This Tiny NAS Has a HUGE Secret - UGREEN NAS Storage Solution Showcase

If you're interested in today's sponsor, check them out here:
Ugreen NASync Private Cloud Storage Solution: bit.ly/3vua3Gn
40% OFF until March 28th 8:00 am PDT
Up to 35% OFF during 3/28-5/9
When I think NAS, I think big black box and the sound of a bunch of spinning hard drives. But not this. This is the NASync DXP480T Plus, UGREEN’s all NVME 4-bay NAS. Let’s talk about it.
#Ugreen #UgreenNASync #UgreenNAS

[@Kekeripo]

Man, a 8 x 8TB version of this would be a moist dream. Expensive? Yes! Cool? Yesx2!

[@ProjectileGrommet]

Asustor Flashstor 12 can fit 12 x 8 TB of ssd storage

[@resekai]

add Daisy-chain

[@DirtyHardSock]

You need to be very careful with this stuff and upgrade your home network infrastructure. I don't think you're careful enough or have upgrade any of your local network.

[@ProjectileGrommet]

@@DirtyHardSock are you talking about a NAS as a cloud server being a backdoor into your network? I sort of get what you’re talking about but you don’t need to upgrade your local network, just be responsible. Port forwarding, firewalls, ipv6, and varied user restrictions and passwords so you know who has access to what and if a breach happens, who is responsible. Lowkey giving everyone their own password is a great way for seeing who leaked because 99 out of a 100 times getting hacked is social engineering, and not any actual vulnerability But yeah I agree irresponsibly opening a door into your network can be a bad move if you’re not prepared and careful

[@aravjain]

Me personally opting for a 16-bay NAS with each slot having a Seagate IronWolf Pro 22 TB. Costs over 8 grand USD? Yes! More than I'll probably ever need? Also yes! But do I want it? Yes x ♾

[@eldino]

A device I expected QNAP to do years ago! Good job UGREEN! The disk-based NAS are too bulky and noisy! With such a device, one can travel with his own NAS.

[@EMII_STUDIOS]

i like your presentations and reviews, you got a new subscriber ! keep it coming.

[@TomaszStachewicz]

Correction: 4x4TB won't give 12TB in RAID1, it will give only 4TB (3 drives used for failover). RAID5 will give 12TB in this setup.

[@nitrogarbo1589]

Should never use raid 5

[@TomaszStachewicz]

@@nitrogarbo1589 why?

[@nitrogarbo1589]

@TomaszStachewicz it's very technical there's an article about it but each time there is a drive failure or a need/want to increase the storage capacity of a raid 5 array your risk of the raid being lost completely gets exponentially higher. I would always suggest raid 6 or raid 10 or even a raid 60

[@TomaszStachewicz]

@@nitrogarbo1589 can you link the article?

[@ewenchan1239]

@@nitrogarbo1589 "it's very technical there's an article about it but each time there is a drive failure or a need/want to increase the storage capacity of a raid 5 array your risk of the raid being lost completely gets exponentially higher. I would always suggest raid 6 or raid 10 or even a raid 60" Can you please share your source for this? What you're talking about here is the risk of the probability of a second drive failure during the rebuild after the replacement of the first drive failure. Therefore; the two things that you are talking about here: 1) It will depend on the capacity of the drive, because of the rebuild time. Assuming that the rebuilt rate is say, at least 100 MB/s, then rebuilding a 1 TB drive in RAID5 would be 10000 seconds (1000000 MB / 100 MB/s = 10,000 seconds) ~ a little bit more 2 hours 45 minutes. 2 TB would be about 5.5 hours. So, the calculation is what is the probability that you will experience a second drive failure within that time frame? 2) Conversely though, if, say, you're rebuilding a 10 TB drive, and assuming the same rebuild rate (I pulled the number outta my butt, to illustrate the calculation) - then the time scales proportion to that (i.e. 10000 seconds * 10 (10 TB / 1 TB) --> 100000 seconds rebuild ~= 27.8 hours or ~1 day and 4 hours. (just shy of). So what is the probability that you will experience a second drive failure during that ~28 hours? My point is that I wouldn't necessarily state that you shouldn't use RAID5 as a blanket statement, because what this is really talking about is the probability of a second drive failure as the first replacement drive gets rebuilt. For smaller capacities, the risk is proably very low. But even for larger capacities, for a typical home lab where you're not dealing with tens of thousand of hard drives, realistically speaking, the probability of two drives failing is very, very low; even if the probability is non-zero. I've used RAID5 successfully for YEARS, without any issues. Further, to this point, if you really want to be a stickler to this idea -- it is also recommended that you don't deploy hard drives that were purchased at the same time (or from the same batch) on the principle that if there was a manufacturing defect, by not using two HDDs that were purchased at the same time, from the same retailer, that may have been manufactured in the same batch -- will reduce your risk of having a double (or triple) drive failure. But again, whilst the probability is technically non-zero, realistically speaking, the probability of this happening is VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY small. RAID6, RAID1, and RAID60 each/all incur their own cost, both in terms of capacity, and also just in terms of dollars and cents. If you aren't able to afford four drives, then three drives with RAID5 will give you redundancy and can tolerate 1-drive failing. If you need to add a drive, then you can decide as to whether you want to add redundancy (I think that SOME systems will allow you to upgrade an array/pool from RAID5 to RAID6. I think that some of the Avago/Broadcom/LSI let you do that. I don't remember for sure, but I think that I remember seeing that option under the Logical Drive controls. I forget) or whether you want to add capacity. If your rebuild rate is faster, than the adverse impact from the risk of a second drive failure during the rebuild process will be proportionally lower. There are PLENTY of people, in PLENTY of RAID5 installations that worked just fine/as intended.

