• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

It's the NAS (Network Attached Storage) Thread, yo.

Marty Chinn said:
How bad are Seagate 4TB NAS drives? They can be had for $110 and for some reason everyone is out of stock of WD 4TB Red drives like they're being phased out for a newer revision.
Click to expand...

They should be perfectly fine. All of the 4TB run of drives seem to be much better than the 3TB ones.
 
vityaz said:
Either should be fine from what I've read, personally I prefer the reds due to some shitty experiences with seagate disks in the past. :p Aren't there 4tb reds on newegg and amazon?
Click to expand...

There weren't any over the last week or so. Newegg and Amazon were both out of stock. In fact every place I checked, including places like B&H Photo were out of stock. Only third party sellers had them at a much higher price. In fact, B&H lists it as discontinued. It looks like Newegg got some in stock as of now though. I think there's a new revision coming or something which is why everyone is out of stock. Only the Pro models are readily available but those are pretty pricey.

dIEHARD said:
They should be perfectly fine. All of the 4TB run of drives seem to be much better than the 3TB ones.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Seagate's reliability recently has scared me off, but it sounds like that was all 3TB related. Still the reputation has certainly taken a toll in my eyes to not immediately trust them. I went ahead and ordered it. I figure since it's in my server, it's designed around drive failure so I'll take the risk. Especially since they're only $110 a drive compared to $135 to $160 a drive. As long as both don't fail at the same time, I'll be good =)
 
CES and still no DS416+???
I guess this confirms my suspicion that they're waiting on DSM 6.0 to come out of beta for it... hmmm. At least we got a DS414j successor!
 
whats the current sweetspot in terms of size/price? WD Red still a good choice to go for?

Need to replace a failing 2TB WD drive thats probably 3-4 years old now, and I'd like to go up in space at least a little - using unraid so will slowly replace the other drives over the coming months.
 
mrklaw said:
whats the current sweetspot in terms of size/price? WD Red still a good choice to go for?

Need to replace a failing 2TB WD drive thats probably 3-4 years old now, and I'd like to go up in space at least a little - using unraid so will slowly replace the other drives over the coming months.
Click to expand...

I think 4TB is the sweet spot at the moment. Unfortunately, prices haven't come down much in the last couple of years. I think they've only dropped like $10 in the last year. So you can typically find NAS rated 4TB drives for about $150. Ideally you'd find a sale that will drop them down to about $110 to $130. Reds are still good, but for the last round of upgrades, I added two Seagate NAS drives simply because of the price difference. I got those on sale for about $104 each. It seems like Seagate's problems were with their 3TB drives but their 4TB drives are fine. 6TB drives are still way too pricey IMO.
 
Marty Chinn said:
I think 4TB is the sweet spot at the moment. Unfortunately, prices haven't come down much in the last couple of years. I think they've only dropped like $10 in the last year. So you can typically find NAS rated 4TB drives for about $150. Ideally you'd find a sale that will drop them down to about $110 to $130. Reds are still good, but for the last round of upgrades, I added two Seagate NAS drives simply because of the price difference. I got those on sale for about $104 each. It seems like Seagate's problems were with their 3TB drives but their 4TB drives are fine. 6TB drives are still way too pricey IMO.
Click to expand...

thanks. I've had to stick with 2TB for the moment as I need to replace like with like for a drive failure, so will look at upgrading space later. Good to know seagate NAS models are back on the table, gives some price flexibility.
 
Marty Chinn said:
Here's something I learned early on about Synology. The model number has a lot of info in it. The first part of the number tells you the maximum number of drives it can take and the second number is the year it's released. I have a DS1813 which means it can take up to 18 drives and was released in 2013. The unit itself can only take 8 drives, but there are two expansion bays that hold 5 drives each which will take the other 10 drives if I expand. Not all of the Synology servers can take the expansion bay so this is how you know. If you look at a DS415, that means it can take 4 drives and was released this year.

