at my Synology 2020 UK Q&A and their answer was a bit vague tbh.
NASCompares yeah, unfortunately companies/studios that use the 18xx 36xx XP’s series are not the same as the rack corporations. As usages increase are gradual, and there is no solution for the old drives. Needing to replace all drives at the same time just to increase storage space really are very costly, and wasteful. Maybe it’s a strategy with the hard drive partners. Thanks for the inquiry. Hopefully we will get the functionality back one day, but as far as the trend goes, even the 16xx are getting the treatment, I am not optimistic about it.
I agree and still have one. Though it also is SATA II, so that's the only reason it is now been downgraded to another backup tier. That said...last i3 Synology ever had...
@@mauritsl84 Thanks, Qnap has many great units, i am just more comfortable using Synology in the office, not that Qnap is 'bad' in any way. Planing on using my ds3617xs and the rs3618(way too loud) as dual backups for two of ds1621xs, when they become available.
You're a big fan of the word Utilisation aren't you! you can just use "use". You come across as trying to sound intelligent at times. You can use shorter words when they suffice.
Can I plug an USB printer to the USB port in the ds1621xs+ and be able to set it up as a network printer?
I am desperately waiting for a DS3621xs updated with 2x 10Gbe and 2+ x 2,5" Slot für Cache and a powerfull CPU (incl. Plex transcoding). Something that can compeate with Qnap´s TS-1685. But I like Synology DM over the QTS from Qnap. Please Synology.
I ordered this NAS but while in transit to my door, I saw this review and realized that it doesn't have the Hybrid RAID (SHR) that I guess ONLY the lower-end Synology NAS systems come equipped with. Why on Earth would Synology take OUT this useful feature from of a higher end model is beyond me! I hope that the folks here at NASCompares really sticks it to Synology so that they implement it into future higher-end NAS boxes.
I understand that SHR is perhaps not the most efficient of RAID configurations, but anyone who has HDDs of varying sizes like I do needs to use a Hybrid RAID otherwise there will be tons of wasted space. So instead of keeping the functionality in the higher end systems and allowing the user to decide what they want to use, Synology removes the feature and forces us to use a traditional RAID configuration where all the HDDs need to be the same size to fully utilize the space.
So, Synology, instead of getting $1,700 from me, you're going to only get $700 on a lesser model when I return this one for one that has SHR.... and I'm then not as happy of a customer for getting something less than I was expecting. Boo Synology, Boo!
Where’s the RS1220+? It’s been a long time.
I know, I know... Annoys me too
I'm holding out for their rack mount NAS also. What i don't like about where Synology is headed is the use of older CPU's. They are continually releasing new hardware with 5-7 year old CPU's. The addition of the 10GBe is a milestone.
I'm hoping they release a NAS that is worthy of an upgrade from the RS1619xs+. Otherwise a lower end Synology NAS with 10GBe card for SOHO and QNAP for media server.
Lets Hope they Will fix SHR in dsm 7.0
When your buying something like this, SHR is less important as your not likely going to be mixing different size disks when using this, RAID6 works fine even if your expanding the disks at at later date you just unplug each one put the bigger HDD in and let it rebuild and rinse and repeat once all disks are installed expand the storage to fill the new array size
There's a good chance they won't "fix" it since they leave out SHR from these on purpose, to favor the standard raid modes
@@jusia80 I agree SHR is more a consumer feature then a business feature, unsure if there is any reason what makes SHR not suitable for business as (bar loss of to many disks to fail the array) I haven't heard of any problems with SHR
@@leexgx The chance of a second disk failing during a rebuild and causing loss of data rises relative to the number of disks and the capacity of those disks. I haven't seen a clearer reason given anywhere but it is likely that Synology does not want to shoulder the responsibility of data loss happening with SHR since it is their branded technology, and their pain threshold can be found at the edge where units stop supporting SHR due to the increased number of bays. If an unrecoverable loss does happen, it won't be because of SHR if SHR is not supported. If a RAID5 sees two disks failing and loses data, it's much less likely that someone will directly blame Synology even though the unit was their make, RAID5 mechanics are universal and disks failing are usually attributed to the disks themselves
@@jusia80 but also the size of the disks increases th chance for another disk to fail or at least have an data error (you shouldn't be using raid5 beyond 2tb really as there rebuild times get longer so far higher chance if second fault
But really should not use raid5 at all as it can't handle dual faults witch RAID6 can even when rebuilding a disk (with 1-2 hot spare it can stay quite resilience to multiple disk failures) i cringe whenever I see somebody using 8TB hard drives with Raid 5
One question I use LSI cards (mainly dell firmware ones, but I believe hole punch in a unrecoverable error is just a standard LSI feature, but dell seem to make it sound like it's a dell only when it seems it isn't) redundancy is loss but the disks are still working just with missing data where the unrecoverable error occurred
does Synology support this "Hole punch" feature
say you have raid5 with 4 disks and 1 fails so no redundancy now and you get a unrecoverable data error on another disk (say disk 3) but the disk 3 it self does not fail it just has spot on the drive that is unrecoverable (dual fault),
how does the Synology react to that as on LSI raid cards they array will stay up but with the missing data where the data was stored (you have to delete and recreate the array to remove the broken array) will Synology stay up in failed raid hole punched mode or just crash the array?
