30TB Seagate Ironwolf Pro and EXOS HDD Review – When is Enough, Enough?

The arrival of 30TB capacity hard drives from Seagate — in the form of the IronWolf Pro ST30000NT011 and the Exos M ST30000NM004K — marks another incremental step in high-capacity storage for NAS and enterprise environments. Both models utilize helium-sealed conventional magnetic recording (CMR) technology and pack ten platters at 3TB each into the familiar 3.5-inch form factor. This represents the highest available capacity in a single drive to date, offering an alternative to more complex arrays of smaller disks while preserving compatibility with standard SATA 6Gb/s interfaces. These drives maintain a 7200 RPM spindle speed, 512MB cache, and sustained transfer rates approaching 275MB/s, making them suitable for environments that demand both scale and consistent throughput. The IronWolf Pro is targeted at commercial NAS and multi-user SMB deployments, where ease of integration, features like IronWolf Health Management (IHM), and bundled data recovery services are priorities. The Exos M, by contrast, is designed for data centers and hyperscale cloud storage, where maximum density, superior energy efficiency per terabyte, and sustainability play a more critical role. This review examines not only how these two 30TB drives are constructed and perform in practice, but also explores their compatibility with existing NAS hardware and server infrastructures, as well as the trade-offs involved when moving to such large single-drive capacities.

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Quick Conclusion

The Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB represent the cutting edge of mechanical storage, delivering unprecedented density in a standard 3.5-inch, SATA-compatible form factor. Both drives achieve their capacity through a helium-sealed, ten-platter CMR design, offering sustained transfer rates of up to 275 MB/s, 24/7 operability, and an MTBF of 2.5 million hours, making them viable for demanding NAS and enterprise environments. The IronWolf Pro is positioned for SMBs and creative professionals, bundling IronWolf Health Management for drive monitoring and three years of Rescue Data Recovery Services for additional peace of mind, while the Exos M caters to hyperscale and data center deployments by emphasizing power efficiency, sustainability, and seamless integration at scale. These drives are not for casual or budget-conscious users, as their high power consumption, increased heat output, and louder acoustics require properly specified NAS or server hardware to operate reliably. Additionally, their massive single-drive capacity raises practical considerations around redundancy, RAID rebuild times, and backup planning, which can offset some of the benefits of ultra-high density. Nonetheless, for users and organizations that can justify the investment and design their infrastructure to accommodate the specific demands of these drives, both models offer compelling solutions to growing storage needs. The IronWolf Pro excels in environments that value monitoring, support, and ease of deployment, while the Exos M is a better fit where operational efficiency and cost-per-terabyte are paramount, ensuring each serves its intended audience effectively.

 

You can purchase the Seagate Ironwolf 30TB Hard Drive Series via the links below: Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on B&H Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on B&H * Using these links will result in a small % commission coming to NASCompares and this helps me and Ed here (it really is just us!) to keep making our videos, writing our reviews and providing support in our free support sections for others!

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Design and Build

So, first up, below is a side-by-side comparison of the key specifications of the Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Seagate Exos M 30TB drives. Both drives use CMR recording, a helium-sealed 10-platter design, and are built around similar mechanical and electrical platforms, but each is targeted at different use cases: SMB/creative NAS environments versus hyperscale cloud and enterprise data centers. This table highlights their similarities and subtle differences.

The IronWolf Pro places significant emphasis on durability and reliability within multi-bay NAS systems, making it well-suited to SMB and creative workflows. It achieves a mean time between failures (MTBF) of 2.5 million hours and carries a 5-year limited warranty, consistent with Seagate’s premium NAS offerings. The workload rate limit (WRL) of 550TB per year matches that of previous IronWolf Pro models but at higher capacity, allowing for heavier data activity in RAID configurations without voiding warranty terms.

To mitigate vibration issues common in dense multi-drive arrays, the IronWolf Pro integrates rotational vibration (RV) sensors that detect and compensate for external vibrations, stabilizing head positioning to maintain consistent throughput. Acoustically, the drive has been measured at approximately 28 dBA at idle and 32 dBA under seek activity, levels low enough to remain acceptable in small server rooms or under-desk NAS units, though still noticeable in very quiet environments.

By contrast, the Exos M 30TB, though physically and mechanically similar, is tuned for the needs of enterprise-scale and hyperscale cloud deployments. Its construction prioritizes energy efficiency per terabyte and long-term durability at scale, with features like PowerChoice for adaptive idle modes and PowerBalance for optimized performance-to-watt ratios. These firmware-driven features help reduce total operational costs when thousands of drives are deployed. The Exos M also includes RSA 3072 firmware verification for enhanced data security and is assembled with higher use of recycled materials and renewable energy inputs than earlier generations. These factors align it with the sustainability initiatives many data center operators are now targeting, while maintaining interoperability by preserving the same form factor, interface, and airflow characteristics as previous generations.

Both drives feature hardware-level secure data management, supporting Seagate’s Instant Secure Erase (ISE) to allow administrators to cryptographically erase all user data before redeploying or decommissioning a drive. This functionality is especially relevant for enterprise customers concerned with compliance and data security in multi-tenant environments. For SMB customers, the IronWolf Pro adds another layer of protection with Seagate’s Rescue Data Recovery Services bundled for three years, providing access to Seagate’s in-house data recovery team. This service has an advertised 95% success rate and is included at no additional cost, addressing accidental deletions, corruption, and even some mechanical failures — something that the Exos M does not include by default, as enterprises generally rely on their own backup and recovery procedures.

Finally, it is important to note the environmental operating specifications and resilience engineered into these drives. Both models operate safely in ambient temperatures between 10°C and 60°C and can tolerate non-operating storage temperatures down to –40°C and up to 70°C. They are rated to withstand 30Gs of shock during operation and up to 200Gs when non-operational, which is critical during shipping and installation in dense arrays. Vibration tolerances are also robust, with rotational vibration resistance specified up to 12.5 rad/s² between 10Hz and 1500Hz. Both require both +12V and +5V power rails and draw a typical 6.8–6.9W at idle, which increases during read/write activity as noted in Seagate’s specifications. Taken together, these figures indicate that while the drives are robust enough for demanding environments, users should still ensure their NAS or server chassis provides sufficient cooling, airflow, and power delivery to stay within these tolerances.

Comparing the 30TB IronWolf Pro to the 24TB IronWolf Pro and 4TB IronWolf (Non‑Pro) for Perspective

The 30TB IronWolf Pro represents Seagate’s largest capacity in the NAS‑optimized lineup, continuing the incremental increase in platter count, areal density, and helium‑sealed design. The 4TB non‑Pro IronWolf uses a more modest five‑platter, air‑filled design spinning at 5400 RPM, while the 24TB IronWolf Pro was the previous capacity peak, utilizing nine helium‑sealed platters and a 7200 RPM spindle. Despite sharing the same CMR recording and SATA interface, there is a clear progression in performance, power requirements, noise, and workload tolerances across these models. This comparison highlights how structural changes and internal technologies evolve with capacity—and where trade‑offs emerge at the top end of the spectrum.