So how do you decide? Well first off it depends on how important the data is to you. At a minimum you're going to have one drive for redundancy. So in a 4 drive enclosure, that's really only 3 drives of space. In a 2 drive enclosure, that's only one drive of space. In the event of a drive failure, you can only have one drive fail before you're vulnerable. I prefer to have two drive redundancy because it can take awhile between the time that the drive actually fails, you realize it has failed, getting a new drive, and then the extensive long process of it rebuilding the data on to the new drive. At any point in time if another drive fails. you'll have lost data. So that's why I prefer to have two drive redundancy since I'd have to have three drives fail before I'd lose data and I have the other drive as insurance while it's rebuilding. Granted, you should also back all of this to the cloud like Crashplan for offsite storage, but I still like the comfort of having two drives fail without losing data.

Don't worry about the CPU, or anything like that. Unless you're transcoding video on the fly or going to use it more as a server than storage, you're not going to really need the performance. Concentrate more on how many drives you think you'll need. Also, whatever you think is the right spot for the number of drives, increase it. You'll realize you wish you had more later on and it'll be harder to upgrade then. Pay up front and give yourself flexibility to grow in the future.

In my setup, even though I can max out at 18 drives, I'm right now only at 6 with two drives for redundancy, which means I'm really only at 4 drives of usable space. That gives me plenty of room to grow. I don't think you need 18 drives, but I'd certainly would go more than two, and I'd even say more than 4. I'd look to see if the DS1515 is affordable to you. That's a 5 bay unit, with the ability to expand with two expansion bays added to it. The 5 bay with two drive redundancy, will give you 3 drives of usable space. If you fill them all with 6TB drives, that's 18TB of space before you need to expand.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this post man. I'm currently trying to get into the home server game and have always subscribed to this thread to keep up tabs

I'm interested in getting back up solution for mostly music, pics, etc....the usual stuff. I havent ripped blurays in the past and dont really expect to, although knowing myself, once I have NAS that gives global house access to potential rips, I might consider it. Aln movies I put on there now would be lower quality dvd rips from the past or digital downloads you get when buying movies these days. I dont know if "transcoding" will be thing I'd be interested in, and if I was, I'd definitely be on the low end of the spectrum of use cases (1 movie at a time to one destination for now)

I have a family, so I'm thinking multiple computers might get backed up to this. Wife wants 4 bays at least because shes worried that she has more pics and videos than I might expect

I have a mac mini as a HTPC. Have Kodi installed but dont really need it at the moment since my movie collection is small. It would be nice if this mac could access this drive along with my PCs. Everyone has iPhones, and Ive got an apple tv in the bedroom ... so hopefully theyd have access

Eventually I might be into getting some home security cams but thats not a priority right now

With all that I was leaning on the new 416j. It's cheaper and on the lower end of specs (512 RAM, 1.3 GHZ Marvell Armada 388). It looks the quietest and has pretty low power consumption. Does this sound like a good starting point, or would I be limiting myself too much by going for the cheaper model?

Also, do people encrypt these drives? Once I set this up I know I will be worried that someone could break in and steal 1 little box that has tons of media and photos and PC back ups etc. I dont hear much about security with these things

Thanks for the help
 
Any one setup ssh with the synology products? I looked at all the guides got root access to work, but I am trying to get it to work for the individual users. I did the passwd edit. Did the ssh file edit, but still get permission denied when logging as a regular user. I am doing this for a ds215j on dsm 6.0.

Thanks.
 
xero273 said:
Any one setup ssh with the synology products? I looked at all the guides got root access to work, but I am trying to get it to work for the individual users. I did the passwd edit. Did the ssh file edit, but still get permission denied when logging as a regular user. I am doing this for a ds215j on dsm 6.0.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Did you restart the SSH service?
 
Doing more research I'm thinking the j series is just a little too budget for me. Thinking about the 416 with two 4 tb hard drives with raid 1 to start. Eventually will add a third when space fills up. The + and play versions of the 415 just seem like overkill

Still like $800 for that. Jesus. Since I will primarily use this as backup first I almost feel like an online service like crash plan would be an even better place to start. Or I could just get 1 drive to start and get redundancy later
 
I posted this on Synology`s help and sent it to the company itself, but I thought I`d put it here in case someone here had any advice. Long story short, I swapped out a hard disk for a repair, and it failed during the repair stating another disk had bad sectors (that never gave any errors before the swap). Now nothing works.

