Re: Recommendations for NAS-based home media set-up
Errr, the Gen8 is a microserver - the HP Gen8 Microserver - the replacement/upgrade for the N54L.
You also stated that the £120 unit (must be a N54L or lower) offer massive outperformance over a NAS. Given you were trash-talking the Synology for £500 (which would be the DS412+) I offered a simple comparison, N54L vs DS412+, and stated it highly unlikely a N54L could outperform it, whereas the Gen8 perhaps could thus making the £350 Gen8 the fairer comparison as there's no point slagging off NAS performance to then compare it with a device likely to give a lower performance is there? You were not comparing apples with apples and I merely corrected this so that readers get the facts and not what seems like your personal bias. NAS units offer a valid alternative depending on the needs of the individual.
"I'm interested, but I'd be pretty surprised if they come close performance wise"
The performance I gave for the Synology is for the benchmark off of the smallnetbuilder site, i.e. they tested it when they reviewed it in order to verify manufacturer claims. You can verify it's speed on a variety of RAID setups from fastest to safest. As an example the DS412+ hits 102.4MB/s on RAID 5 write performance - that's pretty bloody fast. A Gen8 using SSD caching which cannot, to my knowledge, be configured in a 4 bay from Synology or QNAP would offer vastly greater performance. Simple RAID5 HDD to RAID5 HDD I'd like to see but have had trouble getting benchmarks for the HP - faster processor is not the be-all if other components are not well matched.
"unbelievably awful internal components of all of these NAS system cannot compare to a normal system"? These devices are SME targeted and hot-swappable - which the beloved HP Microserver most certainly isn't. The more expensive 4 bays units (£500) also come with dual 1Gb/s ethernet. The microserver, especially the N54L is basically the same as one of these (without dual LAN) in that it's a prepacked spec and you're adding drives. The only freedom is really the OS. It does offer an expansion slot and may take more drives but that's by fiddling with the layout. I do not for one minute believe the internals of the HP would be superior for the given price than a NAS. I also know the actual specs, they are there on the review sites and the manufacturer sites for all to see.
"NAS dogs-wrapped-up-in-expensive-shiny-covers" - your personal bias is showing through and it isn't fair to give someone asking a genuine question an answer based upon this. The HP stands up on it's own merit without personal bias but Synology and QNAP offer valid NAS alternatives depending upon needs, budget, and desire to play with/configure FreeNAS vs the embedded offering. They will outperform a N54L, for example, but be similar price to a Gen8 Microserver when it is dual LANed. A Gen8 is better if you want to run ZFS (stack it with RAM) but is not hot-swappable (may be achievable with added card).
Give them the facts and let them make the decision rather than try to force your viewpoint upon them - I feel no need to trash-talk the HP to make the point that the Synology offers a valid alternative because I'd rather them make the right decision for themselves than try and sway them to any bias I may have.