DS-720+ Greater than 6GB Ram show obvious speed improvement?

[Jan Janowski]

Both my 720+’s are at 6GB of Ram.
Both have M.2 R/W Caches installed.
Both running 7200 rpm Drives in SHR.
Both on Latest DSM

For those of you that have done so… Was there any obvious read or write speed change by going to 10GB or 18GB of Ram over 6GB? And was this expense in your opinion “Worth the Ram Upgrade?”

One of my 720+’s is already running a 4GB Crucial module since the first power on.. (GB Switch, Pre-tested CAT6 cables used everywhere).

Thanks for your comments

 

[itsjasper]

Running a DS720+ with 18GB RAM, 2x2TB NVMe SSD (configured as file store) and 2x18TB IronWolf Pro.

This unit runs VMs and containers off the SSD volume, the HDs are for media storage and backup.
In this use case (minimal users, streaming data) I’m not seeing a huge improvement as I’m not getting the cache benefit; plus the RAM is more for the VMs and containers anyway. Yet there is still a noticeable improvement for general use, from my experience.

For me, this configuration is a near-perfect setup for pms-docker with transcoding.

RAM is cheap, anyway, so it’s a no-brainer to go to 10GB, I’d say YMMV on 18GB, depending on use case. I had the 16GB DIMM already from a NUC upgrade, I’d probably have only gone to 10GB had I needed to purchase the RAM.

 

[Jan Janowski]

I understand the need for ram for a VM.
I’m not using VM’s. So…
Please let me revise the question somewhat…..

For those who have done so… specifically those not using VM’s…. Is there any obvious R/W speed increase when going from 6GB to 10GB or 18GB of ram in a 720+ ????

 

[Robbie]

Any spare RAM is used as a cache, so the RAM does increase performance.

DSM itself is pretty small and I only have a single container running so most of my RAM is a very fast cache:

️

 

[Jan Janowski]

OK... Thanks for your comments.... Will try an 8Gb Stick (found link indicating what MFG/Models work) and give it a try....
A $30 gamble...
My Question if it will provide an observable improvement will then be answered.
If it is, then I’ll consider doing same to my 718+, as it is presently the workhorse NAS.. Doing the 720+ first as it is my Experimental NAS.

 

[NateWorldWide]

Running a DS720+ with 18GB RAM, 2x2TB NVMe SSD (configured as file store) and 2x18TB IronWolf Pro.

This unit runs VMs and containers off the SSD volume, the HDs are for media storage and backup.
In this use case (minimal users, streaming data) I’m not seeing a huge improvement as I’m not getting the cache benefit; plus the RAM is more for the VMs and containers anyway. Yet there is still a noticeable improvement for general use, from my experience.

For me, this configuration is a near-perfect setup for pms-docker with transcoding.

RAM is cheap, anyway, so it’s a no-brainer to go to 10GB, I’d say YMMV on 18GB, depending on use case. I had the 16GB DIMM already from a NUC upgrade, I’d probably have only gone to 10GB had I needed to purchase the RAM.

What RAM did you use? Did you get the 3rd Party RAM notification? I was thinking about getting some NVME's as well but will be down the road since I just don't have the RAM to support my basic needs. What would you say would be a good ratio of HD to NVME cache capacity, I was aiming towards 10% but would like to future proof a little since I am only running backup raided 14TB setup and 2GB onboard.

I was about to buy the Timetec 16GB RAM for my DS720+, but I was reading and if this one guy online was right if you use a Samsung chip (with SEC?) dual rated (rate 2) non-ECC SODIM 260pin, it won't pop up alert about 3rd party RAM since Samsung makes Synology's RAM.