With raid6 most of the above is normally not an issue as even with a disk failed you still have redundant data to replace missing data if a data error happens while failed disk (as to why most say TrueNas Z3/{or mythical raid7 level} is still not needed today (as read patrol and consistently check should pick up on physical problems before a disk flat out fails)
The processor is 5 years old WTF Synology. Came out in 2015.
Was just going to say the same thing. High price for very old CPU.
as there has been said many times you mostly pay for the software but if you wanted a newer CPU in that nas like the i7-7700k it would jump in price with 1500 USD but remember you also pay A LOT for the logo just like with apple
The biggest problem with Synology is their chassis and obsolete hardware. If they offered 2 PCIe bays, they would sell a lot more of these.
Say that though, QNAP are going to the other way, offering better hardware, but now trying to milk their customers by requiring them to purchase licenses for their basic software.
@@EViL3666 can't consider a qnap due to security problems with their firmware (still not seen a report on why so many qnap devices been easily compromised) until full security audit has been done to fix bad security practices won't touch a qnap (the fact they need a malware remover tool is not to confidence in the device)
@@leexgx I don't blame you, it took them months to disclose the cause of QSnatch, which turned out to be injected through a vulnerability in one of their media apps.
The biggest problem is not even these vulnerabilities, it's the QNAP (and other vendors) are encouraging consumers to open their devices to the internet.
Can you put a PCI Graphics card in this for Plex transcoding?
Unfortunately not. Sorry dude.
Thanks for letting me know! Love your videos. They are very helpful when planning to get a Nas.
Bernt Espelien ....surely, what you really want to know (as I do!) is how these Xeon processors handle video/transcoding/plex using brute force processing rather than having assistance from a gpu, be that internal or external to the processor.
Ie if the Xeon can transcode &/or run plex okay through its raw power, then maybe you don’t need to add that gpu?
Lawrence Dunn well... Without gpu support and without SHR, Im thinking the Qnap TVS-672XT might be a better alternative for a 10gbe, 6 bay Plex NAS, since the i3 comes with the UHD360 to begin with and most of my files are 4K
Bernt Espelien ....when I started looking at QNAP’s options (after initially looking at Synology to replace an old Synology DS-207+), I quickly zeroed in on the TVS-872XT, so pretty much like you, I just wanted the extra drive bays to future proof myself, and you get an i5 vs i3, and I think an increase in base ram, so the extra kind of made sense to me, but....
....I then read about Quts Hero & the ZFS file system, & cut long story short, I then started getting interested in the TS-H886 (which comes with Quts Hero). The H886 is a few hundred pounds cheaper than the TVS-872XT, which would fund a faster network card to go in one of the PCIe slots. I’m actually thinking of going for a 25Gbe or even 40Gbe one instead of the 10Gbe one. The other thing that is making me think H886, is the speed of the two PCIe slots vs on the 872XT.
