L’ASUSTOR AS6704T v2 (nom complet Lockerstor 4 Gen2+) constitue une évolution discrète du Lockerstor 4 Gen2. La dénomination peut prêter à confusion : les différences entre les références sont très ténues, le modèle intégrant simplement un « v2 » tandis que le nom commercial ajoute un « + ».
Du point de vue matériel, les changements restent très limités :
le v2 intègre deux ports réseau 5 Gb/s, au lieu de deux ports 2,5 Gb/s sur la version précédente ;
il dispose d’un port USB 2.0 supplémentaire à l’arrière.
Pour le reste, les spécifications demeurent identiques :
processeur Intel Celeron N5105 Quad Core ;
4 Go de mémoire vive ;
4 emplacements NVMe ;
la possibilité d’installer une carte réseau 10 Gb/s à la place de la carte d’extension NVMe.
Vous trouverez un tableau comparatif complet entre les deux modèles sur le site d’Asustor.
Le prix, en revanche, a évolué. La première génération était proposée autour de 700 € lors de notre test d’octobre 2022, tandis que la v2 est affichée à 833 € en mars 2026 ( probablement sous l’effet de l’inflation).
La question reste donc ouverte : cette évolution vaut-elle réellement la peine ?
Conditions des tests
Pour réaliser ces tests, je me suis équipé d’un switch UGREEN 2,5 Gb/s, ainsi que d’un adaptateur USB-C vers réseau 2,5 Gb/s de la même marque. Je ne suis malheureusement pas équipé de SSD NVMe et leur prix actuel ne m’a pas permis de tester cette partie du NAS. Cependant, les performances en NVMe ne devraient pas avoir significativement changés depuis notre test d’octobre 2022. J’ai donc configuré le NAS avec : deux SSD SATA de 2 To en RAID 1 et deux SSD SATA de 240 Go en RAID 0. J’ai créé des partages chiffrés et non chiffrés sur les deux grappes.
Contenu de la boite
Le NAS AS6704T v2 ;
2 câbles réseau RJ45 Cat.5e ;
Les vis de fixation pour disques durs 2,5 et 3,5 pouces ;
L’alimentation externe et son câble ;
Un passe-câble à fixer à l’arrière afin de sécuriser le branchement au NAS et éviter que le câble ne se débranche en cas de manipulations ou d’un passage de votre chat ;
Le guide de démarrage rapide.
À noter : aucun dissipateur thermique n’est fourni pour les éventuels SSD NVMe.
Point négatif, les plateaux pour les disques durs ne sont pas en montage sans outil pour les disques de 3,5 pouces contrairement à la plupart des concurrents. C’est dommage, d’autant plus qu’Asustor propose depuis des années une fonctionnalité assez intéressante, avec MyArchive. Il aurait été pratique d’avoir un montage sans outil pour faciliter le changement de disque d’archivage (par exemple, pour externaliser une sauvegarde), sans devoir acheter des plateaux supplémentaires ou utiliser un tournevis.
Le Lockerstor 4 Gen2+ est équipé d’une barrette de 4go de DDR4. Il y a deux emplacements sur la carte mère, dont un accessible en retirant juste le capot.
Le second se trouve de l’autre coté de la carte mère, et nécessite un démontage complet pour l’atteindre, cela peut se réaliser en une quarantaine de minutes en suivant cette vidéo du support officiel Asustor.
Le logiciel
Au moment d’écrire ces lignes, le Lockerstor 4 Gen2+ tourne sous ADM version 5.1.2.RE51 . L’interface a bien évolué ces dernières années, et même si Asustor n’a pas atteint Synology au niveau de l’ergonomie, on ne peut que les féliciter pour les progrès accomplis. Le magasin d’application est très complet, même si certaines applications sont quelque peu obsolètes, comme par exemple aMule qui n’a plus été mis à jour depuis plus de 4 ans.
Bien que l’application semble abandonnée par son développeur, ce n’est pas la dernière version qui est proposée dans le magasin Asustor. Cela pose la question de la pertinence de maintenir ce type d’applications dans un catalogue qui se veut sécurisé (un argument pourtant central de la marque).
Un autre point perfectible concerne l’intégration des machines virtuelles. Là où QNAP et Synology proposent des solutions maison bien intégrées, Asustor s’appuie sur VirtualBox, dont l’intégration au système reste plus limitée. Certes, le constructeur semble aujourd’hui privilégier les conteneurs Docker, mais il est dommage que les machines virtuelles soient relativement délaissées.
À l’inverse, l’intégration des conteneurs est particulièrement réussie. J’ai par exemple pu installer VaultWarden en deux clics depuis le magasin d’applications, et gratuitement. À titre de comparaison, la version équivalente sur QNAP nécessite de passer par le dépôt alternatif MyQNAP… et elle est payante.
Les performances
Avertissement : Pour ces tests, j’ai utilisé un MacBook Pro M1 avec un adaptateur USB-C Ugreen. J’ai obtenu des résultats surprenants : des vitesses d’écriture parfois supérieures à celles observées en lecture dans les configurations en RAID sans chiffrement. J’ai validé les résultats d’écriture en copiant des fichiers entre deux NAS (mon QNAP TS453D et le Lockerstor), connectés en 2,5 Gb/s. Les vitesses de lecture, en revanche, devraient être supérieures à celles relevées… je mets donc un gros avertissement sur ces dernières.
Des tests iperf ont confirmé que le réseau atteignait des performances proches de la limite théorique du 2,5 GbE, sans toutefois la dépasser.
Lors des transferts entre les deux NAS, les débits observés se situaient entre 2,45 et 2,47 Gb/s.
Résultats en RAID 0
Cette configuration est déconseillée sur un NAS, mais elle a été utilisée ici afin d’extraire les performances maximales :
Ici sans chiffrement
Ici, avec le chiffrement activé
Résultats en RAID 1
En RAID 1 sans chiffrement, les performances ne chutent pas significativement par rapport au RAID 0.
Même constat avec chiffrement activé : les performances restent comparables à celles du RAID 0 chiffré.
Bruit et consommation
L’un des points les plus impressionnants de ce NAS reste son silence de fonctionnement. L’absence de disques mécaniques y contribue évidemment beaucoup, mais même sous charge élevée, le NAS demeure remarquablement discret.
Côté consommation électrique :
20 W en utilisation normale avec 4 SSD SATA
29 à 30 W au démarrage
Des valeurs très raisonnables pour un NAS de cette catégorie.
CONCLUSION
Pour répondre à la question posée en introduction (cette évolution en vaut-elle la peine ?) : la réponse est plutôt non.
Si l’on s’en tient strictement au terme « évolution », les changements restent très limités. À l’exception de l’ajout de deux ports réseau 5 Gb/s et d’un port USB supplémentaire, il s’agit globalement du même NAS que le Lockerstor 4 Gen2 (sans le « + »).
En revanche, pour quelqu’un qui souhaite s’équiper d’un premier NAS ou remplacer un modèle vieillissant, le Lockerstor 4 Gen2+ reste, à mes yeux, un excellent choix.