Was looking at some of these as well (generic links)
Samsung 16gb - M471A2K43CB1-CTD
TimeTek 4GB

Here are a few others that were listed by NASCompares on YouTube (I left his unique links):
ADATA Adata Premier 4GB AD4S2400J4G17-B - https://amzn.to/3sNsql8
TimeTec 8GB 76TT26NUS1R8-8G - https://amzn.to/3wqVtgC
Sabrent Memory 8GB SB-DDR8 - https://amzn.to/3G0XeEg
Crucial 16GB CT16G4SFD8266 - https://amzn.to/3NjJjvm
TimeTec 16GB 76TT26NUS2R8-16G - https://amzn.to/3G08aC4
Sabrent 16GB SB-DDR16 - https://amzn.to/3Pta6HE
Transcend TS1GSH64V6B 8GB - https://amzn.to/3PzU3YL
Transcend 2GB TS256MSH64V4X - https://amzn.to/3wvjN0E

Kingston KVR26S19S6/4 4GB - https://amzn.to/3wtpMDp
AM-D4NESO-2666-4G 4GB - https://amzn.to/3wtpMDp
Crucial CT4G4SFS8266 4GB - https://amzn.to/3NmzOvB
TimeTec 76TT26NUS1R8-4G 4GB - https://amzn.to/3wr1dHc
Transcend M2666HSH-4G 4GB - https://amzn.to/3wH2p7Y
SK Hynix HMA851S6CJR6N 4GB - https://amzn.to/39C1r56
SAMSUNG M471A1K43CB1 8GB - https://amzn.to/3Mx3uWK
Crucial CT8G4SFS8266 8GB - https://amzn.to/3wtwadR
ATech AT8G1D4S2666NA0N12V 8GB - https://amzn.to/3LsUkZZ
SAMSUNG M471A2K43CB1 16GB - Amazon.co.uk : Sam Original 16GB (1x16GB) DDR4 2666MHz PC4-21300 SODIMM 2Rx8 CL19 1.2v 260-PIN Laptop Notebook Memory Module RAM Upgrade M471A2K43CB1-CTD Adamanta
ADATA AD4S3200716G22 16GB - https://amzn.to/3NHpI8X

 

[Robbie]

If you are looking to overcome the vendor lock then just buying Samsung RAM may not be enough. Samsung RAM comes with a Samsung ID code; the magic 'Synology' RAM comes with a different ID code.

 

[Jan Janowski]

Update.
6 months ago: I bought an 8GB TimeTec Ram. installed it in 720+, replacing a Crucial 4GB Ram
SO: I went from 2+4=6, to 2+8=10
I have Not received any prompts about 3rd party ram before with Crucial (Under V6 or V7.1), or now with TimeTec (Under V7.1 or Latest 7.2)

It saw the Ram with Crucial 4GB as cache increase, and cache was increased further with TimeTec 8GB.

However, I see NO IMPROVEMENT in throughput with the extra ram, going from 6 to 10GB. Nothing to indicate it is helping.

Timed tests with large single or small multiple, or just selecting a folder at random. NO IMPROVEMENT in file moving or copying in/out, was seen.

For that reason, I DID NOT purchase Ram upgrades for other 720+ or 718+ that each have 4GB Synology ram upgrades.

For anyone who has seen an improvement, would you describe the test you did showing the improvement?

Thanks.

 

[Robbie]

Who said RAM would improve LAN throughput? Your LAN throughput bottleneck is probably the 1 GbE LAN ports and RAM will not make 1 GbE ports go faster than 1 GbE.

RAM helps with VMs, IOPs, multiple clients, intensive DSM applications or processes et al. It does not make a 1 GbE port capable of exceeding its physical limits.

️

 

[Jan Janowski]

Cache is used for file transfers, no?

In all the posts I've seen on Ram Upgrades, None have shown tests showing an improvement...
It's always been the generic: "Look! See the cache increase!"..

Show me a test that shows an improvement

NO TEST RESULTS: All you are left with is "Bragging Rights" !

 

[itsjasper]

What RAM did you use?

This.

Samsung 16gb - M471A2K43CB1-CTD

 

[Robbie]

Cache is used for file transfers, no?