Detailed description.
A few weeks ago, disk 2 within the 1812+ NAS at my work was having input/output errors, and the GUI was running extremely slow. It was not showing bad sectors, but we agreed to swap it out anyways. Yesterday I swapped out the disk for a new blank one, and I left the repair step alone at around 13%. When I came in the next day, the machine was beeping and Volume 1 has crashed. Volume 7 had bad sectors (which the NAS had never reported before the disk swap) which led to the failure.

I don't have the full error written down because when attempting to do the suggested next step (attempt to remap the bad sectors) I was met with a "Connection Failed. Please check your network settings." error and the error message disappeared. Now if I attempt to open storage manager, I get the same "Connection Failed" error. And trying to attempt to open the "Log Center" is constantly loading and not coming up.

Any advice would be appreciated.
 
Guys I need help, please!

I´ve got a NAS server setup to wakeup on LAN.
In the evening, I simply disconnect the LAN cable to the server, and the thing powers down automatically. Next morning I simply connect the cable again, and the server boots and everything is nice and dandy.
Yesterday I also disconnected the cable, but this morning the server was still busy running. I reconnected the cable, but the server is now not to be found via the PC´s, or the server software.

What can I do? I do not want to simply yank the power cord, as this would probably damage data.
 
Hammer24 said:
What can I do? I do not want to simply yank the power cord, as this would probably damage data.
Click to expand...


If you can't turn it off by pressing an on/off button and you can't find it on the network, you pretty much have to cut the power. And cutting the power isn't a very big risk these days unless you have a very weird set up. If stuff is damaged when you boot back up, it's more likely that it was caused by whatever makes your system unresponsive now.
 
Hammer24 said:
What can I do? I do not want to simply yank the power cord, as this would probably damage data.
Click to expand...

As said in the other thread, if there is no response and no controlled power down 'triggerable', then you have only one option left.

Data should be quite safe, especially if you are running a RAID-1 NAS.
 
So i have around 400-500GB of photos i've taken over the last 10 years, currently they're sitting on a 3TB drive i've had for a few years but i know for sure i'm going to need something better to store them in.

I have a lot of personally ripped DVD's and other media i'd like to store too, hoping to have a method of storing them on my 3TB but having them all on another drive should my 3TB fail.

Is NAS the way to go? I currently live in a house that is out of broadband range in the rural U.S. and use a mobile hotspot so i dont have a traditional network, will this be a problem if i just buy a high speed router and connect the NAS even with no internet?
 
Plasmid said:
So i have around 400-500GB of photos i've taken over the last 10 years, currently they're sitting on a 3TB drive i've had for a few years but i know for sure i'm going to need something better to store them in.

I have a lot of personally ripped DVD's and other media i'd like to store too, hoping to have a method of storing them on my 3TB but having them all on another drive should my 3TB fail.

Is NAS the way to go? I currently live in a house that is out of broadband range in the rural U.S. and use a mobile hotspot so i dont have a traditional network, will this be a problem if i just buy a high speed router and connect the NAS even with no internet?
Click to expand...

Having a NAS will give you the ability to centralize storage and access it easier. A NAS is just a storage solution accessed over a network of some kind, so having a NAS on it's own though isn't a backup solution, so beware of that. For my photos and media, I back them up onto my NAS and an external drive connected to it using USB. That way, I get storage on two separate locations in case the NAS fails. I also upload essential things to the cloud for extra safety, but this may not be an option for you.

Regarding your network setup though, that shouldn't be a problem. You can implement the NAS into a regular local network without internet access. You may lose out on the ability to say, access photos remotely or share them over the internet, but the core functionality of any NAS is storage, which will work fine in your situation.
 