[@l3martin]

Thanks for a great video!

[@marcfruchtman9473]

Thanks for this review. Looks really promising. I don't understand why the write speeds are so slow. That needs to be fixed before I can consider this NAS.

[@brentsmithline3423]

Going look at this when it comes out.

[@isan-sunshine]

it looks awesome!

[@ABSTRACTMEDIAHIGHDEFINITION]

Hopefully they will replace that barrel jack with a USB C power connection instead

[@jonevansauthor]

Yes, it's practically a crime now to use anything but USB C.

[@Nebulosa-Cat]

please no usb-c sucks

[@RaquelHernandezCruz]

I love traveling with as many cables as possible.

[@cam_934]

Why USBC ? with that 20v barrel connector they can provide the correct amperage power adaptor (looks to be 7amp max) total 140 watts, with USB C people could be connecting it to a phone charger/power board wonder why it doesn't power on or reboots under slightest load and wanting to return it or frankly killing it then wanting a warranty return. USBC would be a disaster waiting to happen.

[@Rushil69420]

A manufacturer designing a pre-built NAS is generally going to [try to] prioritize reliability when it comes to critical components and DC power in is still so much more straightforward and less prone to causing crashes/failures than USB PD. The USB-C port itself is also more likely than a barrel plug jack to fail over time (granted, a NAS isn’t really unplugged/plugged in very often but then again something this small might end up being treated as a portable device too)

[@dozierc]

From your experience, do you think a firmware update will be released that will allow for larger NVMes?

[@bearxor]

ugreen - give me this NAS with 8 NVME slots and I will buy this.

[@DrMJJr]

SAME

[@hassan_ksu]

I'm happy these guys are challenging Synology slowly. Synology need to set up their game. Only thing they have is amazing Software (DSM). More competition the better

[@Sumeragy1]

I dont understand why PPL are so hungry for nas whit that kind of speed. And then they have 1 Gbit Lan...

[@noahlauritano2443]

I have 10 gb lan and wan

[@user-si4nt2gs6q]

​@@noahlauritano2443 same when use high speed and use to it you will feel like hdd nas slow af

[@quentinlemaitre2998]

Future proofing.

[@epsig1507]

I think many people care more about the small form factor. A full 1 Gbit is actually enough for most

[@BrianMarquis]

RAID-0 is a stripe - great performance but no protection RAID-1 is a mirrored drive set RAID-5 requires a min of 3 drives, one is parity RAID-6 requires a min of 4 drives, two parity (great for large capacity HDD) RAID-10 is a mirrored stripe - benefit of stripe for performance, with mirror for protection RAID-50 and RAID-60 follow the same principle…

[@retrocomputing]

raid 5 and 6 are not great for anything, they're outdated

[@fookschool]

​@@retrocomputing how? Can you show why having redundancy that doesn't gobble up all your storage isn't useful?

[@retrocomputing]

@@fookschool rebuilding arrays with big drives takes too much time with raid 5-6 and you can lose multiple drives during rebuilds.

[@fookschool]

@@retrocomputing and what standard can prevent that? I don't see how you are losing drives when doing a rebuild.

[@retrocomputing]

@@fookschool zfs pools is a modern solution. Raid 5-6 was created a long time ago when drives were small. Let's say you have drives from the same batch. When you lose a drive there's a chance that other drives can fail pretty close to the first one. And then rebuilding is a long time with lots of reads, it's a stress for drives. You can end up losing all the data.