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Performance, Noise and NAS Compatibility (WiP)

Performance testing of the Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB confirms that both drives deliver sustained sequential transfer rates close to their advertised 275 MB/s. In NAS systems tested—including QNAP, Synology, and Asustor platforms—both drives initialized without compatibility errors and achieved typical sequential read speeds of 268–270 MB/s and write speeds of 252–262 MB/s, depending on the platform and RAID configuration. These results align with expectations for a modern 7200 RPM CMR drive with a 512 MB cache and demonstrate that even at 30TB, throughput remains consistent with prior Pro‑series drives. Random IOPS, while limited compared to SSDs, remain within acceptable ranges for NAS workloads, with the Exos M specified at up to 170 IOPS read and 350 IOPS write at 4K QD16. Latency is nominal at approximately 4.16 ms, which is typical for this class of mechanical drive. Importantly, no firmware or block‑size compatibility issues were noted, and both drives default to 512e sector formatting, ensuring out‑of‑the‑box operability with most modern operating systems and file systems.

Acoustic performance, however, is noticeably impacted by the increase in platter count and capacity. During idle, the IronWolf Pro registers approximately 28 dBA in a quiet environment, with seek noise rising to around 32 dBA. These figures are slightly higher than those of the 24TB Pro and significantly more pronounced than the older 4TB IronWolf non‑Pro, which produces closer to 20–24 dBA. Subjectively, this noise was clearly audible in a quiet office when installed in a plastic‑chassis NAS and became more noticeable under heavy write operations. In larger arrays, particularly in 8‑bay or 12‑bay enclosures fully populated with these drives, cumulative vibration and resonance may amplify the perceived noise level. By comparison, the Exos M does not publish specific acoustic figures, reflecting its assumption of deployment in already noisy data center environments where ambient noise levels mask individual drive activity.

On the topic of environmental and electrical specifications, both drives are built to operate reliably in demanding conditions. The IronWolf Pro and Exos M are rated for continuous operation at ambient temperatures from 10 °C to 60 °C and can withstand storage temperatures from −40 °C to 70 °C when powered off. Shock ratings remain robust at 30 G operating and 200 G non‑operating, ensuring safe transport and handling before installation. Rotational vibration tolerance of up to 12.5 rad/s² helps maintain head‑positioning accuracy even in vibration‑prone multi‑drive arrays. Power draw, as specified by Seagate, averages around 6.8–6.9 W when idle and rises to between 8.3–9.5 W during typical operating workloads, depending on the model. Although these figures are in line with expectations for drives of this capacity, they are higher than those of lower‑capacity models, and users should ensure their NAS or server power delivery and airflow are sufficient.

In terms of platform compatibility, early testing shows that both drives are recognized and functional in all major NAS operating systems tested, including Synology DSM, QNAP QTS, TrueNAS SCALE, and Unraid. Both drives initialized cleanly, allowed full‑capacity volume creation, and performed as expected in single‑disk, RAID‑1, and RAID‑5 configurations. Some NAS brands, such as Synology’s newer units, do issue warnings when non‑Synology‑branded drives are installed, but no functional limitations were encountered. The Exos M, while designed primarily for enterprise and cloud storage arrays, showed no incompatibilities when deployed in smaller NAS appliances. As always, users are advised to consult their NAS vendor’s compatibility list to ensure formal support for these models.

Important point here – As this drive is something of a ‘bigger boy’ – the INITIAL power draw of the drive is quite high, so we are starting to see some examples of particularly high initial power draw drives having issues with NAS backboard/SATA PCB boards that do not have the consistent power delivery needed for larger drive arrays to be stable for a large number of big drives like this one. It’s a small % chance of being an issue, but it does mean that although support and compatibility of the Seagate Ironwolf Pro and EXOS 30TB Hard Drive might be fine on a lot of devices, more power efficient systems or lose built to a lower production cost that reduce a lot of the power deliver (PD) might have long term running and stability issues with drives of this scale down the road.

Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOS Hard Drive – Conclusion and Verdict

The Seagate IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB drives both exemplify the steady evolution of high‑capacity mechanical storage, bringing unprecedented density to the familiar 3.5‑inch form factor without sacrificing the reliability and compatibility that enterprise and NAS users expect. At 30TB each, they are currently the largest CMR SATA hard drives available, delivering predictable sustained transfer rates close to 275 MB/s and designed to operate 24/7 with an MTBF of 2.5 million hours. Both feature helium‑sealed, 10‑platter designs and include hardware‑level protections such as Instant Secure Erase and rotational vibration mitigation, which are critical in multi‑bay arrays. Where they differ is in market focus: the IronWolf Pro is clearly tailored for SMBs, creative professionals, and enterprise NAS environments that benefit from health monitoring via IronWolf Health Management and the inclusion of three years of Rescue Data Recovery Service, making it easier for smaller teams to recover from accidental loss. The Exos M, by contrast, is optimized for hyperscale data centers, where sustainability, operational cost per terabyte, and compatibility with existing rack infrastructure take precedence, and where administrators already have recovery processes in place.

That said, deploying drives of this capacity is not without its operational and economic considerations. At 30TB per drive, both models demand careful attention to power and cooling: idle and active power consumption are notably higher than lower‑capacity drives, and the additional heat and acoustic output can challenge under‑spec’d NAS enclosures. In smaller or plastic‑chassis NAS units, the noise profile of several of these drives spinning simultaneously can become disruptive in quiet offices or residential settings. Additionally, the sheer size of each drive raises planning concerns around data redundancy and recovery times—should a 30TB drive fail, rebuilding a RAID array or restoring from backup can take significantly longer than with smaller disks. For some users, a lower‑capacity, higher‑spindle‑count configuration may still provide better performance in parallelized workloads and potentially faster rebuild times, while keeping per‑drive costs more manageable.

Ultimately, both the IronWolf Pro 30TB and Exos M 30TB succeed at what they set out to do: deliver maximum capacity in a familiar, standards‑compliant format for users and organizations that can benefit from ultra‑dense storage. For NAS and SMB environments prioritizing ease of use, monitoring, and support, the IronWolf Pro remains the obvious choice. For data centers and hyperscale operations where scale, efficiency, and sustainability dominate requirements, the Exos M makes more sense. Either way, these drives are best viewed as specialist tools, suited to those prepared to manage the trade‑offs inherent in such high‑capacity storage. Provided that the environment, workload, and backup strategy are properly aligned, they offer a compelling, if premium, solution for meeting the growing demands of modern data storage.

You can purchase the Seagate Ironwolf 30TB Hard Drive Series via the links below: Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on Amazon Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro HDD HERE on B&H Seagate 30TB EXOS HDD HERE on B&H * Using these links will result in a small % commission coming to NASCompares and this helps me and Ed here (it really is just us!) to keep making our videos, writing our reviews and providing support in our free support sections for others!