Entre un magasin d’applications bien fourni, de bonnes performances, un prix compétitif face à la concurrence et une qualité matérielle solide, il dispose d’arguments sérieux. À cela s’ajoute une garantie constructeur de 3 ans, toujours appréciable sur ce type d’équipement.
Les deux ports réseau 5 Gb/s constituent également un choix tourné vers l’avenir. Les débits réseau progressent rapidement, y compris dans les environnements domestiques. Il n’est plus rare aujourd’hui de voir apparaître des switchs 10 Gb/s dans les installations personnelles. Même si le 2,5 Gb/s reste largement suffisant pour la majorité des usages, comme le dit l’adage : « qui peut le plus peut le moins ».
Enfin, si vous souhaitez échanger autour de ce modèle, un sujet dédié au NAS testé est déjà disponible sur le forum-nas.
The Beelink ME Pro is a 2-bay NAS-style mini PC that aims to deliver a full home or small office storage setup in a much smaller chassis than most traditional 2-bay systems. It is sold in 2 main versions, based on the Intel N95 or Intel N150, and both ship with pre-attached LPDDR5 memory and a bundled NVMe SSD as the system drive. Storage expansion is a mix of 2 SATA bays for 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives, plus 3 internal M.2 NVMe slots (1 running at PCIe 3.0 x2 and 2 running at PCIe 3.0 x1), and networking includes 5GbE plus 2.5GbE alongside WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.4. This review is based on several weeks of use and a set of structured tests covering temperatures over extended uptime, noise in idle and active states, power draw across different drive and workload combinations, and storage and network performance over both HDD and NVMe, with additional notes on the system’s internal layout and the practical limitations that come from its compact design.
Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Quick Conclusion
The Beelink ME Pro is a very compact 2-bay NAS-style mini PC that combines 2 SATA bays with 3 M.2 NVMe slots and multi-gig connectivity, aiming to deliver a small footprint system without dropping features that are often reserved for larger enclosures. It is sold in N95 and N150 versions, both with pre-attached LPDDR5 memory (12GB or 16GB) and a bundled system SSD, and its internal layout uses 1 PCIe 3.0 x2 NVMe slot plus 2 PCIe 3.0 x1 slots, with 5GbE plus 2.5GbE Ethernet, WiFi 6, USB-C 10Gbps (with video output), HDMI 4K60, and a barrel-powered 120W PSU. In testing over extended uptime, external chassis temperatures stayed broadly in the mid-30C range with the rear around 38C, HDDs sat around 34C to 36C with modest 4TB drives installed, and NVMe temperatures rose sharply if the base thermal panel was removed, indicating the thermal pads and chassis contact are part of the cooling design and leaving no practical clearance for NVMe heatsinks. Noise in the tested setup remained in the mid-30 dBA range both at idle and under mixed access, power draw ranged from around 15W to 16W with no drives installed, 18W to 19W with only NVMe, about 22W to 23W with HDDs and NVMe idle, and peaked around 41W to 42W under a combined heavy workload. Performance was consistent with the hardware layout: HDD RAID1 throughput landed around 250MB/s to 267MB/s and will not saturate 5GbE, while NVMe could saturate the 5GbE link and internal testing showed about 1.5GB/s to 1.6GB/s reads and 1.1GB/s to 1.2GB/s writes on the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot, with the PCIe 3.0 x1 slots closer to roughly 830MB/s reads and 640MB/s to 670MB/s writes; media server use handled 4 simultaneous high bitrate 4K playback streams with CPU usage in the teens using Jellyfin. The main drawbacks are tied to the compact design choices: the RAM is not upgradeable, the chassis and storage fitting are very tight during installation, fan control outside BIOS was not straightforward in early testing, the NVMe slots are mixed speed by design, and the CPU options are closely spaced, meaning the upgrade decision is often about the bundled memory and SSD tier as much as the processor. Official messaging also says hot swapping is not supported, yet it worked during testing in a RAID1 scenario, suggesting a support-position limitation rather than a strict hardware block.
DESIGN - 9/10
HARDWARE - 8/10
PERFORMANCE - 8/10
PRICE - 8/10
VALUE - 8/10
8.2
PROS
Very compact footprint for a 2-bay NAS class system (166 x 121 x 112mm, metal chassis) 2x SATA bays (2.5-inch or 3.5-inch) plus 3x M.2 NVMe slots in the same enclosure Multi-gig wired networking: 5GbE + 2.5GbE, plus WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.4 Strong idle efficiency in testing with drives installed and idle (about 22W to 23W) Noise stayed in the mid-30 dBA range in the tested HDD and NVMe configuration NVMe performance is sufficient to saturate the 5GbE link, with the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot clearly faster than the x1 slots Chassis thermal design appears effective under typical always-on use, with external temps broadly in the mid-30C range Practical service access features: magnetic rear cover, base access for M.2, stored tool in the base, reset and CLR CMOS available
CONS
RAM is fixed (no SO-DIMM), so memory cannot be upgraded after purchase Very tight internal tolerances make drive and bracket insertion less forgiving during installation and changes Mixed NVMe slot speeds (1x PCIe 3.0 x2 and 2x PCIe 3.0 x1) and no 10GbE option
The ME Pro is built around an all-metal unibody chassis that prioritizes footprint over easy internal spacing. In physical terms it sits noticeably smaller than many mainstream 2-bay enclosures, and in my comparisons it looked roughly 20% to 25% smaller next to typical 2-bay units from brands like Synology and TerraMaster. The front panel styling leans into a speaker-like look, and it has been compared to a Marshall speaker design, which is likely intentional given the mesh and badge layout. Functionally, that front area is not a speaker, and the design choice is mostly about appearance and airflow rather than adding any front-facing audio hardware.
From a storage perspective, the ME Pro is a hybrid layout rather than a traditional “2-bay only” NAS. It supports 2 SATA bays for 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives, and Beelink positions it as supporting up to 30TB per SATA bay, giving a stated 60TB HDD ceiling. Alongside that, it has 3 internal M.2 NVMe slots with a stated 4TB per slot limit, which Beelink frames as up to 12TB of SSD capacity. Taken together, that is the basis for the commonly quoted 72TB maximum figure, although most buyers will treat that as an upper boundary rather than a typical real-world configuration due to drive cost and heat considerations.
The SATA bays are accessed from the rear by removing a magnetic cooling mesh cover, then sliding out the drive bracket assembly. The trays are screw-mounted rather than tool-less, and the manual specifies different screw types depending on whether you are installing 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives. In practice, it is possible to physically place a drive in a tray without fully fastening it, but the design clearly expects proper screw mounting for stability and vibration control. The device also includes silicone plugs intended to reduce vibration and protect the drives, and the overall bay system is designed to sit very flush once reassembled.
One unusual design detail is that each HDD tray includes a thermal pad intended to draw heat away from the drive’s underside. That is not common on many 2-bay systems, and it suggests Beelink is trying to compensate for the compact enclosure by using direct contact points for heat transfer. The tradeoff is that this design pushes the product toward precision fitting, and it aligns with the wider theme of the ME Pro being tightly engineered rather than roomy.