KingoftheRing said:
Having a NAS will give you the ability to centralize storage and access it easier. A NAS is just a storage solution accessed over a network of some kind, so having a NAS on it's own though isn't a backup solution, so beware of that. For my photos and media, I back them up onto my NAS and an external drive connected to it using USB. That way, I get storage on two separate locations in case the NAS fails. I also upload essential things to the cloud for extra safety, but this may not be an option for you.

Regarding your network setup though, that shouldn't be a problem. You can implement the NAS into a regular local network without internet access. You may lose out on the ability to say, access photos remotely or share them over the internet, but the core functionality of any NAS is storage, which will work fine in your situation.
Click to expand...

Okay great! I've been reading and i think i should buy a 2 bay NAS with 2x 3TB WD Red drives. I've been looking at 2 bay solutions and this Netgear ReadyNAS looks like a good option, is there any reason to not get this one? There's a $70-80 jump from that to the next few brands.
 
Plasmid said:
Okay great! I've been reading and i think i should buy a 2 bay NAS with 2x 3TB WD Red drives. I've been looking at 2 bay solutions and this Netgear ReadyNAS looks like a good option, is there any reason to not get this one? There's a $70-80 jump from that to the next few brands.
Click to expand...

Well, you'd be capped at 3TB of usable storage and would need to replace both drives in order to gain storage. Short term it already feels limiting, but you might get by, but long term it's going to be painful.
 
Marty Chinn said:
Well, you'd be capped at 3TB of usable storage and would need to replace both drives in order to gain storage. Short term it already feels limiting, but you might get by, but long term it's going to be painful.
Click to expand...

So what's a better option? I'm still relatively new to NAS, why would i be capped at 3 TB?
 
Plasmid said:
So what's a better option? I'm still relatively new to NAS, why would i be capped at 3 TB?
Click to expand...

He is assuming you'd be using the most common RAID mode for that configuration and have both disks be duplicates of each other in order to safeguard failure of one of them.
 
Plasmid said:
So what's a better option? I'm still relatively new to NAS, why would i be capped at 3 TB?
Click to expand...

With two bays, you're limited to two drives. With one drive dedicated to redundancy in case of failure, that means you only have one drive to work with. It really depends how much storage you're going to think you need in the long run. My advice is always double what you think you need because you'll likely fill that space up quicker than you realize. This is especially true if you're ripping media. It depends on your budget, but I always tell people to think about going for a four bay system for future expansion and keep in mind that you're losing at least one drive in the storage capacity to protect against hard drive failure. With four bays, you have three usable drives which will make expanding or swapping out drives a bit easier.
 
Plasmid said:
So what's a better option? I'm still relatively new to NAS, why would i be capped at 3 TB?
Click to expand...

He's assuming you are running some form of RAID, presumably RAID 1 on a two bay, which means you only get half as much storage as you put in.

In general with a NAS, you want to buy as much storage as you can before purchase, as it's much easier to add spare drives in now then it will be 6 months down the line.
 
xptoxyz said:
He is assuming you'd be using the most common RAID mode for that configuration and have both disks be duplicates of each other in order to safeguard failure of one of them.
Click to expand...

Oh, i didn't realize RAID1 (right?) would make 3TB total.

I've also seen some people mention old builds can be turned into a NAS, i have a build that is pretty basic, i3 CPU, ATX Mobo, 8GB of ram and a small 2GB GPU. Is doing this a good method or am i better off just buying a manufactured NAS?
 
Plasmid said:
Oh, i didn't realize RAID1 (right?) would make 3TB total.

I've also seen some people mention old builds can be turned into a NAS, i have a build that is pretty basic, i3 CPU, ATX Mobo, 8GB of ram and a small 2GB GPU. Is doing this a good method or am i better off just buying a manufactured NAS?
Click to expand...

That's more than enough for a NAS, if you have enough drive slots. I'd go for 4 drives initially, either using RAID1 (simple duplication), or RAID5.




If you only have your photos on one drive, then please at least back them up onto another USB drive ASAP. That is way too much valuable data to have on one drive which could fail at any moment.

Personally I'd get your data security sorted first, and then look at the NAS. Ideally you'd have your important data in three places. If your internet is too slow to make cloud backup practical,that means you'll want three copies on drives somewhere - one off site.