PROs of the Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOs

PROs of the Seagate 30TB Ironwolf Pro and EXOs

Unprecedented Capacity — Both drives offer 30TB in a single 3.5-inch drive, reducing the number of disks needed for large arrays and saving space – but doing so in a CMR design (and not SMR) is just incredible Helium-Sealed Design — Uses a proven 10-platter, helium-filled architecture for improved reliability, reduced turbulence, and better areal density. Consistent Performance — Sustained transfer rates up to 275 MB/s and predictable latency ensure stable throughput for NAS and enterprise workloads. Enterprise-Grade Reliability — MTBF of 2.5 million hours, 550 TB/year workload rating, and 24/7 operation make them suited for demanding environments. Feature Sets Tailored to Audience — IronWolf Pro includes IronWolf Health Management and 3-year Rescue Recovery; Exos M adds power optimization and sustainability focus. Broad Compatibility — Fully SATA 6Gb/s compliant and functional across major NAS brands, RAID configurations, and operating systems without special drivers. Secure Data Management — Both support Instant Secure Erase (ISE) with Exos M adding RSA firmware verification for data security compliance.

Higher Power and Heat — Increased power consumption and thermal output require well-cooled, properly provisioned enclosures and PSUs. Audible Noise Levels — Louder idle and seek noise, especially when used in multi-drive NAS arrays, can be disruptive in quiet environments. Expensive Per Unit — High initial cost compared to smaller capacity drives, with diminishing returns in some scenarios if not fully utilized or backed up properly.

Find regulary updated NAS offers here
Of course I would prefer you choose AMAZON UK AMAZON USA to buy your perfect solution, however, if you would rather buy locally, please use the links used above to take you to your local Amazon store and help support this free advice service with ad revenue. More ways of supporting the blog are described HERE  
Home: https://www.backblaze.com/cloud-backup.html#af9rgr Business: https://www.backblaze.com/business-backup.html#af9rgr Comparison with other service providers: https://www.backblaze.com/best-online-backup-service.html#af9rgr   SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

45Drives HL8 8-Bay MITX NAS Case Review

The 45Drives HL8 is an 8-bay desktop NAS chassis developed for users who want professional-grade storage hardware without committing to the rigid ecosystems of traditional NAS vendors. Designed and manufactured in North America, the HL8 is available in several configurations, with this review focusing specifically on the chassis, backplane, and power supply model. This version includes a precision-built steel enclosure, a direct-wired 8-bay SATA backplane, and a 500W 80 Plus Gold-rated Flex ATX power supply. It omits bundled motherboards, CPUs, and pre-installed operating systems, appealing to users who prefer to build or customize their NAS hardware environment while still benefiting from an integrated power and storage foundation. The HL8 aims to bridge the gap between low-cost DIY NAS enclosures, which often suffer from poor thermals and awkward layouts, and locked-down consumer appliances that limit software choices and upgrade potential. With a hinged open-frame design, support for full-height PCIe cards, and internal layout optimized for accessibility and cooling, the HL8 is positioned as a platform for long-term use and adaptability rather than a quick-start solution. While its price point is significantly higher than generic imported chassis, its construction and modular focus suggest it’s intended for serious users seeking more control, not simply more convenience.

Who Are 45Drives?

45Drives is a Canadian storage hardware manufacturer based in Nova Scotia, operating as a division of Protocase, a custom enclosure and prototyping company. The brand has built a reputation among system integrators, IT professionals, and homelab enthusiasts for delivering modular, open-platform storage solutions. Unlike many NAS vendors that focus on vertically integrated ecosystems, 45Drives offers systems built around industry-standard components, designed to be user-serviceable and adaptable. Their catalog includes high-density rackmount systems like the Storinator, hybrid flash-HDD systems such as the Stornado, and more recently, a range of compact desktop NAS chassis under the “HL” or HomeLab label. The HL8, HL4, and HL15 models are part of this effort to scale down enterprise-grade build quality into a form factor more appropriate for deskside or small office deployment.

A core part of 45Drives’ identity is its commitment to open-source principles, not just through hardware compatibility but also in software tooling and education. The company develops and maintains Cockpit-based management modules—such as their ZFS and Samba interfaces—for Linux distributions like Rocky Linux, which they often preinstall with their systems. These modules are freely available on GitHub, and the company encourages users to modify, self-host, or adapt them as needed. In addition to their software work, 45Drives actively engages with the community through regular YouTube content, documentation portals, and technical support that continues even when customers deviate from default hardware or software configurations. This combination of enterprise durability, user empowerment, and open development has earned 45Drives a dedicated following among those who want to retain full control over their infrastructure without sacrificing reliability or support.

45Drives HL8 8-Bay MITX NAS Review – External Design

The HL8’s exterior sets it apart from typical consumer NAS enclosures through its bold and unique industrial construction – practically enterprise grade, at a homelab and desktop level. Built from 16-gauge powder-coated steel, the chassis weighs approximately 22 lbs even before drives are installed, conveying a sense of structural rigidity that clearly aligns more with enterprise hardware than with mass-market desktop cases.

The finish is matte and durable, avoiding cheap plastics or decorative panels. Buyers can choose between metal and acrylic front plates, and several color options are available, offering some degree of personalization—something rarely seen at this tier. Branding is subtle, with the HL8 model designation etched into the top panel and a logo plate on the front face.

Unlike most enclosures that rely on removable panels or sliding trays, the HL8 features a hinged “clam shell” design. The entire upper shell lifts open via captive thumb screws, granting immediate access to internal components without needing to remove the drives or disconnect cabling.

This mechanism provides real-time visibility into the system’s interior during operation, making it easier to perform diagnostics, replace fans, or adjust cabling. It’s particularly helpful for users who regularly service or upgrade their systems, and it avoids many of the frustrations associated with cramped or tool-dependent access panels.

The front of the case houses eight hot-swap 3.5” bays in a vertical arrangement, accessible without tools and pre-wired via the internal backplane. These bays are trayless and rely on drive guides for alignment, secured by the structural frame rather than individual plastic sleds. This design allows for rapid drive installation and removal while minimizing potential points of mechanical failure. The front ventilation is cut directly into the steel fascia, and airflow is directed through the drive bays by internal Noctua fans located behind them. There are no visible indicators or LCD panels on the front panel—minimalism is favored over visual clutter.

Around the rear, the layout remains conventional but clean. The rear I/O cutout accommodates standard mini-ITX motherboard layouts, and the single expansion slot supports a full-height PCIe card up to 72mm in height. The integrated Flex ATX power supply sits beside the motherboard area with its own exhaust fan, and ample passive ventilation is provided via additional steel cutouts. While visually understated, the HL8’s outer design prioritizes durability, accessibility, and functional airflow—traits that reflect its enterprise lineage more than its homelab label might suggest.

45Drives HL8 8-Bay MITX NAS Review – Internal Case Design

Internally, the HL8 case is engineered for both accessibility and structured airflow, with a layout that avoids many of the compromises found in smaller or mass-produced enclosures. The most notable feature is its fully hinged body, which allows the entire top and side panel assembly to lift upward without removing the drives. This open-access approach separates the drive chamber from the motherboard compartment without creating restrictive airflow barriers. It’s a significant advantage for users who need to inspect, troubleshoot, or upgrade internal components, especially when working with larger cooling units or dense cable configurations.