If you typically choose NAS hardware where drive swaps are quick and frequent, this approach will feel more like a compact appliance that expects occasional changes, not a platform designed around constant drive rotation.
The compact chassis also affects how storage installation feels in the hands. Because clearances are tight, inserting the drive bracket and getting everything seated can feel less smooth than on larger 2-bay boxes, even though it looks clean once it is in place. This tightness is likely part of how Beelink is managing airflow paths and vibration control in such a small enclosure, but it still means you have less margin for error during installation. Overall, the storage design is best described as space-efficient and deliberate, but it asks for patience during assembly and it rewards users who install drives once and leave the configuration largely unchanged.
Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Internal Hardware
The ME Pro is sold in 2 CPU variants, based on Intel’s N95 or N150, both 4-core and 4-thread chips with integrated graphics. In practical NAS terms, these CPUs sit in the low power mini PC category rather than the heavier desktop class, so the platform is designed around efficiency and compact integration rather than raw compute headroom. In your testing and general use, that design target showed up as stable day-to-day responsiveness for typical NAS tasks, plus enough iGPU capability for common media server workloads when paired with the right software stack.
Memory is integrated rather than socketed. The configurations pair the N95 with 12GB LPDDR5 4800MHz and the N150 with 16GB LPDDR5 4800MHz, and there is no user-accessible SO-DIMM slot to expand it later. In the context of a small NAS, this matters less for basic file serving and backups, but it becomes more relevant if the device is expected to run multiple containers, heavier indexing, or virtual machines. Because the memory is fixed at purchase, the CPU choice is also effectively tied to your long-term memory ceiling.
Internally, the platform is constrained by limited PCIe resources, which affects how the storage and networking are wired. In the review you noted the CPU platform has 9 lanes available, and the device uses a split approach across its internal components rather than giving every subsystem the same bandwidth. The NVMe area reflects this most clearly, with 1 slot operating at PCIe 3.0 x2 while the other slots operate at PCIe 3.0 x1, which makes slot choice part of performance planning for any workload that leans heavily on NVMe. This lane budgeting also helps explain why the system lands at 5GbE plus 2.5GbE rather than a single 10GbE port, since 10GbE would typically add pressure to an already tight allocation.
Controller choices are mixed rather than uniform, and you called that out as unusual. The 5GbE port uses a Realtek RTL8126 controller and the 2.5GbE port uses an Intel i226-V controller, which is not a common pairing in the same chassis. On the storage side, the SATA side is handled by an ASMedia ASM2116 controller, and in your notes you referenced it operating on a PCIe 3.0 x1 link, which is still sufficient for 2 SATA bays in most real-world use. These choices are relevant for OS compatibility and driver maturity, particularly if the unit is being used with NAS focused platforms rather than the included Windows 11 installation.
Cooling is one of the main internal design decisions that enables the smaller enclosure. Instead of a traditional rear fan placed at the drive backplane, the system uses a CPU fan working with a vapor chamber arrangement, and airflow is routed so that it also passes over other internal heat sources rather than treating the CPU as a separate cooling zone. In your thermal testing, you observed that the front panel area ran warmer than the rest of the chassis due to the WiFi hardware placement, and you also saw a noticeable rise in NVMe temperatures when the base thermal panel was removed, which supports the idea that the chassis panels and pads are intended to be part of the heat management system. Power is delivered via a barrel connector using a 120W external PSU, which provides headroom for spin-up and load, but it also means this is not a USB-C powered design.
Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Ports and Connections
Up front, the ME Pro keeps things simple: a power button and a single front-mounted USB port for quick access. This suits the NAS-first intent, where most interaction is remote, but it also sets expectations for local use. If you plan to attach multiple peripherals directly to the unit, you are quickly pushed toward using a hub or relying on network-based management rather than treating it like a conventional mini PC with generous front I/O.
Most connectivity is placed at the rear and along the base section of the chassis, which also helps keep cables routed in one direction when the unit is placed on a desk or shelf. Wired networking is split across 2 Ethernet ports, a 5GbE port and a 2.5GbE port, and the unit also includes WiFi 6 plus Bluetooth 5.4. That mix allows both a standard single-cable setup and more flexible layouts such as separating traffic across the 2 wired links, or keeping WiFi available for temporary placement, troubleshooting, or scenarios where pulling Ethernet is not straightforward.
For general external connectivity, the ME Pro includes a USB-C port rated at 10Gbps for data and it supports video output, but it is not used for power input. Power is delivered through a barrel connector and the unit ships with a 120W external PSU, which provides comfortable headroom and removes any questions around USB-C PD negotiation. Alongside USB-C, it includes 1 USB 3.2 port rated at 10Gbps and 2 USB 2.0 ports at 480Mbps, which covers basic keyboard, mouse, UPS signalling, or low bandwidth accessories, but it is still a small selection compared with many mini PCs.
For local display and basic audio, there is 1 HDMI output rated up to 4K 60Hz and a 3.5mm audio jack. The manual also calls out a reset hole and a CLR CMOS function, which is useful context for users who intend to experiment with different operating systems, boot media, or BIOS settings, since recovery options are clearly exposed rather than being hidden inside the chassis. Overall, the port selection feels intentionally weighted toward networking and core connectivity, with enough display and USB support for setup and troubleshooting, but not a layout aimed at heavy local peripheral use.
Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Noise, Heat, Power and Speed Tests
Testing was done over several weeks of general use and targeted measurements, with a focus on temperatures, noise, power draw, and storage and network throughput. The typical configuration used for the core measurements included 2 SATA HDDs and 3 installed NVMe drives, with the system left running for extended periods and accessed regularly throughout the day. In addition to network file transfers, I also checked internal storage performance directly over SSH to separate storage limits from network limits.
On thermals, external chassis temperatures after a 24-hour period of operation with regular hourly access sat around 34C to 35C across most sides. The base area was a little warmer at roughly 34C to 38C, and the rear section around the motherboard and vapor chamber area was around 38C. The installed HDDs sat around 34C to 36C in that same period, using 4TB IronWolf drives, so not high power enterprise class media. The front panel area peaked higher than the rest of the enclosure, which aligned with the internal placement of the WiFi hardware near the front of the chassis.
The NVMe area showed the clearest example of how much the chassis panels and pads matter. With the base thermal panel in place, the panel itself sat around 36C over the same extended uptime. When that panel was removed, temperatures on the NVMe drives rose noticeably, with the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot drive reaching around 45C to 46C and the PCIe 3.0 x1 slot drives sitting around 38C to 41C. The difference suggested that the base panel and thermal pad contact are doing meaningful work as part of the heat path, and it also reinforces that there is no practical clearance for NVMe heatsinks in this chassis.
Noise levels were measured in a modest drive configuration, and they stayed in the mid-30 dBA range in the test environment. With the HDDs idle and the system otherwise sitting in standby, noise came in around 36 dBA to 37 dBA. With both HDDs being accessed simultaneously and NVMe activity occurring, it sat around 35 dBA to 38 dBA. The system uses a compact fan approach tied to the CPU cooling path, and one limitation I ran into is that I did not find a straightforward way to control the fan outside the BIOS during early testing, including attempts via SSH, which reduces fine tuning options for users who want tighter acoustics control.
