vacancies advertise contact news tip The Vault
facebook rss twitter

QNAP introduces eight-bay Intel Atom-powered SS-839 Pro Turbo NAS

by Parm Mann on 22 June 2009, 10:54

Tags: SS-839 Pro Turbo NAS, Qnap

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qasri

Add to My Vault: x

QNAP's acquired a taste for Intel Atom-powered NAS units, and the Taiwanese manufacturer is today following up its four-bay SS-439 with the launch of the larger eight-bay SS-839 Pro Turbo.

The unit, pictured below, offers eight 2.5in drive bays, supporting a maximum total storage capacity of 4TB. Why bother with a 2.5in solution? Well, it saves space - with the SS-839 Pro Turbo measuring 177mm x 180mm x 235mm - and it should save power, too.

QNAP reckons that the Atom-powered unit will consume in the region of 34W with eight 2.5in drives installed - that's around 60 per cent less than an equivalent eight-bay 3.5in unit, it adds.

Inside the SS-839 Pro Turbo resides a 1.6GHz Intel Atom N270 processor and 2GB of DDR2 memory. The device supports RAID 0/1/5/6/5+hot spare and JBOD configurations, and features two eSATA ports for storage expansion.

As you'd expect, it's armed with a large array of software features - including built-in iSCSI support for up to eight targets, AES 256-bit volume-based encryption and scheduled power on and power off.

QNAP hasn't yet detailed pricing, but the SS-839's complete specification can be found over at the official product page.



HEXUS Forums :: 4 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
As far as I can see, the only thing this has going for it is if you happen to have a load of laptop drives lying around, or when SSDs become as cheap as HDDs, if they're still predominantly using the 2.5“ form factor. Great, 8 2.5” drives uses more power than 8 3.5“ drives. But on the flip side, you only need two 2TB 3.5” drives to have equivalent storage space to 8 500GB 2.5" drives - all of a sudden, it's not looking like such a great space saver, noise saver, money saver, power saver, or any other kind of saver.
Rather than SSDs you could use Velociraptors for a potentially very fast NAS box. But that relies on the rest of the system being able to keep up.

you might need 4x 500GB 2.5“ drives for a single 2TB 3.5” drive, but if you have 5 little ones, you also have some redundancy in there, something you don't have with the single 2TB drive.

It is a very specialist device, but I can see the apeal
Funkstar
Rather than SSDs you could use Velociraptors for a potentially very fast NAS box. But that relies on the rest of the system being able to keep up.

you might need 4x 500GB 2.5“ drives for a single 2TB 3.5” drive, but if you have 5 little ones, you also have some redundancy in there, something you don't have with the single 2TB drive.

It is a very specialist device, but I can see the apeal

Yes, some redundancy, but if you wanted redundancy you'd put two 1TB drives in instead, for example. Would work out cheaper too - just checking Scan, two 1tb drives - under £120. Four 500GB 2.5" drives - just under £260. Sorry, I'm not seeing the benefit.
miniyazz
Yes, some redundancy, but if you wanted redundancy you'd put two 1TB drives in instead, for example. Would work out cheaper too - just checking Scan, two 1tb drives - under £120. Four 500GB 2.5" drives - just under £260. Sorry, I'm not seeing the benefit.

8 300GB raptors would give you 2,100GB effective RAID5 capacity, redundency, and performance that would make you wet your pants. Usefulness?.. Enterprise iSCSI storage backend for databases and the like?

You're thinking too much like a light home NAS user who'd never need more than a Synology CS407e.