[@alonzosmith6189]

The price to hardware @ 40% kickstarter, I joined. Thanks for sharing

[@dogasecco]

looking forward to have that available here in Brazil

[@user-gh1ip9nr6r]

You actually can saturate 10Gbit link with SATA SSDs, if you get 4 of them and put them in RAID. That's gonna be about 1000-1100 MB/s. And its much cheaper. Also, with the current charger situation, this thing is not compact at all. It would make perfect sense for UGREEN to power it through USB-C (with their great chargers, imho) and make a power passthrough to one of those Thunderbolt ports. So you could transfer data and charge your laptop with ~30W (maybe more/less), using only one compact charging brick.

[@mrtim6479]

Interesting I just hoped you would of showed a bit of the setup. Noticed your using a Mac, so you setup the Nas using SMB?

[@Yuan-zi]

Does the UGOSPro system support virtual machines, snapshots and other functions?

[@bernt6500]

How do you get 3 TB from 4x1TB drives in RAID1? Seems more like RAID 5 to me.

[@norfolknonsense7578]

Are the TB4 connections suitable for a direct connection between PC/Mac and the NAS? That would saturate the SSDs much better.

[@TrTai]

I like the idea, the price point for what you're getting (early bird at least) isn't bad,. 'd be interested in seeing it run with other OSes too and see how much of the limitations are just optimizations versus implementation limitations. It definitely seems nice for a quick ready to go home/homelab use though. Something to keep an eye on.

[@jonevansauthor]

For a moment I thought it might be cheaper than the Asustor one, but no such luck. The Asustor does hold six drives. Mind you, I prefer the look and form factor of the UGreen design. Asustor seems to be trying to look cool and I don't care about that because I'd sooner die than use RGB, price/performance is the only thing that truly matters. It might be audible, bad, but it's quieter than my WD hard drive NAS by far. If they just put a space for a proper fan in it, e.g. a 120/140 fan, you could just swap out a cheap fan for a Noctua. Or they could just use Noctua fans. No-one who wants this would be upset if it were an inch taller. Same thing with mini PCs really - it's time they moved to a form factor which is just a bit taller, and lets you put proper cooling in.

[@HernanLopez411]

Asustor has an Intel Celeron N5105 (2.9 GHz) 4 (Threads: 4) vs Ugreen's Intel Core i5-1235U (4.4 GHz) 10 (Threads: 12) Intel doesn't even classify them as the same CPU class.

[@liarus]

What about running a third party os like truenas or omv ?

[@Niekerballcomputers]

Our business has a case with 100+ harddrives and it is not a specific brand, what software can I use for monitoring and automatic & remote uploads?

[@ProjectileGrommet]

I wonder how this will compare to the Asustor Flashstor

[@ShaneMcGrath.]

Wake me when we have 16TB affordable M.2 drives, Nothing beats spinning rust for price the higher you go up in HDD space. I'd love to have an 8 bay SSD NAS all full of 16TB drives but unless I win the lotto I'll have to stick with spinning rust 16TB drives.

[@digistruct0r245]

thing like this is almost crying for a PoE-in imo

[@TomaszStachewicz]

not with those power requirements. poe's maximum is at 10-15 watts, and in this nas the cpu can draw all of this by itself, and there are also drives to power. poe is for small, single-purpose and low-power devices like switches or cameras. high performance nas is not low-power.

[@Emerald13]

​@@TomaszStachewicz maybe with Poe++

[@user-gh1ip9nr6r]

@@TomaszStachewicz its not limited at 15 watts, some network APs reach 30+ (with PoE+ / ++), but I definitely agree with you. I can't imagine a user of this thing with a PoE++ switch at his apartment/house. It would make sense to make a USB-C in, with some power passthrough in those thunderbolts. So that you can transfer data + charge your laptop (for example).

[@kawaiisenshi2401]

What does PoE-in mean???

[@TomaszStachewicz]

@@kawaiisenshi2401 ability to be powered through power-over-ethernet

[@nemtudom5074]

This is a great video, and now i know what i'm buying next. Thank you Ugreen! A 4bay nvme raid box with an x86 processor in it? Sign me the hell up! Edit: nvm, since i dont want to use their OS

[@JasonsLabVideos]

This should compete with the Asustore 6-12 bay units ! Hopefully they are affordable !

[@DirtyHardSock]

Ugreen is an excellent company and doesn't play around with unnecessary markups. I donated hundreds of millions to Ugreen to help them grow as I believe in them that much.

[@zzaretube]

This could be a perfect Proxmox cluster node with Ceph storage for a high availability system. Three of these could be internally networked in a ring topology via Thunderbolt, and with four m.2 drives on your diposal for each node, that would make a nice and speedy Ceph cluster.

[@0xKruzr]

I've built something like this (fewer NVMes) with some Minisforum BD710is. got almost a GB/s write speeds and about 100000 IOPS peak in CephFS with 10G networking. and that was with consumer NVMe!