The motherboard area is positioned on the right side of the chassis, aligned horizontally to the drive plane, which prevents any obstruction by drive trays or cabling. This layout supports standard mini-ITX boards and allows full visibility of memory slots, M.2 sockets, and power headers even with drives installed. The motherboard is flanked by routing space that supports organized cabling, including SATA or power leads. This spacing is particularly useful when working with non-modular PSUs or when routing SATA cables from alternative controllers or add-in cards. The case does not limit users to any specific board vendor or layout beyond the mini-ITX size constraint.

Cabling for the backplane is pre-installed in the PSU model, which simplifies setup considerably. The backplane itself is a direct-wired design supporting up to eight SATA drives without requiring SAS expander cards or proprietary interfaces. This approach ensures compatibility with a wide range of consumer and enterprise SATA drives and avoids the long-term risks of vendor-specific drive bay lock-ins. It also makes replacing or troubleshooting individual cables far easier than in systems using multipath or bundled connectors. Power and data connections are cleanly routed through the side of the case, keeping airflow clear and minimizing vibration interference.

The Flex ATX PSU sits at the rear left and is mounted horizontally, drawing air through its own intake and exhausting separately from the main airflow path. This compact configuration leaves the bulk of the case’s lower chamber available for future expansion or airflow tuning. Additional internal fan mounts and brackets are preinstalled, and 45Drives includes all necessary mounting screws and documentation—even down to port-specific manuals for the pre-installed PSU. The internal design of the HL8 shows clear thought toward ease of maintenance and modularity, reflecting an expectation that users will revisit and modify their system over time rather than treat it as a sealed appliance.

45Drives HL8 8-Bay MITX NAS Review – Noise and Cooling

The HL8’s cooling design reflects a balance between thermal efficiency and acoustic performance, especially in its PSU-included configuration. By default, this model ships with multiple Noctua fans—specifically, two NF-A12x15 fans for intake and one NF-A4x10 for exhaust—which are widely regarded for their low noise output and long-term reliability.

Combined with the direct airflow path created by the open drive cage layout, the HL8 maintains effective cooling of both hard drives and system components without requiring high-RPM, high-noise fan profiles. Even under load, thermal tests show the drive temperatures hovering around 50°C in a 20°C ambient environment—well within safe operating margins for mechanical disks.

In real-world usage, the system produces around 33–34 dBA at idle and 42 dBA under full fan load during tasks such as ZFS pool creation or sustained disk activity. These levels are consistent with what you would expect from a quiet desktop PC and are significantly lower than typical rackmount systems or budget enclosures using unbranded high-speed fans.

The use of steel panels throughout the chassis also contributes to noise dampening, reducing vibration resonance from spinning drives. Overall, the HL8’s thermal and acoustic profile is well-suited for deployment in office or home environments where audible noise is a concern, without sacrificing long-term cooling performance.

45Drives HL8 8-Bay Case vs the Jonsbo N3 Case

The 45Drives HL8 and the Jonsbo N3 both offer 8-bay NAS enclosures for mini-ITX builds, but they cater to very different tiers of the DIY NAS market. The HL8 is positioned as a premium, enterprise-grade enclosure built entirely from 16-gauge steel and manufactured in Canada. It includes a fully integrated backplane, Noctua fans, and a Flex ATX PSU—features aimed at maximizing serviceability, thermal control, and long-term reliability.

Priced at roughly $880 USD for the chassis, backplane, and PSU combo, it targets users who demand industrial standards in a desktop form factor. The Jonsbo N3, in contrast, is a Chinese-manufactured enclosure constructed from 2.0mm aluminium alloy with 1.0mm steel internals.

It focuses on maximizing functionality in a compact and aesthetically refined format, with average retail pricing ranging between $150–$170 USD, though occasional sales and unpredictable shipping costs on platforms like AliExpress can make pricing volatile.

In terms of hardware layout and user experience, the HL8 emphasizes modularity and ease of access. Its unique “flower-style” hinged chassis allows for complete servicing of drives, motherboard, cabling, and PSU without disassembly. The built-in backplane supports both SATA and SAS, reducing the need for messy cabling or additional HBA cards unless required for scale-out. Meanwhile, the Jonsbo N3 offers a two-chamber design separating drives and the motherboard/PSU area, supporting 8 hot-swap drives via an included SATA-only backplane. However, the power delivery system relies on two Molex and one SATA connector—an odd combination that may require more planning for power distribution. The N3 also employs a PSU passthrough cable from the back to a front-mounted internal SFX PSU, saving space but potentially restricting airflow and complicating installation. Unlike the HL8’s enterprise cable routing, the N3 requires tight cable management due to its smaller internal volume, and is more prone to cable congestion near the motherboard tray.

Where the HL8 wins in build quality and professional usability, the N3 counters with surprising features at its price point. The N3 includes dual rear fans, 8 LED indicators for drive activity, USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C front I/O, and support for large PCIe GPUs or network cards up to 250mm. However, it uses rubber grommet-mounted drive holders instead of trays—a cost-saving measure that may reduce vibration but introduces concerns about long-term durability and ease of drive removal. It also lacks tool-less panels for the main lid, requiring an Allen key for access, which, while flush and neat, isn’t practical for regular service. By comparison, the HL8 is fully toolless throughout. Ultimately, the HL8 is ideal for users who prioritize low-maintenance reliability and modular enterprise design in a desktop form, while the N3 offers excellent value for cost-conscious DIY builders willing to trade some serviceability and airflow flexibility for size, aesthetics, and affordability.

45Drives HL8 8-Bay MITX NAS Review – The Pre-Built AMD Model

In addition to offering the HL8 as a chassis with backplane and power supply, 45Drives also sells a fully assembled, tested, and burn-in validated configuration for users who prefer a turnkey deployment. The current prebuilt model typically includes a Gigabyte B550I AORUS Pro AX mini-ITX motherboard, paired with either an AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT (6-core, 12-thread) or Ryzen 7 5700G (8-core, 16-thread) processor. These CPUs offer solid single- and multi-threaded performance, integrated graphics for transcoding or light GUI workloads, and efficient power profiles.

The build also comes with up to 64GB of DDR4 UDIMM memory, a 1TB NVMe SSD (typically Gen 4), Noctua NH-L9a-AM4 low-profile CPU cooler, and factory-installed Noctua case fans. All internal wiring is professionally routed, and the system arrives with Rocky Linux and the Houston UI preinstalled for immediate setup.

At the time of writing, the total cost of the prebuilt HL8 with the Ryzen 5700G configuration is $1,538 USD. In contrast, a self-built system using comparable off-the-shelf components can be assembled for approximately $875–$900. A rough cost breakdown would be: Ryzen 7 5700G and B550I motherboard combo ($260), 64GB DDR4 UDIMM ($103), 1TB NVMe SSD ($60), 500W Flex ATX Gold PSU ($90), Noctua CPU and case fans ($75), plus an equivalent MITX 8-bay chassis with SATA backplane ($159–$180). While this approach offers clear cost savings, it comes with multiple delivery sources, fragmented warranties, and no factory testing—factors that may be important to users prioritizing reliability and vendor accountability over price.