Eg:
1) NAS with some form of data protection at home
2) copy of your data on USB drive at home
3) copy of your data on USB drive stored off site (office, family members house etc).
Then every month or so, you take your USB drive from home to your offsite location, bring the offsite one back and update the data on it.
 
mrklaw said:
That's more than enough for a NAS, if you have enough drive slots. I'd go for 4 drives initially, either using RAID1 (simple duplication), or RAID5.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't recommend RAID 5 on current large format drives. The time to rebuild a single 3-4TB could end up in another failed drive. Hybrid-RAID options aren't any better, but yeah.

I kind of wish I just saved a bit more and got the 6-8 bay options for Raid 6 or 10
 
I usually use Ubuntu Server as my OS on my microserver at home, I have been thinking about installing FreeNAS on a VM and doing all of my media stuff through that. Is there any benefit to that? Or is Ubuntu Server just as capable?
 
Burgess_101 said:
I usually use Ubuntu Server as my OS on my microserver at home, I have been thinking about installing FreeNAS on a VM and doing all of my media stuff through that. Is there any benefit to that? Or is Ubuntu Server just as capable?
Click to expand...

I would only use FN if you want to use ZFS, and have the required hardware to do so. FN has plugins that help make it a media server, but at its core it is a turnkey solution to BSD ZFS.
 
ANuclearError said:
Hi, my Uncle recommended the ASRock N3700-ITX to me for use in a NAS I'm wanting to build. You guys think it'd be suitable? I'd ideally like to run something like Plex on it.
Click to expand...

Need more info man.. do you want to transcode video? Multiple streams? Do you need it to be headless? What OS or Filesystem do you want? Does the case you want support larger than ITX? Hardware RAID?
 
TarpitCarnivore said:
How many drives were you looking to have? 4-sata ports is pretty limiting in what you can do in terms of upward mobility.
Click to expand...

dIEHARD said:
Need more info man.. do you want to transcode video? Multiple streams? Do you need it to be headless? What OS or Filesystem do you want? Does the case you want support larger than ITX? Hardware RAID?
Click to expand...

Ah bollocks, sorry.

I'm thinking 4x4TB hard drives for starters. I'd most likely need an expansion for extra SATA ports.

Transcoding would be nice yeah, wouldn't imagine there being more than 2 streams at once. Would be looking at using FreeNAS most likely.

I haven't fully settled on a case yet, the Silverstone DS380B is my preferred option, but would prefer a <£100 option.

When I get time over the weekend, I'm planning on creatign something on PCPartPicker, will return then.
 
Anyone got Plex remote access working on a Synology box? I'm having a hell of a time getting this working for something that should just require a single forwarded port. No issues with all of the other remote apps I have running on my box.

It's times like these I really wish I was still running a router with tomato on it and not an Apple Time Machine.

edit: Figured it out I think. I had the firewall rule in the Synology restricted to US IP addresses, and I guess Plex's discovery server is based outside of the US since allowing all appears to have fixed the issue.
 
Hey guys, finally got my new NAS and put together everything and installed QTS etc. etc.
Just finished syncing my RAID 1 Array after ~24 hours: x2 WD Red 6TB. 
Total Capacity listed as 5.41TB. Used Capacity listed as 17.60GB.

Is this normal? What is inside the 17.60GB? System files? Linux? I do not have that many apps installed, only the default ones which shouldn't take more than 2GB at most. The default shared folders that come with QNAP installation are completely empty I deleted whatever could be deleted (Sample files) and checked that they are all empty. I have not placed ANY files into my NAS yet. 

Can someone explain to me what is inside the 17.60GB and if this is normal? 

Excited to use my new NAS otherwise.  :DD 

Thanks!!
 
I have some questions as well. I just bought a Synology DS216play and I'm loving it so far.

About remote access: I guess it's better to connect my Synology straight to my internet modem, right? Without having a router inbetween?

Will this make it easier for me to remote access it?