Power consumption was tested in several stages to isolate the impact of installed storage. With no HDDs or NVMe installed and the system powered on, it drew around 15W to 16W. With 3 NVMe installed and no HDDs, it rose to around 18W to 19W. With 2 HDDs and 3 NVMe installed but all media idle, it sat around 22W to 23W.
Under a heavy combined workload with HDD and NVMe activity plus the CPU at full utilization, power draw reached around 41W to 42W, which reflects a worst case state rather than typical idle or light service operation.
For throughput, 2 HDDs in a RAID1 style setup were able to deliver around 250 MB/s to 267 MB/s, which is consistent with what you would expect from 2-bay HDD performance and means the HDD side will not saturate a 5GbE link.
NVMe storage over the 5GbE connection was able to reach full saturation of the network link in testing, so the network became the limiting factor rather than the SSD. Internal NVMe testing over SSH showed the expected split between slots, with the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot delivering roughly 1.5 GB/s to 1.6 GB/s reads and 1.1 GB/s to 1.2 GB/s writes, while the PCIe 3.0 x1 slots delivered around 830 MB/s to 835 MB/s reads and roughly 640 MB/s to 670 MB/s writes with more variability.
On media server use, 4 simultaneous high bitrate 4K playback streams ran with CPU usage in the teens, using Jellyfin. One extra operational note from testing is that while official messaging indicates hot swapping is not supported, I was able to remove and replace a drive in a RAID1 environment without powering down and continue the rebuild process, which suggests the limitation may be a support stance rather than an absolute hardware block.
Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Conclusion & Verdict
The ME Pro’s main practical strengths are the space-efficient chassis, the combination of 2 SATA bays with 3 internal NVMe slots, and a connectivity set that includes 5GbE plus 2.5GbE and WiFi 6. In measured testing it delivered controlled external temperatures under typical always-on use, mid-30 dBA noise levels in the tested configuration, and power draw that stayed in the low-20W range at idle with drives installed, rising into the low-40W range under a full combined workload. Storage performance matched the internal design limits: HDD throughput was solid but not enough to saturate 5GbE, while NVMe performance split clearly between the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot and the PCIe 3.0 x1 slots, with the faster NVMe slot capable of saturating the 5GbE link in network transfers.
The main limitations are tied to the same compact, integrated approach that makes it unusual. Memory is fixed at purchase with no SO-DIMM upgrade path, NVMe cooling relies on chassis contact and leaves no clearance for heatsinks, and the lane allocation results in mixed NVMe slot speeds rather than uniform bandwidth across all 3 slots. The launch CPU options also remain close enough that the decision is often as much about bundled memory and SSD tier as it is about a clear performance tier shift. For buyers who want a small, always-on NAS with mixed SATA and NVMe storage, multi-gig networking, and reasonable thermals, noise, and power characteristics, the ME Pro aligns with that goal, but it is less suitable for users who expect frequent hardware changes, want expandability in RAM, or prefer a more conventional 10GbE-first network design.
PROs of the Beelink ME Pro NAS
CONs of the Beelink ME Pro NAS
Very compact footprint for a 2-bay NAS class system (166 x 121 x 112mm, metal chassis)
2x SATA bays (2.5-inch or 3.5-inch) plus 3x M.2 NVMe slots in the same enclosure
Multi-gig wired networking: 5GbE + 2.5GbE, plus WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.4
Strong idle efficiency in testing with drives installed and idle (about 22W to 23W)
Noise stayed in the mid-30 dBA range in the tested HDD and NVMe configuration
NVMe performance is sufficient to saturate the 5GbE link, with the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot clearly faster than the x1 slots
Chassis thermal design appears effective under typical always-on use, with external temps broadly in the mid-30C range
Practical service access features: magnetic rear cover, base access for M.2, stored tool in the base, reset and CLR CMOS available
RAM is fixed (no SO-DIMM), so memory cannot be upgraded after purchase
Very tight internal tolerances make drive and bracket insertion less forgiving during installation and changes
Mixed NVMe slot speeds (1x PCIe 3.0 x2 and 2x PCIe 3.0 x1) and no 10GbE option
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions
If you like this service, please consider supporting us.
We use affiliate links on the blog allowing NAScompares information and advice service to be free of charge to you.Anything you purchase on the day you click on our links will generate a small commission which isused to run the website. Here is a link for Amazon and B&H.You can also get me a Ko-fi or old school Paypal. Thanks!To find out more about how to support this advice service checkHEREIf you need to fix or configure a NAS, check FiverHave you thought about helping others with your knowledge? Find Instructions Here
Or support us by using our affiliate links on Amazon UK and Amazon US
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
After the surprising hit that was the Beelink ME Mini NAS in 2025, a lot of users were looking forward to seeing what the brand would do next in the NAS space. In January 2026, the brand responded with the launch of the Beelink ME Pro: an Intel N95/N150 powered system with DDR5 memory, 5GbE plus 2.5GbE connectivity, 2 SATA HDD bays, 3 M.2 NVMe bays, and one of the smallest physical footprints in this device class that I have seen. I have a full detailed review in progress on the ME Pro, but even after several days of use, several pros and cons have already emerged that may influence whether this is the right purchase for a homelab. While the review comes together, this article will outline the good, the bad, and the weird aspects of the Beelink ME Pro NAS.
This is a minor point, but it is worth noting how the ME Pro arrives. The chassis box is unusually small for a 2-bay NAS, and at first glance it can look like the packaging contains little more than the unit itself. In practice, the accessory items are stored inside the drive bracket area in small internal boxes, which helps avoid loose parts moving around in transit and reduces wasted packaging volume.
The device also arrives with the M.2 thermal pads already positioned in place, so the initial storage installation process is more direct. It is not a major buying factor, but it is a practical packaging decision that avoids the excessive empty space and material waste that is common in this product category.
Reasons you Should Buy the Beelink ME Pro NAS
The ME Pro is positioned as a compact, high-connectivity 2-bay NAS that also provides NVMe expansion and local display capability, with hardware aimed at users who want more than basic file serving in a small footprint. It combines dual-port networking, integrated wireless connectivity, and multiple internal storage options in a chassis designed for straightforward access and cleaning, while also introducing a motherboard drawer concept that Beelink claims will support future platform upgrades. If those priorities match your setup goals, the ME Pro has several practical advantages that can justify its price and design choices.
#1 Man alive – this 2 Bay NAS is TINY!
The ME Pro’s most immediate differentiator is its physical footprint. The chassis measures 166 x 121 x 112mm and uses an all metal unibody design, which is notably smaller than most 2-bay NAS boxes that also include NVMe storage and dual network ports. In person it reads closer to a compact mini PC enclosure than a traditional NAS, and that difference matters if you are placing it on a crowded desk, a media shelf, or anywhere you are trying to keep cabling and hardware out of the way.