The 872XT has a Gen 3 x16 & a Gen 3 x4 PCIe slot ( the gen 3 x16 being used for the thunderbolt card/ports, which could be replaced with something else). While the H886 has two Gen 3x8 PCIe slots. I was thinking of populating one with a high speed network card as mentioned, and potentially the NVMe 4 slot card at a later date if/when 4TB NVMe sticks become more widely available & affordable, for a high speed storage area for video use. So I think the more even spread of PCIe slot performance might be the way to go for me.
Any news on the DS1621+ at all yet, guesstimation / speculation wrt specs or price? :)
Just placed order and look forward for it
M L qnap 886 is way too big and double up my power consumption
dt8884 the qnap is 75 watt vs 62 watt typical use.so no big difference here. 166 mm x 282 mm x 243 mm synology vs qnap 231,9 × 292,9 × 319,8 mm Both still small. The qnap in ZFS filesystem and way better hardware is no Brainer if you take a look what ZFS offers. 32GB vs 128GB, 2x SSD slots extra, GPU support on the Qnap. snap a nvidia card in it! ZFS, way better Virtual machine implementation. I Will replace my DS3018xs for sure with a qnap ts--h886
M L qnap just not my cup of tea.. it’s a multi media center😉
dt8884 no it is full redesigned New QTS Hero OS. Complete new product line. Good business Solution. But sure buy the synology if it Give a good feeling.
M L I’m sure I’ll be happy as it’s the second one I buy this year😋
I love your videos.
can i use it for plex 4K Videos ?
I really wonder how good the chances are for a lower specked ds 1621/1622+ or an 1822+? Too me a lower specked cpu would be o.k. don't necessarely need a Xeon. BUT i want to have at least 6 bays, SHR support, ECC ram, 10 Gbe RJ45, built in nvme and a PCI slot out of the box.
These cpu are already pretty low spec. (The one in this new NAS is 5 years old already) These are NOT Xeon that are used in servers. These are more or less Intel Pentium chips with ECC turned on.
@@Dave_CDN_IrishDAB I know but i also do not care that much how old or powerfull a CPU in my NAS is. Since i use it mainly for fileserving a XEON might be overkill anyway. ECC Ram is kinda important to me, so even a lower specked CPU with ECC support would do for me. At the moment i am using a DS620Slim and a DS 918+ and the CPU of the latter works fine for what i use the NAS for. A similar CPU with ECC support (no matter how old), 10Gbe and most important SHR would do for me - if a 1621+/1622+ with those specs would be enough for me.
Do they sell replacement power supplies? What are the best bang for the buck enterprise hard drives to use? Would like SSD but they may be too much $$. Thanks
@nascompares You like to say these are "Xeon" CPU's. To be clear they are NOT server Xeon CPU's. (I feel like it is a bit of a mislead to your less informed viewers.) They are
Intel Xeon D Processor. A much lower performance cpu. These are
more or less a Intel Pentium with ECC turned on. The chip in this NAS is also almost 5 years old. It was launched Q4 of 2015.
You are completely correct and perhaps I should be more relative. I should add though that XEON W and Silver CPUs are almost never desktop based due to the power required, cost affecting the entire system and the extent to which that process can be pushed in a desktop architecture (typically 8 bay max and comparatively compact) system. I agree with you though and should perhaps add that caviat in the interests of staying grounded.
I am not sure if this is a stupid question! Without SHR can this still support different HD sizes throughout the trays?
you are the best.. :) and could you tell more about the memory upgrade ? 8gb is nothing, but this is not a problem for synology because we can upgrade it...
Is this a replacement for 1618+ ? If not what is the update model ?
Im now torn between the 1819+ with the possibility of getting that 10g/Nvme Adapter Card and the 1621+ that everything included. Since I am going for low end 4GB Harddrives I am more concerned with the additional heat and noise the 21 produces, since I will be using this in an office environment. Also I would have liked to upgrade individual harddrives over time and the removal of SHR support seems counter intuitive to me since it was supported on lower end NASes allready. Does that mean that SHR support will also be removed in future models as well?
Love the videos as always. Disappointed that it does not has SHR Support.