In all the posts I've seen on Ram Upgrades, None have shown tests showing an improvement...
It's always been the generic: "Look! See the cache increase!"..

Show me a test that shows an improvement

NO TEST RESULTS: All you are left with is "Bragging Rights" !

What on Earth are you talking about and as for bragging rights, seriously - on this friendly forum?

Did you bang your head or something or just not read anything about why users may need more RAM?

Nobody is going to provide anything to a closed mind. Challenging or demanding others to 'prove' something is an immature way to seek knowledge, from regular people, via the internet. It tends to turn people off from responding or discourage others from asking questions.

Keep it friendly or keep it to yourself.

️

 

[Jan Janowski]

Im saying that in all the posts on adding extra ram to NAS’s.
No one has posted proof that extra ram provides a speed improvement, just pictures that the ram is there.
With no proof that it helps to improve speed, you are left with bragging rights that it exists, for the expenditure of your money.
I would love to see a speed increase for the extra ram— but I simply don’t see it.

 

[Robbie]

@Jan Janowski

No, only you brought the argument of extra RAM for improved sequential throughput. Nobody else did and to the surprise of absolutely nobody you found that it did nothing for your sequential throughput tests as you are limited by your network interface. You also define 'speed' as bandwidth (rather than latency) and concepts such as response time and IOPS just whistle over your head.

Somewhat irritatingly you also chose to ignore all other posted examples where RAM really does matter.

You are not looking to learn and this forum does not host silly squabbles (or exists for bragging rights) so we are where we are.

️

 

[Jan Janowski]

Would love to see improvement.
I don’t. I do on a pc: apples & oranges.
If you say it does, ok, good for you
end of thread

 

[Jan Janowski]

I’m still waiting for someone to post proof that extra ram improves overall operation.
Until someone does, I stick with my “Bragging Rights” comment

 

[Deleted member 5784]

I understand the need for ram for a VM.
I’m not using VM’s. So…
Please let me revise the question somewhat…..

For those who have done so… specifically those not using VM’s…. Is there any obvious R/W speed increase when going from 6GB to 10GB or 18GB of ram in a 720+ ????

@Jan Janowski It's a more interesting question than you are being given credit for. Usually this conversation ends up with 'Page Cache' as a hand-wavy justification for adding extra Ram, but this has almost no bearing on the specific aspect you're asking about.

If by R/W speed you mean speeds over the Lan (as opposed to, eg, R/W speeds within a service running on the NAS) then this is clearly always going to be limited by the slow 1000Mbps ethernet speed. RAM used as page cache is pretty irrelevent here, as pulling a non-cached portion of a file from the HDDs is still significantly faster (~x2) than the slow Lan connection.

Your system would be more responsive going to higher quantities of Ram if you had processes running on the 720+ that had used up all of the available physical RAM, but this is a fairly unlikely scenario for most typical used of a 720+ outside of VMs, imo.

Put another way, you'd have to have some pretty specific use case for your 720+ beyond regular file serving levels of I/O in a typcial SoHo scenario to see the Ram beyong 6GB having a meaningful affect on file serving speeds.

 

[ed.j]

I think he misunderstands what the RAM is for
Edit: sorry - maybe she.

 

[Jan Janowski]

He. Fortran’s post explains to a point, what I was stating, based inability to see anything: by observation or available tests:

Yes, for the average Synology user, extra Ram between 6 & 10 makes no obvious improvement whatsoever, unlike a PC. Unfortunately I did not tests between 2 & 6GB.

 

[Coop777]

You are overthinking this one HARD. RAM on a NAS is just like RAM on a PC. The more applications you run on it, the more processing power and memory (RAM) is utilized. It will not increase file transfer speeds, which on a 1GBE connection is ~110MB/s. If you want faster transfer speeds, get a NAS that supports 10 GBE and upgrade your network and clients to support it.