What will I need to remote access my Synology? I tried "QuickConnect" together with a friend, but the download speed was incredibly slow. My upload isn't THAT bad, but I'm guessing it's some kind of setting.
 
eravulgaris said:
I have some questions as well. I just bought a Synology DS216play and I'm loving it so far.

About remote access: I guess it's better to connect my Synology straight to my internet modem, right? Without having a router inbetween?

Will this make it easier for me to remote access it?
Click to expand...

No, don't do this. Don't do this ever with anything. Always put everything behind your router.
 
Considering getting into the NAS boat right now, after realizing that disparate 1TB external drives are going to be really messy and of insufficient capacity on a per-drive basis... Really don't want to end up with a messed up file system these days while I don't have up-to-date backups... at least, not after something terrible happened a few days ago and I managed to clutch save since I never formatted an external I was using to hold my personal data while reconfiguring the system before.

I'm running into storage limitations with Windows' File History and Steam backups across multiple drives. (My personal data weighs half a TB already, and all the game backups (since the DSL connection here stinks, I make backups of everything) take up an entire 1TB drive by itself, in its compressed form. The remaining 1TB external (I have three) is a slow one (old design) and sometimes have trouble starting, though it saves and loads fine.

In addition to considering an NAS system, additional internal 3.5" drive(s), desktop external drive(s), and portable USB external drive(s) are also in consideration. What would be best suited to my need for more backup storage?
 
Noivern said:
Considering getting into the NAS boat right now, after realizing that disparate 1TB external drives are going to be really messy and of insufficient capacity on a per-drive basis... Really don't want to end up with a messed up file system these days while I don't have up-to-date backups... at least, not after something terrible happened a few days ago and I managed to clutch save since I never formatted an external I was using to hold my personal data while reconfiguring the system before.

I'm running into storage limitations with Windows' File History and Steam backups across multiple drives. (My personal data weighs half a TB already, and all the game backups (since the DSL connection here stinks, I make backups of everything) take up an entire 1TB drive by itself, in its compressed form. The remaining 1TB external (I have three) is a slow one (old design) and sometimes have trouble starting, though it saves and loads fine.

In addition to considering an NAS system, additional internal 3.5" drive(s), desktop external drive(s), and portable USB external drive(s) are also in consideration. What would be best suited to my need for more backup storage?
Click to expand...

what are you wanting to backup and how big is each category? Games/documents/photos/music?

What do you want to protect against? Drive failure, fire, theft?

Is some data more critical than others? While it might be damn annoying to re-rip CDs or redownload your steam games, it would be possible - whereas your important photos/docs could be priceless to you.



If your priceless stuff isn't too big, I'd definitely look into having cloud storage as one arm of your backup plan - although your DSL is slow and the initial upload will take a long time, keeping it up to date shouldn't be too bad. Just leave it going a few days.

For your steam games, I'd think another 3.5" drive in your PC would be fine as a backup - also means you'd be up and running quickly if there was a failure. Just get big drives - minimum 2TB or go for 4TB if you can.
 
mrklaw said:
what are you wanting to backup and how big is each category? Games/documents/photos/music?

What do you want to protect against? Drive failure, fire, theft?

Is some data more critical than others? While it might be damn annoying to re-rip CDs or redownload your steam games, it would be possible - whereas your important photos/docs could be priceless to you.

If your priceless stuff isn't too big, I'd definitely look into having cloud storage as one arm of your backup plan - although your DSL is slow and the initial upload will take a long time, keeping it up to date shouldn't be too bad. Just leave it going a few days.

For your steam games, I'd think another 3.5" drive in your PC would be fine as a backup - also means you'd be up and running quickly if there was a failure. Just get big drives - minimum 2TB or go for 4TB if you can.
Click to expand...

Games: I believe I mentioned that a 1 TB external drive would get filled with compressed Steam backups and the like, ending up with less than 30 GB of space.

Documents: More like a catch-all for things I can't categorize properly in addition to actual documents, it's 142 GB.

Pictures: Memories, artwork, the like! Photos and drawings and oh my. 116 GB.