Been praying Synology release all NASs with both 10GBe or at least 2.5 / 5 and NVME drives but then they release a NAS with all this and still with a PCie card slot?? Really?
So either they give customers nothing they want or then more than anyone would really need with all those features and still with a card slot?? Just crazy.
God they drive me crazy sometimes.
I don't think synology is responding to customer feedback.
DS1621XS+ & TS-H886, would you do a comparison between the two please? Is qnap version more of a jack of all trade given its got 2 pci-e slots?
Filmed and coming in about a week. Thanks.
NASCompares .....good to hear you have that comparison coming.
It would be interesting to see how these Xeons cope with video/transcoding/plex I think, because these units are starting to deliver the sort of combination of hardware than many enthusiasts have been waiting for, but using Xeon, and the video/transcoding/plex performance is not so well documented using brute force from a Xeon vs guy enabled cpus.
@@nascompares I can now be the spokespearson of NASCompares whats coming next :) Joking aside I would be interested to know the security compares between the two. Thanks in advance and much appreciated as always.
Plex testing finished last week on this device (should have a video on it up by the weekend) and yeah, though the Xeon put alot of raw power into the task, it still didn't give the top tier usage Vs output of an 8th/9th gen i3/5. Still performed well and I would still rank it as the best Synology desktop plex machine so far, but still that lack of embedded gfx hurts.
NASCompares .....awesome! Thank you, looking fwd to watching that one.
I guess if you throw even more raw power at the task, like an even better Xeon, then it can only help!
I will have to compare the raw power of the Xeon in this Synology, to the Xeon in the QNAP H886 to see potentially how much better at transcoding/plex the H886 might be, and watch your video coming up very carefully to aid in that comparison.
DS1621xs+ with DX517 vs DS3617xs please for next video
Already on the schedule! Stay tuned. Thanks for watching.
@@nascompares thank you!
Any idea when it will be available?
Today is the launch date. So likely listed as available in stores now, likely in stock within the week
I get confused with 10Gbe, what sort of cable does it use? I have 10gbe on my motherboard but it also accepts a regular ethernet cable, which I thought was RJ45. Will this plug into my motherboard's port?
Yes. You have gave 10Gbe on a SFP+, and RJ45 format. As long as both end support the same speed you are good to go.
@@rcast05 thanks, so in the video here you can see the 10gbe port does not look the same as the 1G ports. Is this a SFP+? My motherboard looks like it's plain RJ45
@@leevfx 10gbe is same port as the 1gbe (RJ45) on the back of the unit it's the 3 ports to the left of This unit (2x1gbe ,1x10gbe)
For very short length you can get away with probably just a normal cat5e cable on 10gbe but more ideal if you use cat 6 or 7 cable more so)
SFP/SFP+ is a different type of Socket then RJ45
@@leexgx thanks - why does the 10gbe port look different out of the 3? is the plug different? this is whats confusing me
@@leevfx That is a RJ45 port on that NAS. Note: if you get a Switch that has SFP+, you can buy adapter that are SFP+ to RJ45, and that is what I have. Also, SFP is limited to 1GLAN, make sure that says SFP+.
can you recommend a synology nas for a 4K plex server capable of multiple remote connections I currently have a 918+ I also love the SHR
Is the chassis sturdy metal similar to the DS1618+ or rather like the DS1019+, cheap and noisy ? (I hope the first option but you never know with them). Thanks.
I own the DS1621xs+ and currently there are no PCIe M.2 cache cards that are supported. Their own E10M20T1 card is not even recognized with M.2 Drives present. Have you tested this or is it just me?
I know this is a year old, but, I have the same unit and I use the Sabrent Rocket NVMe 4.0 without issue.
@@SethParr thanks. I got it figured out. The is supported and officially supported. I went with some iron wolfs and had been working great
How does this compare to the RS1619xs+? Considering both for large storage and remote editor server purposes. Haven’t decided on SSD or HDD, but leaning towards HDD for larger storage.
Wonder how much faster the cpu actually is compared to a 4125. It has HT, ECC and supports 128 GB of Ram butit's also 5 years old and the 4125 is surprisingly capable for a Celeron. And it has a GPU and QuickSync. Geckbench didn't have a score for the Xeon.