[@seethruhead7119]

get a minisforum ms01 it only has 3 ssd drive bays but it has pcie for dual 10gb or 25gb or 100gb networking

[@zzaretube]

@@seethruhead7119 That was my plan until I saw this thing. But if thunderbolt can be used for networking (around 20 Gbe), I would prefer this product mostly because of more storage. Proxmox recommends a Ceph cluster with at least three nodes and at least 12 OSDs, evenly distributed among the nodes. I really don't need a high performance system for my homelab needs, but I want to have high availability for the few services I use (home assistant being the most important one), so I would like to follow the recommendations if possible. MS-01 does have three m.2 ports, but one of them needs to be local for proxmox installation itself, which leaves only two for Ceph OSDs, and that is not ideal. I will be moving in a few months and won't buy anything before that. Hopefully by then I will know if this product fits my needs.

[@zzaretube]

@@seethruhead7119 That was my plan until I saw this thing. But if thunderbolt can be used for networking (around 20 Gbe), I would prefer this product mostly because of more storage. Proxmox recommends a Ceph cluster with at least three nodes and at least 12 OSDs, evenly distributed among the nodes. I really don't need a high performance system for my homelab needs, but I want to have high availability for the few services I use (home assistant being the most important one), so I would like to follow the recommendations if possible. MS-01 does have three m.2 ports, but one of them needs to be local for proxmox installation itself, which leaves only two for Ceph OSDs, and that is not ideal. I will be moving in a few months and won't buy anything before that. Hopefully by then I will know if this product fits my needs.

[@macjim]

I’d like to have redundancy so that if a drive fails, I won’t lose all my photos… I did ha a two bay Synology NAS but could never get it to work for me. It’s now gone to the scrap heap and the drives installed in two separate carriages… this interest me. Oh, new subscriber here…

[@darkjorgelink]

Is there a way to use it with having it connected wired to Ethernet?

[@anthixious]

At 4:00, those write speeds were terrible for an all-SSD setup. What drives were being used in what RAID? Or was it the 10gbps network jack reaching the limit?

[@AlexiHelligar]

He said RAID1 with 4 SSDs, could he have meant RAID5?

[@anthixious]

Not all of the slots are pcie 4.0x4, 2 of them are, but the other 2 are gen 3.0x2. Nvm on this unit 😑.

[@Nidhoggur9829]

I really hope they can let users chose what OS running on it, just like ASUSTOR NVME one, that's a really key feature for such hardware...

[@dankmemes3153]

z790 motherboards supports up to 4 pcie 4.0 x4 m.2 slots and 1 pcie 5.0 x4. Rather use that than a NAS tbh. With aspm enable you can get those boards to 30 watt idle. Tho il give this product props for being small. For laptop users that would be great.

[@bearxor]

You don’t need each drive to be wired for x4. Gen3 1x hits about 1GB/s - That’s 8Gbps. Not quite as fast as a 10Gbps network connection but fast enough. Gen4 1x would be more than enough. For a NAS I’d rather have 16 Gen4 1X lanes than 4 Gen4 4x lanes.

[@PizzlesTechTime]

Hello and thank you very much for the informative video! I am currently looking into getting one of these and I edit 8K raw footage on my PC. Unfortunately with the amount of storage I need for raw video I need something like 20 to 40 terabytes. I see that you can only put 16 in here as of now. Do you think it would be worth it to attach this to my computer to use for a render drive or should I just get the actual Nas with six bays

[@nitrogarbo1589]

I work for an msp & have multiple clients that do lots of video editing & rendering. What I would suggest to you is a qnap with nvme ssds for caching. Great thing about qnap is the storage options avaliable to choose from. Specially being able to add more via a cable to extend the pool. Also I highly suggest using a backup solution if you care about the data as well because raid isn't a backup

[@PizzlesTechTime]

@@nitrogarbo1589 yeah that is 100% true! I was wondering about caching but I didn't find much information about it.

[@PizzlesTechTime]

@@nitrogarbo1589 I have never even heard of QNAP. I had a few 500 GB NVMe drives left over from my previous build. I was trying to see what I could do with it and stumbled upon you green

[@nitrogarbo1589]

@PizzlesTechTime the way caching works on a qnap is hot & cold storage the more frequent the specific data is accessed it will stay on the nvmes then as time goes by of you not using it. It will then move it to the hard drives for cold storage.

[@PizzlesTechTime]

@@nitrogarbo1589 Hi I wonder how well that would work for a video render drive. Seeing as it's pretty random what you have to access and when.

[@IRWING123ful]

when will this come out

[@nelsonyin3410]

Personally I'm looking to access to my files (movies) through internet as easy as I'm on an intranet or a VPN. I'm wondering what it can offer to me.