The prebuilt model is best suited to users who want predictable performance, reduced setup time, and consolidated post-sale support. It removes the need for component sourcing, physical assembly, and initial troubleshooting. However, it also imposes some limitations, such as the use of a single 2.5GbE network port and lack of configuration flexibility. Users requiring more advanced networking or GPU options will need to expand via the PCIe slot manually. Overall, the prebuilt HL8 fills a niche for those who want an enterprise-adjacent storage server without the learning curve or integration work required by a ground-up build, but it may be over-specified or overpriced for more self-sufficient users.

The 45Drives Houseton UI Software – Any Good?

The Houston UI platform from 45Drives is built on top of the open-source Cockpit Project, designed to offer users a web-based server management interface with a lightweight footprint.

Its browser-based GUI makes it accessible from any device on the network, and it supports multiple Linux distributions, including Rocky Linux, which is often used as the default OS with Houston UI.

One of the primary strengths of Houston UI is its ZFS management interface. Users can easily create, modify, and monitor ZFS storage pools without needing to interact directly with the command line.

The system allows for selection of RAID types (RAIDZ1, Z2, etc.), VDEV expansion, record size configuration, deduplication, encryption, and adjustable compression — all accessible within a guided, GUI-based setup.

System monitoring is a central feature of Houston UI, with a real-time dashboard showing CPU, memory, network throughput, and active services. It includes disk status indicators, smart monitoring tools, and hardware detail pages.

Some of which include visual layouts depending on motherboard detection. While the graphical presentation is basic compared to Synology DSM, it does provide sufficient system insight for regular administration.

Houston UI also includes a modular service control center, where administrators can enable or disable a wide range of server services such as Samba (SMB), NFS, SSH, and rsync.

Each module is toggleable, and users can configure individual services with editable configuration files directly from the browser. This brings flexibility, while still maintaining visual accessibility for basic tasks.

The task scheduler in Houston UI provides an easy way to set up automated jobs — including backups, updates, power cycling, and network interface toggling.

Unlike many systems that hide these functions under multiple wizards, Houston offers a unified “Tasks” area for managing all routine automations, including custom scripts and cron-based tasks.

A standout feature is the cloud synchronization and backup module, which offers connectivity to cloud platforms such as Amazon S3 and Backblaze B2, as well as support for local-to-remote rsync and FTP targets. It allows users to control bandwidth, frequency, and folder mappings from a single-pane interface — something that’s typically fragmented in competing platforms.

For users running virtual machines, Houston UI includes a KVM-based virtualization manager. This allows the creation and monitoring of guest VMs directly through the browser, including storage provisioning, image selection, CPU/memory configuration, and console access. While not as feature-rich as Proxmox, it’s suitable for lightweight VM workloads and container testing.

Finally, Houston supports module extensions, with 45Drives publishing their own file sharing and ZFS modules via GitHub. These can be installed on any compatible Linux system running Cockpit. This open approach allows users to build their own UI extensions or pull from the community, avoiding platform lock-in and enabling customization well beyond the factory defaults.

45Drives HL8 8-Bay MITX NAS Review – Verdict and Conclusion

The 45Drives HL8, when configured as a chassis with backplane and PSU, represents a refined and deliberate approach to small-form NAS deployment. Priced around $880 USD, this configuration sits well above entry-level alternatives, but the investment is clearly reflected in its enterprise-grade construction, serviceable layout, and attention to detail. With a robust 16-gauge steel chassis, direct-wired SATA backplane, and a high-efficiency 500W Flex ATX PSU pre-installed, it offers an ideal base for users who plan to build a serious and scalable NAS solution without locking themselves into restrictive ecosystems.

The hinged body design, tool-free drive access, and Noctua fan integration show a strong understanding of real-world usability, especially for those who perform ongoing maintenance, upgrades, or hardware experimentation. In that sense, it’s less a typical “consumer NAS case” and more a modular platform intended for long-term infrastructure use in homelab and small business environments.

That said, this is not a universal fit for all users. The HL8’s exclusive support for mini-ITX motherboards imposes limitations on connectivity and expansion, especially for those needing multiple PCIe lanes or additional SATA ports without relying on adapters. And while the internal layout is clearly optimized, buyers still need to be comfortable sourcing and configuring their own motherboard, CPU, memory, and storage—something that could be daunting for beginners or those seeking simplicity over flexibility. In markets where similar 8-bay enclosures from lesser-known brands can be found for half the price, the HL8’s value lies more in its physical build quality, localized production, and long-term viability rather than raw cost efficiency. Users comparing it to entry-tier rackmount gear or compact server cases will need to weigh whether the HL8’s refinement and modularity justify the premium.

Ultimately, the HL8 is a product with a clearly defined audience: self-hosters, IT professionals, and technical users who understand the value of vendor-agnostic hardware and want to retain full control over their system’s lifecycle. It offers a rare middle ground between low-cost DIY setups that require piecemeal integration and fully locked turnkey NAS systems from mainstream brands. For those who are willing to invest not only financially but also in the time and knowledge needed to assemble and manage their NAS environment, the HL8 stands out as one of the most thoughtfully engineered and supportable 8-bay NAS chassis currently on the market.

---

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

If Not Synology? Which Other NAS Brand Should You Choose?

It’s an odd question, but with Synology arguably making some rather higher business and enterprise decisions in recent years, there have been increasing queries about who would fill the void if they moved onwards and upwards. As Synology holds such a powerful position in the NAS market, their absence would certainly lead to quite the battle of strength from other players. The obvious answer would be QNAP, a brand that has a similar history to Synology (over two decades in the business, Taiwan-based, in-house OS, numerous 1st-party tools, home and business solutions, etc.), but in 2025, the reality is nowhere near as clear-cut. Younger established brands that have jockeyed for 3rd position, such as Asustor and Terramaster, have been challenged by several startups (ZimaCube and Zimaboard 2, Orico’s Cyberdata Vault, to name just two) entering the fray, as well as established brands like UGREEN, which are expanding their business into the NAS sector. If Synology, for whatever reason, ceased to occupy this important user class of private turnkey server ownership, who would be best placed to occupy it?

How, Where and Why Has Synology Changed?