Videos: 235 GB of videos. It'd be a hassle to re-rip and/or redownload things that can, let alone irreplaceable personal videos given by someone else...

Music: lol 6.35GB my thumb drive can store it several times over xD But seriously, yeah, this one isn't important.

Yep, documents and pictures must not get nuked at all times. Followed very loosely by videos.

Just protection against drive failure, file system errors, and accidental deletion/overwrites would be enough.
 
I'm thinking about getting into NAS myself, mainly to store photos and video and run a Kodi or Plex server. My friend swears by Synology so I was looking into their 4 bay options. Does anyone have any suggestions as to the cpu and ram specs I should be looking at?
 
razgriz417 said:
I'm thinking about getting into NAS myself, mainly to store photos and video and run a Kodi or Plex server. My friend swears by Synology so I was looking into their 4 bay options. Does anyone have any suggestions as to the cpu and ram specs I should be looking at?
Click to expand...

what are your trans-coding requirements?
 
Noivern said:
Games: I believe I mentioned that a 1 TB external drive would get filled with compressed Steam backups and the like, ending up with less than 30 GB of space.

Documents: More like a catch-all for things I can't categorize properly in addition to actual documents, it's 142 GB.

Pictures: Memories, artwork, the like! Photos and drawings and oh my. 116 GB.

Videos: 235 GB of videos. It'd be a hassle to re-rip and/or redownload things that can, let alone irreplaceable personal videos given by someone else...

Music: lol 6.35GB my thumb drive can store it several times over xD But seriously, yeah, this one isn't important.

Yep, documents and pictures must not get nuked at all times. Followed very loosely by videos.

Just protection against drive failure, file system errors, and accidental deletion/overwrites would be enough.
Click to expand...

Not sure I'd bother with a NAS unless you're curious.

For the games: I'd put a 2TB drive in your PC and use that for a backup of your steam stuff.

For the rest, get something like the WD mirror drives that'll duplicate the content on both drives so you have some redundancy there - a 2TB one should be enough (you'll get 1TB usable, but get a bigger one if you can afford it.

Then also for your important files, consider something like an office 365 account so you get 1TB onedrive space, and upload that stuff to the cloud. That way, your data will be in multiple places - cloud for slow but offsite, WD mirror for archiving locally with built in redundancy, and finally also on your PC.
 
dIEHARD said:
what are your trans-coding requirements?
Click to expand...

tbh I'm not sure. I currently run a Kodi server program on my pc and stream my ripped blurays and stream to these android boxes I have in the living room and bedroom. With transcoding, I've been just using whatever the default is.
 
razgriz417 said:
tbh I'm not sure. I currently run a Kodi server program on my pc and stream my ripped blurays and stream to these android boxes I have in the living room and bedroom. With transcoding, I've been just using whatever the default is.
Click to expand...

Which Android boxes? They may be able to play them native and you won't need transcoding at all.
 
mrklaw said:
Not sure I'd bother with a NAS unless you're curious.

For the games: I'd put a 2TB drive in your PC and use that for a backup of your steam stuff.

For the rest, get something like the WD mirror drives that'll duplicate the content on both drives so you have some redundancy there - a 2TB one should be enough (you'll get 1TB usable, but get a bigger one if you can afford it.

Then also for your important files, consider something like an office 365 account so you get 1TB onedrive space, and upload that stuff to the cloud. That way, your data will be in multiple places - cloud for slow but offsite, WD mirror for archiving locally with built in redundancy, and finally also on your PC.
Click to expand...

I was going to say just get a Crashplan or Backblaze account. Rough math has all that coming in under 1TB (probably smaller). It'd be a few days to back up but then it's just done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New " Check out my Hyperscape scan" thread. It's incredible
26
1K
jason10mm replied
2025 | The yearly positive thread
3
231
DKehoe replied
NBA Thread 2026: There will be ballin'
2
46
Ipsi replied
Cold Storage - Official Teaser Trailer (2026) Liam Neeson, Joe Keery, Georgina Campbell
7
390
CellarDoor81 replied
It's the 1st day of Summer!
2
68
2K
12Goblins replied
Top Bottom