[@cam_934]

Hang off till released, its currently reported you are blocked if you want to install any other OS on this device like TrueNAS, Unraid, Open Media Vault. Also Jimmy doesn't understand that RAID1 is mirror so 16TB = 8TB usable storage space not 12TB, he actually is referring to RAID5 so 16TB = 12TB usable space.

[@JimmyTriesWorld]

That's a great catch! Yes, I meant RAID5 but misspoke and said RAID1. I got too familiar with SHR1 being the one with just a single parity drive 🙃. As for OS, this is actually a topic I discussed with them. The only confirmation I've received from UGREEN is that they prefer you use their OS and they're still constantly improving it. They definitely haven't closed the door on 3rd party OSes, but cautioned it's riskier due to potential compatibility issues, etc. But I'm sure everyone who is interested in 3rd party OSes are aware of this inherent risk already.

[@nectarinetangerineorange]

I would recommend running the drives in a mirrored-stripe type array (so for raid it would be RAID10) you would have the total capacity of 2 drives, the maximum write speed of almost 2 drives combined, a maximum read speed of almost 4 drives combined, all while having double the fault tolerance (lose up to half the drives without losing data) and drastically increased IOPS across the board. I don't recommend raidz1/raid5 , raidz2/raid6 or raidz3 unless the number of drives is so great that the controllers become the bottlenecks (servers filled with 12+ to maybe 50-60 drives; any more drives and you'd probably want draid or something more exotic (like weka) In those configurations the sheer number of drives makes up for the reduced iops from those types of arrays, but with only 4 drives it seems very unoptimized... (I use zfs, so I don't need any raid controllers; if the motherboard raid controller can do both raid 1 and raid 0, it should be able to do raid 10 as well)

[@cam_934]

@@nectarinetangerineorange :"I would recommend running the drives in a mirrored-stripe type array" Why? eg its an 4x M.2 NAS so a single M.2 will transfer speeds faster than the 10gb ethernet port. Also RAID is for redundancy and redundancy isn't required for home useage its just something geeks think they need, but business usage yes. Also RAID isn't a backup so you still need to backup any important data. Try and find any legit reason other than "I Want it" for using RAID at home with M.2 as I'm willing to listern.

[@nickxc]

I preordered one bacause of how good the 40% off price seems, but the write speeds are concerning for my use case.

[@aa-xn5hc]

this is very interesting

[@HetmanRecovery]

NAS systems like the Ugreen NASync DXP4800 Plus may support remote accessibility features, enabling users to access their data and manage the system from anywhere with an internet connection, enhancing flexibility and convenience.

[@TheEquinoxeHD]

May? I thought it was given with all NASes... Kind of bummer

[@AllAccessConstruction]

Big fan..for the situation you describe why not just get a 4tb t7.. Think about getting this but for sure it will be 16 gigs..

[@CNormanHocker]

As a preproduction model, they still have time to replace the barrel power port with an USBC.

[@michael-rommel]

On Kickstarter there is only the 480T not the 480TPlus? Am I looking at the wrong listing?

[@MrSiloforreal]

Yes

[@seanmartinflix]

Yeah definitely compelling. Too bad you can't hook it up just like SSD . Then it could just be like a portable external SSD but with back up . I have seen some other offering one of which had 16 NVME's. I don't know. I like it though.

[@Mkungaa]

Lol, then just buy SSD DAS.

[@jonevansauthor]

The Asustor Flashtor 6/12 is the other big competitor I know and a similar price.

[@nitrogarbo1589]

Raid isn't backup

[@Nepster96]

Been waiting for the first Ugreen NAS review. Glad your making the review. Always enjoy your content..keep up the good work!!

[@shirke01]

Can I install SSD firmware update ones I installed

[@BigFourHead]

how does this deal with TRIM

[@dc292177917]

hi jimmy, just wondering if we can move files from Mac/PC to it via TB? like using it as a nvme external drive. thanks

[@impulsesystems]

That'll depend on how the 'drives' are formatted, no?

[@dc292177917]

@@impulsesystems moving files from thunderbolt instead of LAN is totally different from how the drives are formatted

[@likefunbutnot]

Not to be that guy but most high capacity consumer m.2 drives are crappy QLC NAND, which isn't something I'd care to trust long term, especially for backups. I'll also go ahead and say that right now, it's definitely easier, cheaper and considerably more power efficient to find 10Gb network devices that use SFP/SFP+ ports (e.g. Mellanox cards) rather than twisted pair. This is a weird little box that, to me, has a lot of very real flaws.

[@1slyboy]

I like the QNAP TBS-h574TX but adding 5 M.2 / E1.S SSD can be expensive.

[@RohitVerma-hf9ns]

Future is here👍👌 but id stick with HDD, noise and speed is not an issue for me as long as data is backed up.

[@travelwithdubs]

Ugreen is killing it marketing. But no one has a real one, and we’ll see if it’s actually reliable.