That compactness is not just cosmetic, it directly shapes how the hardware is arranged and how it feels to work with. Storage bays, the NVMe area, networking, and the cooling hardware are densely packed, so clearances are tight and the device is designed around precision fit rather than roomy access. The upside is that it is easy to place in small spaces without needing the usual NAS sized footprint. The tradeoff is that installations and maintenance are likely to feel more constrained than they would on a larger, more conventional 2-bay enclosure.
#2 Arrives with 5GbE and WiFi6, when everyone else is still on 2.5GbE
On networking, the ME Pro ships with 2 wired Ethernet ports and integrated wireless. The wired setup is a 5GbE Realtek RTL8126 port alongside a 2.5GbE Intel i226-V port, and the unit also includes WiFi 6 plus Bluetooth 5.4. For a compact 2-bay NAS, that is a broader mix of connectivity than the many systems that still top out at dual 2.5GbE, and it gives you more options for how the device fits into an existing home or small office network.
In practical terms, this provides flexibility rather than guaranteeing a specific performance outcome. A 5GbE port can be useful for faster transfers if you already have compatible switching or direct attach options, while the 2.5GbE port can serve as a secondary link for a different subnet, failover, or a separate device path depending on the OS and network configuration you choose. WiFi 6 is not a replacement for wired networking in a NAS role, but it can be relevant for temporary placement, initial setup, or use cases where running a cable is not straightforward, and the manual indicates the antenna is integrated into the front panel design rather than using an external antenna.
#3 Maintenance and Internal Access is a work of art!
The ME Pro is built around user access rather than treating the internals as a sealed appliance. The manual’s process is simple: remove the magnetic cooling mesh cover, unscrew and pull out the hard drive bracket, and use the bottom access panel to reach the M.2 slots. A screwdriver is stored in the base under a silicone pad, so the tool required for basic access is physically included with the device. The ports and recovery related features also acknowledge user servicing, with items like a reset hole and a CLR CMOS function shown in the manual.
In day to day handling, the layout is designed to slide out and reassemble in a specific order, and it generally supports the idea of quick cleaning and drive installation without full disassembly. At the same time, access relies on small screws and tight tolerances, so it is not a tool-less experience. In your first impressions, the mechanism for sliding the internal assembly out felt solid and precisely aligned, but you also noted that the included tool is very small and can be fiddly to use. The result is a design that prioritizes compact service access, but still expects careful handling during installation and maintenance.
#4 Great Base Memory Quantity at a time when RAM costs are BONKERS
From the start, the ME Pro is configured with either 12GB LPDDR5 4800MHz on the N95 models or 16GB LPDDR5 4800MHz on the N150 models, rather than shipping with a minimal memory pool that immediately pushes users toward an upgrade. In practical NAS use, that baseline capacity is relevant because it can influence how comfortably the system handles common add-ons such as containers, light virtualization, background indexing, and multiple concurrent services, depending on the operating system and workload. It also reduces the likelihood that memory becomes the first immediate bottleneck for typical home and small office setups.
The tradeoff is that this approach is linked to the way the memory is implemented. In your inspection of the unit, you noted there is no SO-DIMM slot and the RAM appears soldered to the board, which means users are effectively choosing their memory tier at purchase rather than treating it as a later upgrade (more on that in a bit). This makes the initial configuration choice more important, especially for buyers who already know they will run heavier applications or multiple VMs over time.
#5 Genuinely unique modularisation and upgradability in a pre-built solution, which I have ever seen
The ME Pro’s most unusual design claim is the swappable modular motherboard. Beelink markets the system as supporting interchangeable boards across Intel, AMD, and ARM options, using a drawer style layout intended to let the main compute board slide out rather than being permanently fixed inside the chassis. The product page frames this as a way to avoid replacing the entire enclosure when you want a different CPU platform, and instead treat the chassis, drive housing, and general structure as the long-term part of the purchase.
In practical terms, this concept will only matter if Beelink actually sells the alternative boards at sensible pricing and maintains availability over time, but the physical architecture appears to be built around the idea. Your first look showed a clear internal separation between the board assembly and the rest of the enclosure, and you also observed hints of planned scale-up hardware, such as layout markings that suggest different future storage or platform variants. For buyers who like the idea of extending a system’s usable life without a full rebuild, the ME Pro is one of the few pre-built NAS style devices currently trying to formalize that upgrade path rather than leaving it to a full case swap.
Reasons You Might Want to Skip the Beelink ME Pro NAS
The ME Pro’s compact design and connectivity focused feature set come with tradeoffs that will matter to some buyers more than others. Several of the core choices are linked together, meaning you get the small chassis, the storage density, and the modular drawer approach, but you also accept limits around upgrades, physical handling, and how the platform is configured from the factory. This is not a device where every part is meant to be user replaceable or easily swapped in the way a DIY small form factor build would be.
It is also worth treating the launch configuration and roadmap as part of the buying decision. The product is being introduced with very similar Intel CPU options and fixed memory tiers, while the company is already pointing toward future AMD and ARM variants and possible expanded layouts. For some buyers, that is a reason to wait until the wider range exists and the upgrade parts are actually available. For others, the current design constraints are enough to prefer a more conventional 2-bay NAS that is larger, simpler to work on, and has clearer long-term upgrade paths.
The RAM is FIXED (i.e cannot be upgraded or changed)!!!
The ME Pro uses LPDDR5 memory (12GB on the N95 models, 16GB on the N150 models), and based on the internal layout you inspected, there is no SO-DIMM slot for user upgrades. In other words, the memory appears to be soldered to the motherboard rather than installed as a replaceable module. That makes the initial purchase configuration more important than on many small NAS builds where memory can be upgraded later as needs change.
The practical impact shows up when your usage grows beyond basic file storage. If you plan to run multiple containers, heavier indexing tasks, or virtual machines, memory headroom can become a limiting factor long before CPU or network does, depending on the OS and services you deploy. With this platform, there is no simple path to increase RAM after purchase, so anyone unsure about future requirements may prefer a system with upgradeable memory, or may want to treat the 16GB model as the safer long-term option by default.
The design is so, so very tight!
The ME Pro’s small enclosure is achieved through very tight internal tolerances. That is visible in how the drive bracket, motherboard drawer area, and storage zones are packed together, and it influences the overall experience during installation and servicing. The system relies on screw mounting for drives rather than a click-in tray approach, and while the manual provides clear steps, the process assumes careful alignment rather than quick, tool-less handling. This level of precision fit is likely part of how Beelink is trying to control airflow and improve thermal transfer in a compact space, and it also aligns with their noise and vibration messaging around tightened mounting and silicone dampening.
In the first impressions, that tightness showed up most clearly when inserting and removing components. Slotting the hard drive bracket and drives could feel rough at times, with very little clearance to work with, and the internal assembly can require a firmer push to seat correctly. Even if the compact fit is helping with heat dissipation and vibration control, it remains a very tight build, and it is less forgiving if you are frequently swapping drives, testing different storage combinations, or repeatedly opening the chassis. The end result is a device that looks clean and flush when assembled, but can feel constrained during hands-on work compared with a larger enclosure with more physical margin.
