NAS or NUC ?

[Oberonald]

I've been using a DS212+ for years now. It serves me fine, but there is one downside... It's slow. Slow while using it's web-interface, slow to wake up etc.

So I want to upgrade but I can't decide between a DS220+ or a NUC (mini pc) with two external drives attached in a RAID1 configuration.

Of course the NUC solution (running Freenas or something like that, with 16Gb of RAM and a i5 or i7 processor) would be sufficient. It's almost as good as one can get it; it even out-performances my desktop PC . But it sets me down financially too. It's at least two times a DS220+. And perhaps it's a bit "overkill" for a NAS?

So what do you recommend? How does the 220+ compare to the 212+? Is it worth the upgrade? Or would you consider a NUC solution as well?

Thanks for the tips!

 

[EAZ1964]

I had the 212+ for many years, it was a fine little machine at that time and I liked it a lot. But for sure many of the speed issues have been solved over the years. You cannot compare its speed with a current DS220 or 918+.

Your other option: the NUC: I would vote against it. As you say, it is pricey, external disks in raid 1 are a risk, bulky and energy wise not ideal. Also you are right with the overkill. An advantage might be the support of 2.5GBE, unfortunately there is no SoHo Synology that supports >1Gbe.
Alternatively to a NUC you might consider a HTPC type of case with a Mobo supporting additional disks, but also here if your objective is data serving your house, it is overkill and cost wise similar to a NUC. Also my experience with the Linux file servers is the additional "time consuming hobby" you get with such a system. The apps that typically work with synology, you have to install, learn and maintain.

 

[sylsyl]

As you want more speed and are prepared to spend more money, consider the 720+.