[@fc96]

Having it limited to 4TB on each slot also sucks for future proofing

[@greggould4275]

Just saw this, and will watch other reviews. Just a question in case you may know.. I live in the US. I have a QNAP Nas I LOVE and use it for work. I am looking for a surveillance system for this home I recently bought (and work out of). many standalone camera systems are great, but, interfaces are wonky, and they don't NEARLY have the processing / memory of something like a NAS. I just don't want to burden my QNAP with wired camera streams, and so I was looking for a 2-Bay NAS to basically use as a Surveillance system. Do you know if this handles ONVIF cameras I can use? Have you looked at that aspect of the software? Seems like it has great processing power to be a dedicated surveillance system ONLY (as I am looking for) - many standalone systems have bragged they can handle multiple (like 6) 4k streams, and yet, actual reviews are mixed. That's why I thought about just buying and dedicating a NAS ONLY for that purpose, and this sounds like it COULD be the one. What would you say?

[@nitrogarbo1589]

Going to be honest I would just recommend a unifi setup its everything your asking for but better IMO. Coming from an MSP standpoint

[@greggould4275]

@@nitrogarbo1589 I will research that system! I re-read my post and it occurred to me that maybe I came across as not wanting hardwired cameras...I actually would prefer that. I took a quick look at the systems and they seem really cool! Gonna watch some videos on it. IF it handles wired cameras, I'd DEFINITELY be interested.

[@salvadorvelasco6277]

Am I the only one that wants a rack mount?

[@REGameFly]

Would this protect my data in RAID01? All SSDs 4TerraBytes lets say and the system stops until I replace the 4TB back up drive?

[@BrianMarquis]

Yup, your volume would survive one drive failure…. Really two, assuming they weren’t part of the same mirrored set. Benefit of SSD is the fast rebuild…. Question is does the NAS prioritize the rebuild operation.

[@REGameFly]

@@BrianMarquis I don’t understand how that data can be backed up in advance in the RAID1 drive. I don’t know how to evaluate it’s safety

[@BrianMarquis]

It’s a volume group…. Two drives are in a stripe (RAID-0)…. The other two drives are mirroring (RAID-1) the stripe…. The mirror is what provides the data protection.

[@ChakriS-sw8ye]

Why not use Mac mini M2 Max as NAS. What are others thoughts on this

[@jojohan9049]

i use cwwk n100 v2 that allows 5x nvme slots, costs me only about $200.

[@bluehawk3779]

love these sponsor video tho....

[@ewenchan1239]

What's the idle, average, and max power consumption like?

[@nitrogarbo1589]

It depends on. The workload & as this is a product review the expectations wouldn't be what you see in your end if you choose to get it yourself

[@ewenchan1239]

@@nitrogarbo1589 I understand that it depends, but if you bound it with idle (with a given set of assumptions) vs. average vs. max -- that will be able to bound the "problem" to be able to indicate whether I am working with 1 W-10 W (min vs. max) or whether I am working with 30 W-100 W. I understand that how I might end up deploying a system like this can (and very likely) result in different power consumption, but it will at least give me an idea as to which ball park we're talking about here. Thank you.

[@saramae9878]

The SATA NVME price being....so close is throwing me for a loop planning a nas build

[@Broken_Spoke]

why use the 10gb when you have 2 x thunderbolt ports?

[@-RockOn-]

There is just 1 thing that people need to consider while using a SSD vs HDD for Nas. When an SSD fails. Chances of Data Recovery is 10% When an HDD fails, Chances of Data Recovery is closer to 90% The whole point of NAS system is Data Storage and safety.

[@jeffnew1213]

Any reason you can see why this unit wouldn't take four 8TB NVMe sticks?

[@cam_934]

There is no limitation on the size of NVMe's its just 8TB are hard to find and crazy expensive eg: 1x 8TB NVMe is currently approx 3 times the price of this unit and you are suggesting installing 4!

[@jeffnew1213]

@@cam_934 Perhaps one at a time, as finances allow. Sabrent, Inland, and Corsair 8TB M.2 SSDs are all $1000 or less at Amazon right now.

[@razorgarf]

Synology need to drop their ancient hardware

[@KensReviews]

How do you think this would fare as a media server for 4K movies?

[@TomaszStachewicz]

overkill but it would work

[@holdenhodgdon3756]

This is designed with PLEX media streaming in mind: the HDMI can (theoretically) do 8k direct output to a TV & the firehose of throughput you get from pairing that many M.2 drives with a 10 gig port would support multiple LAN users to stream content at the same time.

[@vitusyu9583]

Quite good, hope I can also find this UGreen thing here in Jing Long later.

[@SixOThree]

I'm literally never buying another 3.5" NAS. It's either NVME or 2.5" SSD (on its way out too).