Launching the N95 version and N150 version was an odd choice (i.e very similar processors)
At launch, the ME Pro is offered in N95 and N150 variants, and on paper these CPUs sit very close to each other. Both are 4-core, 4-thread Intel N-series parts with 6MB cache, and the headline frequency difference is modest: up to 3.4GHz on the N95 and up to 3.6GHz on the N150. For many NAS workloads that are constrained by storage or network throughput rather than CPU, this kind of gap may not translate into a clearly different experience, especially once real world thermal and power limits are applied.
This tight spacing makes the product stack less clear than it could be, because the pricing difference between the entry and higher tier configurations is not simply paying for a meaningfully different platform. In practice, buyers are also paying for the memory and SSD tier attached to each CPU option, and in your case the non-upgradeable memory makes that choice more permanent. If the goal is to segment the lineup, the N95 and N150 pairing may feel like a small step that leaves some users waiting for a more distinct higher performance option rather than choosing between two closely related CPUs. Given the noise that Beelink has made about this expanding range, that only further encourages some users who think these CPUs a little timid, to remain on the fence a bit longer….
There are other CPU/Architecture versions coming
As mentioned, Beelink is already signalling that the ME Pro chassis is intended to outlive the initial Intel configurations. The official product messaging highlights a swappable modular motherboard concept and explicitly references future boards beyond the current Intel N-series options, including AMD and ARM. In your first look, you also noted visible hints inside the unit that suggest the internal layout has been planned with other variants in mind, rather than being a one-off design limited to the launch hardware.
For buyers, this creates a timing question. If those alternative boards and models arrive soon, they may offer clearer performance separation, different feature priorities, or a better match for specific workloads. At the same time, the current purchase decision depends on what is available today, not what is promised, and the value of the modular approach only becomes real once the upgrade boards can actually be bought at reasonable pricing. Until the roadmap becomes a shipping product line, some users may prefer to wait, while others will simply evaluate the current N95 and N150 models on their own merits.
Mixed M.2 Speeds at PCIe 3.0 x2 and PCIe 3.0 x1? Was 10GbE and uniform lanes discussed instead?
The ME Pro’s 3 M.2 NVMe slots are not equal. Slot 1 is PCIe 3.0 x2, while slots 2 and 3 are PCIe 3.0 x1, and the manual specifically recommends using slot 1 for the system drive because it is the fastest slot. In practical terms, this creates a tiered NVMe layout where one drive has higher potential bandwidth than the other 2, which can influence how you plan cache, containers, VM storage, or scratch workloads. It also means peak NVMe performance depends heavily on which slot you choose, not just the SSD you buy.
That design choice raises an obvious tradeoff question: whether the platform would have been better served by a different allocation, such as keeping all 3 M.2 slots at PCIe 3.0 x1 in exchange for other connectivity, or prioritizing a different network tier such as 10GbE (though arguably, it might well have to sit at 3×1 and potentially be bottlenecked to 800-900MB/s, unless that lowered the m.2 to x2 bays). The ME Pro already includes 5GbE plus 2.5GbE, so the networking is not low end, but the mixed NVMe lane widths still make the storage side feel uneven by design. For a NAS focused build, the practical impact will depend on real testing: whether the internal topology causes contention under mixed loads, and whether the faster slot meaningfully benefits common tasks once network and SATA throughput are considered.
Conclusion & Verdict – Should You Buy the Beelink ME Pro NAS?
The Beelink ME Pro is a compact 2-bay NAS platform that combines SATA storage with 3 M.2 NVMe slots, dual wired networking, and integrated wireless in an enclosure that prioritizes density and internal access. It also introduces a modular motherboard drawer concept that, if supported with real upgrade boards over time, could change how long the chassis remains useful compared with typical pre-built NAS systems. As a hardware package, it is aimed at users who want high connectivity and mixed storage options without moving to a larger box.
At the same time, several of its main limitations are set at purchase and cannot be easily changed later. The memory appears fixed, the internal fit is very tight during drive and bracket handling, and the launch CPU options are closely spaced rather than clearly separated performance tiers. The NVMe layout is also mixed speed by design, which affects how you should plan drive placement and workloads. Whether these tradeoffs are acceptable depends largely on how much you value the enclosure size, the network ports, and the promised modular roadmap versus the more conventional upgrade flexibility of larger or more established NAS designs.
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions
If you like this service, please consider supporting us.
We use affiliate links on the blog allowing NAScompares information and advice service to be free of charge to you.Anything you purchase on the day you click on our links will generate a small commission which isused to run the website. Here is a link for Amazon and B&H.You can also get me a Ko-fi or old school Paypal. Thanks!To find out more about how to support this advice service checkHEREIf you need to fix or configure a NAS, check FiverHave you thought about helping others with your knowledge? Find Instructions Here
Or support us by using our affiliate links on Amazon UK and Amazon US
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red (Which is Best in 2025/2026)?
In late 2025, choosing between Seagate IronWolf and WD Red for a NAS is less about raw performance and more about secondary factors such as noise, power consumption, pricing, and ecosystem. Both brands now offer broadly similar SATA performance in their mainstream and Pro lines once you reach 7200 RPM, 256 MB cache, and CMR recording, and both quote comparable workload ratings and multi bay support for NAS use. Durability claims in MTBF, workload per year, and 24 by 7 operation are also effectively at parity on paper, and the underlying engineering around vibration control, error recovery, and NAS specific firmware has converged to a large extent. Where meaningful technical differences still exist is in the maximum capacities on offer and how they are positioned. Seagate currently leads on headline capacity in the NAS tier with IronWolf Pro drives up to 30 TB, while WD Red Pro tops out slightly lower but overlaps most of the mainstream size points that home and small business users are likely to deploy. As a result, the decision for many buyers is less about which brand is objectively better and more about how each behaves in real deployments in terms of acoustics, energy use, long term running costs, warranty extras such as bundled recovery services, and regional pricing patterns at specific capacities.
Seagate vs WD (and Toshiba!) Market Share in 2025/2026?
Across the HDD industry in 2024 and early 2025, Western Digital and Seagate remain closely matched, with Western Digital holding a slight lead by several common measures. Public breakdowns of exabytes shipped in 2024 put Western Digital at roughly 38.6 percent of HDD capacity shipped worldwide, Seagate at about 37 percent, and Toshiba at around 24.4 percent, confirming that the market is effectively a 2 vendor race with a smaller but still significant third player. Although the exact percentages vary depending on whether you look at units, capacity, or revenue, the pattern is consistent, with Western Digital marginally ahead and Seagate following closely behind.
Recent industry and financial reporting also shows Western Digital gaining momentum in high capacity nearline drives, particularly in data center and cloud deployments, with disk based revenue and shipped capacity outpacing Seagate in at least some recent quarters. At the same time, Seagate retains a leadership position in very large capacity models, including 30 TB HAMR based NAS and nearline drives that are already commercially available and aimed at the same high density markets.
Taken together, these data points indicate a tightly contested landscape where Western Digital currently leads in overall shipped capacity and revenue, while Seagate pushes the capacity envelope and remains highly competitive in large scale deployments.
Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red NAS Hard Drives – Price
In late 2025 there is a clear pattern in how Seagate and WD position their HDDs on price, even if individual deals move around constantly. In general Seagate tends to be slightly cheaper per terabyte across many mainstream retailers and regions, particularly for larger 16 TB to 24 TB IronWolf and Exos capacities. WD pricing is often a little higher at like for like capacity in third party channels, especially for newer Red Plus and Red Pro models, although temporary sales can narrow or reverse this gap. Both brands are heavily discounted during seasonal events, so headline price screenshots are only ever a snapshot rather than a permanent rule.
Where WD changes the picture is through its own direct store. WD sells Red, Red Plus and Red Pro drives through its retail site and often undercuts third party resellers by a noticeable margin, especially during promotions. That means in some regions the cheapest way to buy WD is directly from WD, while Seagate relies entirely on partner channels and keeps relatively steady discounting through Amazon and similar outlets. As a result it is common to see Seagate come out cheaper in most general marketplaces while WD can be the lowest price only on its own store, which is not available in every country.
Once you move up into Pro and nearline class drives, such as IronWolf Pro versus WD Red Pro or WD Gold, pricing becomes more fragmented. Seagate keeps a fairly consistent capacity step pricing model where higher capacities scale in a relatively predictable way. WD on the other hand often runs multiple Red Pro and enterprise SKUs at the same capacity with different cache sizes or internal designs, which leads to overlapping prices and large swings between models that appear similar on paper. In practice this means that at the Pro tier Seagate is usually easier to price compare, while WD may offer good value on specific model IDs or capacities but requires more careful checking of part numbers and current discounts before purchase.
Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red – Noise Level Comparison
In terms of acoustic behaviour, Seagate IronWolf and IronWolf Pro drives are consistently a little louder than their WD Red Plus and Red Pro counterparts at like for like capacities. Manufacturer data sheets show most recent IronWolf and IronWolf Pro models idling in the mid to high 20 dBA range, with seek noise commonly around 30 to 32 dBA. WD Red Plus drives in the same capacities often idle in the low to mid 20 dBA range with typical seek levels in the mid to high 20 dBA band, while Red Pro models generally sit around 20 to 25 dBA idle and 31 to 36 dBA under seek depending on capacity and generation. In practical terms this means that in a quiet room or a small office, Seagate NAS drives tend to be more noticeable both at spin up and during sustained random activity.
Capacity
Idle Seagate Ironwolf
Idle WD Red Plus
Idle Winner
Seek Seagate Ironwolf Pro
Seek WD Red Pro
Seek Winner
30TB
28 dBA (ST30000NT011)
no WD equivalent
Seagate
32 dBA (ST30000NT011)
no WD equivalent
Seagate
28TB
28 dBA (ST28000NT000)
25 dBA (WD281KFGX)
WD
32 dBA (ST28000NT000)
32 dBA (WD281KFGX)
Tie
26TB
no Seagate model
25 dBA (WD260KFGX)
WD
no Seagate model
32 dBA (WD260KFGX)
WD
24TB
28 dBA (ST24000NT002)
25 dBA (WD241KFGX), 20 dBA (WD240KFGX)
WD
26 dBA (ST24000NT002)
32 dBA (WD241KFGX), 32 dBA (WD240KFGX)
Seagate
22TB
28 dBA (ST22000NT001)
32 dBA (WD221KFGX)
WD
26 dBA (ST22000NT001)
32 dBA (WD221KFGX)
Seagate
20TB
28 dBA (ST20000NT001)
20 dBA (WD202KFGX, WD201KFGX)
WD
26 dBA (ST20000NT001)
32 dBA (WD202KFGX, WD201KFGX)
Seagate
18TB
28 dBA (ST18000NT001)
20 dBA (WD181KFGX)
WD
26 dBA (ST18000NT001)
36 dBA (WD181KFGX)
Seagate
16TB
28 dBA (ST16000NT001)
20 dBA (WD161KFGX)
WD
26 dBA (ST16000NT001)
36 dBA (WD161KFGX)
Seagate
14TB
20 dBA (ST14000NT001)
20 dBA (WD142KFGX), 20 dBA (WD141KFGX)
Tie
26 dBA (ST14000NT001)
36 dBA (WD142KFGX), 36 dBA (WD141KFGX)
Seagate
12TB
28 dBA (ST12000NT001)
20 dBA (WD121KFBX), 34 dBA (WD122KFBX)
WD
26 dBA (ST12000NT001)
36 dBA (WD121KFBX), 39 dBA (WD122KFBX)
Seagate
10TB
28 dBA (ST10000NT001)
20 dBA (WD102KFBX), 34 dBA (WD103KFBX)
WD
30 dBA (ST10000NT001)
36 dBA (WD102KFBX), 39 dBA (WD103KFBX)
Seagate
8TB
28 dBA (ST8000NT001)
20 dBA (WD8003FFBX, WD8005FFBX)
WD
30 dBA (ST8000NT001)
36 dBA (WD8003FFBX, WD8005FFBX)
Seagate
6TB
28 dBA (ST6000NT001)
21 dBA (WD6003FFBX, WD6005FFBX)
WD
30 dBA (ST6000NT001)
36 dBA (WD6003FFBX, WD6005FFBX)
Seagate
4TB
28 dBA (ST4000NT001)
20 dBA (WD4003FFBX), 29 dBA (WD4005FFBX)
WD
30 dBA (ST4000NT001)
36 dBA (WD4003FFBX, WD4005FFBX)
Seagate
2TB
28 dBA (ST2000NT001)
21 dBA (WD2002FFSX)
WD
30 dBA (ST2000NT001)
31 dBA (WD2002FFSX)
Seagate
The difference becomes more apparent once you move beyond a simple 1 or 2 bay NAS and start populating 4, 6 or 8 bay chassis. Multiple Seagate drives running together produce a slightly harsher mechanical sound profile, with more pronounced click and clunk patterns during head movements, as well as higher cumulative vibration. WD drives, particularly Red Plus and most of the more recent Red Pro helium models, lean toward a smoother background hum with less sharp seek noise and lower ambient vibration. For users placing a NAS in a living room, bedroom or under a desk, this cumulative effect can be significant, even if each individual drive only differs by a couple of dBA on paper.
It is worth noting that not every capacity behaves identically. Lower capacities and some air filled WD Red Plus models idle very quietly and can be comparable with the quietest Seagate SKUs, while some high capacity Red Pro variants with 7200 RPM motors and larger caches approach IronWolf Pro levels of seek noise. However, when you average across the current CMR product stacks in late 2025, WD holds a small but consistent advantage in both idle and seek acoustics, especially in multi bay deployments where background noise and vibration build up over time.
Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red – Power Consumption (Idle / Active)
Looking purely at spec sheets, both Seagate and WD publish idle and seek values that cluster in similar bands, typically around the low 20 dBA range at idle and high 20 to mid 30 dBA under seek as capacities and spindle speeds rise. In practice though, the character of the noise differs between the brands. IronWolf and IronWolf Pro models tend to produce a sharper mechanical click pattern during head seeks and a more noticeable spin up profile, while WD Red Plus and Red Pro lines usually present as a smoother hum with less abrupt transitions between idle and active states. In a quiet room this difference in tone can matter as much as the numeric dBA rating itself.