Synology’s rapid change in business stance to be more enterprise/hyperscale-focused comes at the same time as their frequency of more entry-level, small business, prosumer, and enthusiast solutions has dropped. The regularity of smaller 2-Bay and 4-Bay solutions has noticeably decreased, and the hardware they feature has changed to accommodate more business-type use. This by no means suggests that the brand is making moves to exit these user groups (indeed, support of DSM and the latest revision DSM 7.2.2 extends to all existing users up to many systems released in the late 2010s). However, there has been plenty of user outcry from existing users and potential customers on the architecture of both DSM and the recent releases that exacerbate users to move away from the brand and spend their allocated budgets elsewhere. Synology still comfortably sits ahead of its competitors in terms of software, features, and the UX of their platform, but many changes in policy and support mentioned below have started this trend:

• Changes in 3rd-party HDD compatibility on systems above the 8-Bay scale, prioritizing their own 1st-party labeled HDDs and SSDs, as well as reducing the presentation and compatibility listings on their site significantly.
• Changes in the choice of internal hardware featured in their systems to be more focused on business file processes and less on multimedia use.
• Comparatively smaller increases in base hardware between refreshes of individual series (e.g., J4125 and V1500B CPUs in 2024 launch devices, despite first appearing in 2019/2020).
• Considerable increased focus on software enhancements over hardware (not a bad thing, but an undeniable fact).
• Increased proprietary hardware support over 3rd-party (e.g., Synology-only Memory modules, custom 10GbE adapters like the E10G22-T1, Synology-only M.2 SSDs for Pool Use).
• An increasing number of cloud subscription services getting newer features, while local services remain secure and stable but static.
• New product focus shifting towards newer larger-scale solutions like the evolving GridStation series, Active Protect subscription system, and C2 innovations.
• The predicted elimination of the J entry-level series in favor of the pre-populated and software-streamlined BeeStation.

All of the above are small factors in themselves, but add them all up, and you see small but important stepping stones toward a gear shift in Synology’s target demographic. So, if Synology were to intentionally or inadvertently begin to move outside of these user groups of home, small business, and enthusiast, who stands to fill this space and grow?

---

QNAP vs Synology?

As mentioned earlier, QNAP stands to be the most likely contender to fill this space. With over 20 years of history, a larger range of hardware solutions than Synology, and software that does pretty much everything Synology’s does, they have been consistent competitors. However, inconsistencies in user experience, conflicting UIs, and a tendency to try to do “too much” have resulted in their losing ground to Synology in terms of software. Add to this the negative brand impact of security incidents in 2020-2022, which tarnished their reputation around security and safety, requiring serious improvement. To the brand’s credit, they have made considerable internal culture changes on this subject, adding bounty programs, tightening system defaults, increasing pen testing, introducing several system security scanning tools, disabling things like SSH and admin super user accounts as standard, and more.

Value Series	Best All Rounder	Prosumer NAS
TS-233 2-Bay NAS	TS-464 4-Bay NAS	TVS-h874 8-Bay NAS
$189 on Amazon (Check Here)	$549 on Amazon (Check Here)	$2499 on Amazon (Check Here)

In terms of hardware, they have mostly stuck to what works, refreshing existing product families at the same rate of 2.5-3 years for desktop small-medium scale, and 3-5 years for larger scale. They have also introduced significantly more recent CPUs from both Intel and AMD, as well as 2.5GbE as standard on their solutions at the same price point as 1GbE. If it weren’t for the damaging brand harm caused by the Deadbolt/QSnatch/Qlocker ransomware attacks, I think Synology would have been significantly challenged by QNAP in the last 2-3 years across all fronts. However, the setback to QNAP’s reputation reduced this growth potential significantly, and in the last two years, we have seen an increasing number of new names pop up in NAS that have also harmed QNAP’s appeal to users in terms of hardware value, the thing they could always be relied upon to beat Synology on. QNAP would still stand to become the ‘top dog’ in the event of a Synology exit (Synexit?) from the low-to-medium tiers of NAS storage, but many new players have entered the field, such as…

---

UGREEN vs QNAP?

Largely known for their power adapters and PC accessories, a year ago UGREEN had practically no real presence in the world of NAS. They had a smaller scale and more entry-level range of solutions that were limited to the East, but aside from that, they were complete outsiders. Fast forward to now, and following a successful and well-marketed Kickstarter campaign that raised millions of dollars, they are now a provider of genuinely impressive turnkey NAS solutions—the NASync series. The key word there is “turnkey”, as in they are providing both the hardware and the software. They could have just rolled out their hardware and made it OS-free (i.e., “Here’s a ready-built server, now go install UnRAID or TrueNAS”), but instead, they opted to produce and include an impressively responsive NAS OS in UGOS. Genuinely challenging the feature set of the likes of Asustor and Terramaster, as well as the design of Synology and the hardware level of QNAP, UGREEN has made a rapidly growing name for itself in the small-to-medium NAS sector.

Value Series	Best All Rounder	Prosumer NAS
DXP2800 2-Bay NAS	DXP4800 PLUS 4-Bay NAS	DXP8800 PLUS 8-Bay NAS
$399 on Amazon (Check Here)	$699 on Amazon (Check Here)	$1499 on Amazon (Check Here)

They definitely lack the range of solutions that those other brands offer, with only 6 solutions currently available (the DXP2800, DXP4800/PLUS, DXP6680, DXP8800, and DXP480T), and no rackmount solutions yet, but it’s a solid start. Equally, their software, although fluid and responsive in nailing down the NAS fundamentals, lacks many of the more impressive AAA+ solutions that are offered by the bigger brands. Lastly, although they raised a considerable sum during the crowdfunding, they do not have the global support, offices, or availability of their long-running NAS competitors—with solutions only being available in two regions, the US and Germany. All of these factors add up to a brand that is poised to make even bigger splashes in the years to come but is perhaps not quite ready to replace the big dog, Synology, just yet!

---

ASUSTOR vs Synology?

Always the bridesmaid, but never the bride, Asustor is a brand that has been around in the world of NAS in one shape or form for quite a few years. They are one of the mainstream Taiwanese brands in NAS that has always ‘been there’, but it is only in the last 4-5 years that they have been making sizable moves to take on both Synology and QNAP. One of the main ways in which they pursued this is by developing numerous features in both hardware and software that are available from their competitors individually. So features such as M.2 NVMe-focused storage systems, BTRFS support, WORM locking, 2.5GbE/5GbE support, HDMI output via a dedicated GUI, and more are features available on Synology and QNAP to some extent, but only Asustor rolls them under one brand umbrella. So, how poised are they to fill a void if Synology moved out of this space?

Well, from a hardware standpoint, Asustor is in a very good position. Them being Taiwan-based will certainly soothe concerns that have grown around Chinese companies and data storage solutions. Equally, their hardware has evolved rapidly in their last two generations to feature some genuinely unique solutions that are either specific to the platform or priced at a level that makes them genuinely competitive against DIY and BYO solutions. Systems such as the Flashstor series, Lockerstor series, and even value offerings like the Drivestor are surprisingly well equipped. They are not quite on the same level of hardware as QNAP (who have a significantly more diverse hardware portfolio), but they are fleshing it out very well.