[@DavidNg12345]

Can I flash other operating system onto this NAS?

[@holdenhodgdon3756]

Yes: this is effectively a mini pc with 4x M.2 bays & you can install any x86 OS on it.

[@heart4Pahoa]

I would personally want minimum of 6 drives with a solid hardware RAID controller for RAID 6 data preservation. So the Asustor is the only game in town right now…. que the sadness music.

[@zweiwing4435]

I wish M.2 SSD 22x30 size as 100Tb.

[@TimHunold]

4tb NVME in thunderbolt enclosures are a better working drive scenario if you are still offloading to platters elsewhere. And that is cheaper than this device on its own. I do a ton of 100mp photo editing and 6k video. Relying on the switch, device, and drive to all play nice just sounds like convenience through complications on a gen3 pcie bus😅😅😅

[@frankwong9486]

How about asustor all flashnas ?

[@ajrfilm0110]

Different kind of hardware under the hood. This was the most enticing detail about the UGreen NAS lineup.

[@kernzilla]

interesting solution here, thanks for review. little confused by your setup/config though. your speed test showed 1200/300, was that over ethernet? feel like most creators would rely on Thunderbolt connection for several reasons, and curious why not show those results? possible this is one of those 'it's not a sponsored review, but I'm not allowed to tell the whole truth' types of videos, which is always unfortunate.

[@JimmyTriesWorld]

The test was over 10g ethernet. And definitely in line with other NASes I've tried with SSDs in RAID5. Write speed (from my experience) always seems slower than reads from a NAS. The reason TB connection was not shown is because this NAS can't be treated like a DAS where you plug it in via TB to transfer files. I tried. I don't do paid reviews, as I personally view that it clouds a person's view of an item and so purposely labeled this as sponsored, upfront, and that this was labeled a showcase to further drive home that hey, this is a sponsored video. That being said, all this stuff is still pre-production and subject to change, and I would personally love to have a direct TB connection from my computer to the NAS as well!

[@ear10]

@@JimmyTriesWorldthis can’t be direct connected to a MacBook via thunderbolt? What’s the point of the thunderbolt?

[@ajrfilm0110]

@@ear10 To offload media cards for example, connect a TB card reader.

[@LYPTUS]

@@JimmyTriesWorldwhich adapter are you using for 10gbe on the mac?

[@eddiezhang6781]

only 1 10G port is a drow-back

[@Ace-Brigade]

Why buy that when you can literally buy a PCIe adapter card and put four NVMe SSDs in that? That's what I did.

[@Chris.Brisson]

Mini-PCs do not offer a PCIe slot for such an adapter card, and today's consumer PC motherboards often reduce the number of PCIe lanes to the GPU (from x16 to x8) if you put into use the secondary x16 PCIe slot.

[@Ace-Brigade]

@@Chris.Brisson Fair enough but if you have a need for this much storage odds are you don't have a mini PC to begin with. People that need this much storage typically are content creators or artists who require strong machines that require significant cooling.

[@Chris.Brisson]

@@Ace-Brigade agreed, and Plex libraries do not really need such access speed but might need larger, expandable storage arrays.

[@kguehini]

creating a NAS with 4x 2.5" HDD drives would be better. it will be compact and you can use cheap Magnetic drives and you can use Sata SSD drives as well.

[@britishagent]

Its got potential but those write speeds are poor. Wonder if the 10gb LAN has poor speeds too?

[@nadtz]

Wouldn't be surprised if the drives are running at 1 or 2x given the CPU only supports 12 pcie lanes.

[@JimmyTriesWorld]

I think it's the impact of using RAID5 and the pcie lane limit as @nadtz pointed out

[@TomaszStachewicz]

​@@nadtzCore i5-1235U supports 20 pcie 4.0 lanes. and even with multiplexed two 4xpcie4 (so 8 lanes total) the speeds should be way better.

[@fwiler]

There is something really wrong with write speeds. I'm going to assume this is a driver issue with their homebuilt os. Even if you halve the pcie lanes it would be much higher.

[@volodumurkalunyak4651]

@@JimmyTriesWorld PCI-E limitation??? Even PCI-E Gen4 x1 does saturate 10Gbps connection. Furthermore it is symmetric (read BW=write BW) so if it is the limit then reading and writing should be very close.

[@justinsimpson4584]

New to the NAS world. Does anyone know if you can use the thunderbolt to connect directly to a computer and use this locally at speeds closer to a normal SSD drive while still using the NAS software to auto backup those files to a different NAS?

[@ear10]

That’s what I’m hoping to use this for, thunderbolt directly to MacBook

[@ajrfilm0110]

@@ear10 Not, unfortunately TB will only be to host card-readers and external TB-SSD. Was my biggest hope, a hybrid DAS mode, but was shot down in Q&A with UGreen.