I would make that comparison, but at 550 Vs 1600 pounds, I'm not sure even I can make this comparison for TH-cam...
@@nascompares :-) I didn't want to ask you for more work. You already do a ton. Was wondering if I missed any benchmarks for the Xenon. Its weirdly missing from most CPU benchmark websites. Love your content by the way.
Actually there are two extremely similar Xenons. D-1520 which is more or less the same but half a year older and has a geekbench of 3300 and the D-1521 which is a bit more powerful ( 2.4 instead of 2.2 GHz ) which has 5931. I kinda tend to believe the higher number because of the Hyperthreading. Which would make the D-1527 perhaps 50-80% faster than the J4125. www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-D-1520-vs-Intel-Xeon-D-1521-vs-Intel-Celeron-J4125/2662vs2712vs3667
What about if your present setup is SHR,will you need a fresh install or will you be able to just move existing drives over
I have a video on this very subject coming in a few days, but to confirm, I was successfully able to move a 4 disk SHR from a Synology DS420+ into the DS1621xs+. I had to reinstall the DSM.pat for the new NAS, but it maintained the SHR and files fine. Just make sure you have your backups in place dude!
Good video as usual. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. I wish this technic in a 4 bay NAS for 500 - 600 €. But I won't that see at Synology, I belive.
Price? I don’t see the price online
Syed Ahmed Hashmi $1600 without tax ofcourse... so add 25% and you get real price...
@@haukionkannel Damnn!!!
Which model supports 2.5Gb LAN as i have Asus Z590 E MB and Thunderbolt planning to use for CHIA Mining connecting to my personal gaming PC. Any advice is appreciated.
Why is synology dropping SHR ? It gives medium business such a great flexibility in gradually upgrade HDD. Any one knows why?
They are not dropping the service, it's just not available on their XS series. Unsure why. I addressed Synology about this last year at my Synology 2020 UK Q&A and their answer was a bit vague tbh.
NASCompares yeah, unfortunately companies/studios that use the 18xx 36xx XP’s series are not the same as the rack corporations. As usages increase are gradual, and there is no solution for the old drives. Needing to replace all drives at the same time just to increase storage space really are very costly, and wasteful. Maybe it’s a strategy with the hard drive partners. Thanks for the inquiry. Hopefully we will get the functionality back one day, but as far as the trend goes, even the 16xx are getting the treatment, I am not optimistic about it.
Thanks Syno for ruining my plan to upgrade my ds918+ with SHR to a DS1621xs+ for the 10GBE and 2nd bay ports...
How to hire you?
I need help for TrueNAS Core.
It is easy just Go with it.
Well could be nice to see new amd made cpu in this with 7nm 8 core to keep it cool...
Great vid
Thanks.
Good observation: BIG gap in middle*
Do you think Synology watches these videos? 🤔
Honestly, they watch less of these than you'd think.
What is with 4K/HEVC/H.265 Transcoding in 2020. A CPU from 2015 with release in 2020 is not an innovation.
If one disregard ram, the ds1621xs+ has it all.
Sure i could point at the negatives but sod it, i like the unit.
I agree and still have one. Though it also is SATA II, so that's the only reason it is now been downgraded to another backup tier. That said...last i3 Synology ever had...
Anders Andersen www.qnap.com/nl-nl/product/ts-h886 ZFS support wow!
@@mauritsl84 Thanks, Qnap has many great units, i am just more comfortable using Synology in the office, not that Qnap is 'bad' in any way.
Planing on using my ds3617xs and the rs3618(way too loud) as dual backups for two of ds1621xs, when they become available.
$1700 on amazon, fuck! Synology expensive.
No SHR = no buy
An existing SHR can be migrated over if that helps, but yeah, bit of a shame.
NASCompares yeah but the flexibility of SHR is difficult to live without it. I hope DSM 7 will bring it...
First
You're a big fan of the word Utilisation aren't you! you can just use "use". You come across as trying to sound intelligent at times. You can use shorter words when they suffice.