Value Series	Best All Rounder	Prosumer NAS
Nimbustor Gen 2 2-Bay NAS	Flashstor Gen 1 12-Bay NAS	Lockerstor Gen 3 8/10-Bay NAS
$369 on Amazon (Check Here)	$449-749 on Amazon (Check Here)	$1999 on Amazon (Check Here)

However, it is the software of Asustor (ADM) that is unfortunately where the brand is a little more timid. They have a NAS OS, numerous client tools for Windows, Mac, iOS, and Android—and they nail down the bulk of the application fundamentals for storage management, multi-site backup handling, multimedia playback, containers, and more. But the platform lacks a few of the more AAA/desirable services, such as AI-powered photo recognition, a 1st-party VM tool, ZFS support, and ultimately is a little more reliant on 3rd-party applications to fill the gaps. They have recently countered this by officially detailing that they support users who buy Asustor hardware to go ahead and install 3rd-party NAS software like TrueNAS or UnRAID without it harming your warranty—so they know they are not leading the pack in terms of their own ADM NAS software but do make noticeable user concessions. With new hardware on the horizon in the Lockerstor Gen3 and Flashstor Gen2 (both of which see a significant bump in hardware profiles), we might see some impressive moves from Asustor in 2025. I just think they still have some ways to go before they can fill any potential void that Synology might leave.

---

TERRAMASTER vs Synology?

Terramaster has been jockeying for the NAS 3rd place spot with Asustor for well over a decade at this point, and much like their opponent, they have been good at integrating individual features from both QNAP and Synology into their own NAS hardware and TOS platform, but to a larger degree than Asustor. For example, their OS provides largely everything that Asustor ADM does (including TrueNAS/UnRAID support without voiding your warranty) but adds to this with an AI photo recognition platform, their own VM tool, and an impressive Isolation Mode that can sever the system at the click of a button from remote access, 3rd-party PHP, and any external requests (necessitating a restart to disable). However, as this brand is a Chinese brand, there will always be question marks raised by users about how this system compares with Taiwanese-based systems. This is a little unfair, given that Terramaster, Asustor, and QNAP were all successfully hit by the same ransomware attack (Deadbolt) a few years back, so there was plenty of ‘vulnerability’ to spread around!

In terms of hardware, Terramaster has been making some impressive and aggressive strides in this area—with the recent launch of their 3-part F4-424 Intel NAS series (Standard, Pro, and MAX), the release of two 8-bay M.2 NVMe 10GbE equipped systems (the F8 PLUS and F8 SSD PLUS), and new desktop and rackmounts hot on their heels. They have also scaled up the design to better improve cooling, efficiency, and just general visual appeal.

Value Series	Best All Rounder	Prosumer NAS
F2-424 2-Bay NAS	F4-424 Max 4-Bay NAS	T9-500 Pro 9-Bay NAS
$369 on Amazon (Check Here)	$819 on Amazon (Check Here)	$1499 on Amazon (Check Here)

However, much like Asustor, their software is just not able to challenge the standard that Synology has set. For buyers looking for smooth and easy utilization like Synology, Terramaster’s TOS has the danger of feeling a little clunky. Their latest release, TOS6, brings new features, software standards, and design to the mix, but it lacks the range of mobile applications, desktop client tools, and consistent UX/presentation that Synology seems to do so well. Terramaster is a fantastic value-for-money choice, and I would argue they have significantly scaled up the level of hardware and software utility they provide year on year. But they still have a way to go before they can hit the same notes as Synology DSM yet.

---

WD / Netgear vs Synology?

This is a pretty short one! The answer is no! Both WD and Netgear have regularly reduced their hardware ranges and the frequency of software updates these last few years, and although there are a decent range of business file server systems still being released, the general home/enthusiast/prosumer level of hardware is pretty poor and uninteresting compared to everyone else on this list so far. I cannot help but get the feeling that, aside from some basic backup NAS systems that are still listed at the majority of retailers, the bulk of their range has been in circulation for 5-6 years now without any refresh in sight. For basic target file/folder storage, these systems still provide some limited modern NAS utility, but overall, they are a fairly weak alternative to Synology’s offerings in 2025.

---

A UniFi NAS?

With increased mentions and leaks online towards a potential NAS in the works from UniFi, this could be a very credible alternative to Synology in terms of software UX and presentation. UniFi, and its incredibly user-friendly UX featured on their Switch, Router, NVR, and Dream Machine combination systems, is where UniFi shines. No doubt any UniFi NAS solution would need to similarly blend into their ecosystem to the same degree. That said, if they were to launch a system, all their experience in the fields of network management, router security, and surveillance systems might not necessarily translate into a similar pedigree in network-attached storage. It’s hard to discuss how or if UniFi could fill any market space that a potential Synology absence would create, as they do not have any systems out in the market to make an informed decision. This is for the “To Be Continued…” pile!

---

Drobo vs Synology?

No…just…no. See Video Below:

---

IceWhale / ZimaCube

This is a very interesting one. 2023 and 2024 saw several companies arrive in the turnkey NAS space via the crowdfunding route (we already discussed UGREEN as the biggest example), wanting to break into the market. However, IceWhale benefits from having already launched two previous successfully fulfilled campaigns and is just completing their third one with the ZimaCube NAS system. Arriving with the lightweight containerized platform Zima OS (a modified version of their existing Casa OS), this new series is pretty impressive for its scale and price point at launch. Add to that the significantly unique design, impressive use of 10GbE and Thunderbolt over IP, and a 6x HDD / 4x NVMe system in a compact case, and you can see why they have made a fairly significant splash for a brand that is comparatively unheard of compared to Synology, QNAP, etc.

However, as robust as their range of solutions is (ZimaBoard, ZimaBlade, and ZimaCube), the software is still very rudimentary compared to the bulk of other browser GUI and more “operating system”-stylized UX. There are virtually no client applications, except for their own system search and connection client tools. An eventual successor to Synology, if they moved upwards toward bigger and more business-oriented solutions, would need to hit the software functionality and user experience exceedingly early and exceedingly well.

Mini PC Brands – Lincplus, Aoostar, etc.

This is an odd one. There have been a large number of solutions appearing on sites such as AliExpress that arrive as “OS-Free” services, allowing a user to get a pre-built NAS hardware solution (i.e., no need to build one yourself, which takes longer and requires a degree of technical understanding). The end user can then choose to install popular and well-established solutions like TrueNAS, UnRAID, OpenMediaVault, and more.

Value Option	Best All Rounder	SSD Focused NAS
Aoostar WTR Pro 4-Bay NAS	Minsiforum MS-01 3/6-Bay NAS	Lincplus Lincstation N1 6-Bay NAS
$399-799 on Amazon (Check Here)	$399 on Amazon (Check Here)	$399 on Amazon (Check Here)

This serves as an impressively economical solution and has significantly grown in popularity in 2023/2024, but these 3rd-party software platforms lack a lot of the ease of use and quality of life client tools for modern devices that Synology features. Indeed, despite efforts like UnRAID 7 making its day-to-day use much easier, and TrueNAS working with HexOS for a more user-friendly output, these still pale in comparison to DSM and will also require a greater degree of technical user input in the long term to maintain stability, versus Synology’s rather more “it takes care of itself” design.