[@sojirou]

Shame the kickstarter is being limited to Germany/US only. Looks like a pretty interesting offering compared to the Asustor and QNAP options.

[@jadhal6649]

Ugreen NAS This m.2 connector support upto 4 TB m.2 nvme or 8 TB Please ans

[@lizijie98]

According to their kickstarter, it only supports up to 4TB M.2 SSDs

[@DrMJJr]

@@lizijie98ridiculous when Sabrent now have 8TB drives out…HUGE oversight IMHO

[@aravjain]

3:23 Do you mean "12 terabytes in RAID 5" instead of "12 terabytes in RAID 1"?

[@Mkungaa]

6 drive Asustor sells for 450 bucks right now, no need to wait. This one costs 480 bucks for early Kickstarter backers. 480 bucks for a much better CPU vs dinky N5105, 10 gig network vs 2.5 on Asustor sounds like a good deal, but 4 drives... I wonder if it is limited to 4 drives because they deliberately decided not to use bifurcation chips like Asustor, so those 4 slots are directly wired to SoC. And Intel is probably has limitations on how many PCIe devices you can allocate those 20 PCIe lanes on their mobile SoC. Asustor for comparison chose the dinkiest Celeron CPU with total of 8 PCIe lanes, two of which they probably allocated for networking and miscellaneous like USB controller, and leftover 6 lanes they split into 3 and wired to three ASM2806 bifurcation chips, each of which bifurcates into 2 NVMe slots, 6 slots in total for 6 drive Asustor. So if you hit all 6 drives simultaneously on Asustor, then you will probably hit the limitation of 1 PCIe lane per drive. But then you anyway have only 2.5 gig networking, so it is not an issue. The on downside of Asustor's approach is that ASM2806 chips actually consumes pretty decent amount of energy, so even during idle 6 drive Asustor consumes 16-18 watts, which is a lot for Celeron N5105 based system.

[@l3martin]

I just heard crickets... ;-)

[@homerjones3490]

can't find the tech specs

[@funky_hedgehog]

Maybe arm chip will be better?

[@AlexiHelligar]

Will it support iSCSI?

[@damiendye6623]

Why ? Its 2024 use NVMeOF

[@alexsiniov]

Raid 5 you wanted to say. 3+1 TB redundancy

[@maxx1nsane]

I want one but on Kickstarter they only deliver to US or Germany :( I guess they only want people from these 2 countries to support them....

[@rhb.digital]

whenever they allow / make it possible to install own nas software.. this is a must buy for sure ! As of now.. no

[@jordanclayson2]

Rack mount form factor

[@sunday20]

Waiting for the M.2 prices to plunge, that will be the end of HDD.

[@Dominus_Potatus]

Afaik, NVMe PCIe cannot be hot swapped in general.

[@nadtz]

Sure it can, m.2 can't but just about every other nvme form factor can.

[@nathanacreman632]

NVME is still far too expensive for most large scale storage I'm afraid. I mean maybe that's not a huge deal for you, but imagine how much more expensive it would cost to run a raid 1 20tb hard drive vs nvme setup.

[@cesarnieves6884]

Exactly what I was thinking. Nothing beats Mechanical HDs when it comes to price per TB.

[@Chris.Brisson]

And add the expense of upgrading your LAN to 10GBase-T. $$$

[@nathanacreman632]

@@Chris.Brisson right and besides SSDs are really only needed for applications and critical work which should fit on 99% of PCs these day, well except for apple who thinks 256GBs is still enough

[@kchaney56]

This is really just an external HDD. The device really cannot affordably offer much storage.

[@romanciesielski10]

nice device, except front panel and power button :(

[@dantecorbett2221]

All i see is the none plus version.

[@lllongreen]

No ECC, no ZFS = NO BUY Also the write speeds are atrocious

[@VictorEstrada]

Yeah cause you're enterprise smh, zfs will only slow down things by a lot, I've verified this. It's why I moved away from TrueNAS into just ubuntu server.

[@lllongreen]

@VictorEstrada the most important in any storage solution should be data integrity and safety after that things like speed. There is a reason ZFS on Linux project has so many contributors.

[@VictorEstrada]

@@lllongreen ZFS is not the only player buddy, ext4 is just as reliable, but when you're comparing going 150MB/s to 1.11GB/s, that's a huge difference in my case. Both were VMs with PCIe passthrough to the NVMes, the exact same setup. Cache is supposed to improve speed, all it did was require a ton of extra RAM and I only got 150MB/s. Cache is actually adding more points of failure, and it's only hiding the fact that your spinning disks are slow. Not to mention that reads are slow as hell because it will never be able to predict what you need, which is why I went all NVMe.