Capacity
Idle Seagate Ironwolf
Idle WD Red Plus
Idle Winner
Active Seagate Ironwolf Pro
Active WD Red Pro
Active Winner
30TB
6.8W (ST30000NT011)
no WD equivalent
Seagate
8.3W (ST30000NT011)
no WD equivalent
Seagate
28TB
6.8W (ST28000NT000)
3.6W (WD281KFGX)
WD
8.3W (ST28000NT000)
6.0W (WD281KFGX)
WD
26TB
no Seagate model
3.6W (WD260KFGX)
WD
no Seagate model
6.0W (WD260KFGX)
WD
24TB
6.3W (ST24000NT002)
3.6W (WD241KFGX), 3.9W (WD240KFGX)
WD
7.8W (ST24000NT002)
6.0W (WD241KFGX), 6.4W (WD240KFGX)
WD
22TB
6.0W (ST22000NT001)
3.4W (WD221KFGX)
WD
7.9W (ST22000NT001)
6.8W (WD221KFGX)
WD
20TB
5.7W (ST20000NT001)
2.8W (WD202KFGX), 3.6W (WD201KFGX)
WD
7.7W (ST20000NT001)
6.1W (WD202KFGX), 6.9W (WD201KFGX)
WD
18TB
5.0W (ST18000NT001)
3.0W (WD181KFGX)
WD
7.5W (ST18000NT001)
3.6W (WD181KFGX)
WD
16TB
5.0W (ST16000NT001)
3.6W (WD161KFGX)
WD
7.6W (ST16000NT001)
6.1W (WD161KFGX)
WD
14TB
5.0W (ST14000NT001)
3.0W (WD141KFGX), 3.6W (WD142KFGX)
WD
7.6W (ST14000NT001)
3.0W (WD141KFGX), 6.4W (WD142KFGX)
WD
12TB
5.0W (ST12000NT001)
2.8W (WD121KFBX), 6.1W (WD122KFBX)
WD
7.6W (ST12000NT001)
2.8W (WD121KFBX), 8.8W (WD122KFBX)
WD
10TB
7.8W (ST10000NT001)
2.9W (WD102KFBX), 3.0W (WD103KFBX)
WD
10.1W (ST10000NT001)
4.6W (WD101KFBX), 6.1W (WD103KFBX)
WD
8TB
7.8W (ST8000NT001)
4.0W (WD8003FFBX), 4.9W (WD8005FFBX)
WD
10.1W (ST8000NT001)
4.6W (WD8003FFBX), 6.9W (WD8005FFBX)
WD
6TB
7.1W (ST6000NT001)
3.7W (WD6003FFBX), 4.0W (WD6005FFBX)
WD
9.3W (ST6000NT001)
3.7W (WD6003FFBX), 6.9W (WD6005FFBX)
WD
4TB
7.8W (ST4000NT001)
3.7W (WD4003FFBX), 4.0W (WD4005FFBX)
WD
8.7W (ST4000NT001)
3.7W (WD4003FFBX), 5.8W (WD4005FFBX)
WD
2TB
6.7W (ST2000NT001)
6.0W (WD2002FFSX)
WD
6.7W (ST2000NT001)
7.8W (WD2002FFSX)
Seagate
At lower capacities, especially in the 2 TB to 6 TB range where air filled designs and lower spindle speeds are common, WD Red Plus models are often among the quietest options, with idle noise figures that sit at the lower end of the published spectrum and relatively soft seek sounds. Seagate standard IronWolf drives in these capacities are not especially loud by absolute numbers, but they generally sit slightly higher at idle and under random activity. Once you move into high capacity Pro class drives, WD Red Pro and IronWolf Pro become more comparable, although WD still often maintains a small advantage in idle noise on the newest helium filled models, while seek noise can be quite close on some capacities.
Noise differences increase as you add more bays and drives. A 2 bay or 4 bay NAS with mixed workloads may only expose a modest gap in acoustic behaviour between the brands, but 8 bay and larger systems can amplify any small variations. Multiple Seagate drives seeking at once will create more noticeable cumulative chatter and vibration inside a metal chassis, which can transfer into desks or shelving if the NAS is not well isolated. WD units with otherwise similar specifications and workload ratings usually generate less overall vibration, so the aggregate sound from a populated chassis can be easier to live with in shared spaces.
For users planning deployments in noise sensitive environments, such as a living room media setup or a small office where the NAS will sit in the same room as desks, these differences can be a factor in the buying decision once capacity and performance requirements are defined. Seagate remains attractive where price per terabyte and maximum capacity are the main priorities, and users are able to position the NAS in a cupboard, loft or separate room. WD drives typically suit scenarios where the system will remain close to people for long periods, sacrificing a small amount of price advantage in favour of lower background noise and a slightly less intrusive acoustic profile at both idle and under sustained activity.
Seagate Ironwolf vs WD Red – Verdict & Conclusion
From a technical perspective Seagate and WD now sit very close to one another in most core HDD metrics, particularly in the NAS focused IronWolf, IronWolf Pro, Red Plus and Red Pro ranges. Both brands use CMR recording on their NAS lines, have comparable workload ratings in each class, and converge around similar sustained transfer rates once you reach 7200 RPM and larger cache sizes. The main structural differences are that Seagate currently pushes higher maximum capacities into the consumer and prosumer space and includes bundled rescue data recovery on many NAS models, while WD tends to retain a small advantage in power consumption and acoustic behaviour at equivalent capacities, especially in multi bay systems. Historical issues such as WD Red SMR drives and Seagate high failure rate models at specific points in time are still relevant for older stock, but the current generation NAS ranges for both vendors are broadly aligned in specification and intended workload.
In practical terms the choice between Seagate IronWolf and WD Red often comes down to priority order rather than any single clear winner. Users aiming for the lowest cost per terabyte and the highest capacities available in the near term will usually find Seagate more attractive, particularly in larger IronWolf Pro and Exos class drives, accepting higher power draw and a more noticeable acoustic profile. Users who are sensitive to noise, want marginally lower long term energy usage or prefer WD’s clearer product segmentation may gravitate toward Red Plus or Red Pro, taking care to select the correct CMR models and capacities. In all cases the decision should be made at model level using current datasheets and pricing, not just brand reputation, and should be paired with a sensible RAID plan and an independent backup strategy, since neither vendor can remove the fundamental risk that any individual hard drive can fail.
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
TRY CHAT Terms and Conditions
If you like this service, please consider supporting us.
We use affiliate links on the blog allowing NAScompares information and advice service to be free of charge to you.Anything you purchase on the day you click on our links will generate a small commission which isused to run the website. Here is a link for Amazon and B&H.You can also get me a Ko-fi or old school Paypal. Thanks!To find out more about how to support this advice service checkHEREIf you need to fix or configure a NAS, check FiverHave you thought about helping others with your knowledge? Find Instructions Here
Or support us by using our affiliate links on Amazon UK and Amazon US
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Connexion