---

Synology vs EVERYONE ELSE – Conclusion and Verdict

If Synology were to leave the home/enthusiast/prosumer/small business tier very soon, I do think QNAP would stand to reoccupy this ground. However, give it 2-3 years, and I do think players like Terramaster, Asustor, and yes—even UGREEN—are poised to give QNAP some serious consumer competition. No doubt Synology is still keeping an eye on their competition (big and small) and would not willingly or easily give up this sector without a fight. However, there is no denying that the turnkey NAS industry is no longer the 2-3 horse race it was just five years ago!

---

---

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Synology VS Terramaster NAS Drives in 2025 – Which One Deserves Your Data?

Synology and TerraMaster are two well-established brands in the network-attached storage (NAS) industry, each targeting a range of users from home enthusiasts to small and medium-sized businesses. Synology, a Taiwanese company with over two decades in the field, is widely recognized for its DSM (DiskStation Manager) software, which emphasizes stability, security, and integration within a tightly controlled ecosystem. TerraMaster, while newer to the market, has steadily gained ground by offering hardware-focused, cost-effective solutions with increasing software support via its TOS (TerraMaster Operating System) platform.

I want to provide a side-by-side comparison between Synology and TerraMaster as they stand in 2025, focusing on the real-world differences in hardware, storage, software, and security. The goal is to outline the practical strengths and weaknesses of each brand without leaning heavily toward subjective preferences or historical bias. This is especially relevant for users reevaluating Synology due to recent policy shifts, or for those considering TerraMaster as a flexible and affordable alternative.

 TerraMaster’s TOS (TerraMaster Operating System), currently in version 5.1 with version 6 available on select systems, has seen rapid growth in capabilities and usability over the last few years. While it doesn’t yet match DSM’s polish, it has made significant strides in offering equivalent functionality. TOS supports Btrfs-based snapshots, Rsync and CloudSync for cloud backup, Docker container deployment, and VirtualBox-based virtualization. While the latter is less tightly integrated than Synology’s VMM, it does allow for third-party VM deployment in a usable way.

TerraMaster has also developed TerraSync, a synchronization tool designed to rival Synology Drive, and supports both media management and AI-enhanced photo sorting with apps like Terra Photos. However, many of TOS’s functions rely more heavily on community-driven or open-source third-party applications, resulting in a slightly less unified experience overall.

In terms of application ecosystems, Synology’s App Center clearly offers the broader and deeper catalog, particularly for business users. First-party applications such as Synology Office, Chat, MailPlus, and Note Station deliver a productivity-focused alternative to cloud services, and their Surveillance Station software stands out as one of the most powerful NVR platforms in the NAS market.

TerraMaster’s App Center includes essential tools but lacks the same level of first-party development. However, it makes up for this in openness: TerraMaster supports a wide array of third-party and open-source platforms more freely, including Jellyfin and Unraid. Moreover, TerraMaster allows alternative operating systems like TrueNAS to be installed without voiding the warranty, which adds considerable flexibility for tech-savvy users. Overall, Synology delivers a more unified and polished software experience, while TerraMaster emphasizes adaptability, freedom, and cost

Synology vs Terramaster NAS – Security and Safety

Synology has long maintained a strong reputation in the NAS sector for prioritizing system security, and this is evident in how thoroughly security is integrated throughout DSM. Synology’s Security Advisor provides active scanning for vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, and password weaknesses, while its firewall, account protection, and IP auto-blocking features offer practical layers of defense against unauthorized access. Synology also supports comprehensive SSL certificate management via Let’s Encrypt and offers two-factor authentication (2FA) with TOTP and hardware key support. From a business continuity perspective, DSM includes native WORM (Write Once Read Many) capabilities and encrypted shared folders to protect sensitive data from tampering or deletion. Perhaps most critically, Synology operates a dedicated PSIRT (Product Security Incident Response Team), frequently publishes security advisories, and participates in high-profile vulnerability testing events like Pwn2Own—demonstrating a serious commitment to vulnerability discovery and remediation.

TerraMaster’s security offering has become more robust over recent years, particularly with the development of Isolation Mode—a unique feature allowing users to instantly sever all external access and remote services with a single click. This acts as a kill switch in the event of a suspected breach or malware event. TOS also includes a system-level security scanner that checks for basic vulnerabilities and enables 2FA, SSH restrictions, and SSL certificate deployment. While TerraMaster’s platform does not offer as many granular policy tools as DSM, it supports core protocols like OpenVPN and L2TP for secure remote access and regularly issues firmware updates in response to new threats. The company also now provides greater transparency regarding CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), though its advisory frequency and scope remain smaller than Synology’s.

---

Despite these advancements, TerraMaster’s security record has faced scrutiny in the past due to incidents like the Deadbolt ransomware attacks. These incidents, which also affected other NAS vendors, prompted significant user backlash and a push for more proactive security updates and faster patching. TerraMaster has since responded by improving software integrity and introducing layered protection features, but the lingering perception remains that Synology maintains a stronger and more proactive security posture overall.

This perception is reinforced by Synology’s investment in ongoing vulnerability research, bug bounty programs, and a broader portfolio of security-focused tools. As it stands in 2025, Synology continues to lead in NAS security maturity, while TerraMaster has made meaningful progress—especially with unique features like Isolation Mode—but still has ground to cover in enterprise-level protections and threat response.

Synology vs Terramaster NAS – Conclusion and Verdict

Comparing Synology and TerraMaster in 2025 ultimately highlights a clear philosophical divide between the two NAS brands. Synology continues to build upon a long-standing focus on refined software, tight integration, and enterprise-grade security. Its DSM platform remains one of the most polished and feature-rich operating systems in the NAS space, offering a wide selection of first-party tools for backup, surveillance, virtualization, and secure access. However, this ecosystem is increasingly closed, with stricter hardware compatibility requirements and limited support for third-party drives, SSDs, and expansions. For users who prioritize reliability, ease of use, and support from a mature software ecosystem, Synology remains a compelling—if sometimes restrictive—option.

Synology NAS– 5 Strengths vs TerraMaster in 2025 Superior software polish: DSM offers a more consistent, responsive, and user-friendly interface, ideal for beginners and pros alike. Better security infrastructure: Features like a dedicated PSIRT, frequent vulnerability disclosures, and a bug bounty program give Synology the edge in system safety. Mature first-party apps: Key tools like Active Backup for Business, Surveillance Station, and Synology Drive are more refined and feature-rich than their TOS counterparts. Streamlined management: Built-in tools for snapshots, monitoring, and backup offer a more centralized and automated experience. Longer ecosystem stability: Greater long-term support for software versions and consistent patch cycles provide peace of mind for business use. Cons: Strict hardware compatibility: Recent models (e.g., DS925+) restrict use of non-Synology drives and SSDs, frustrating users seeking flexibility. Less hardware value per dollar: Generally more expensive for equivalent CPU, RAM, and port configurations.

TerraMaster, by contrast, leans into flexibility and hardware value. Its broad portfolio includes NAS units ranging from entry-level to high-performance multi-bay SSD systems, often at lower price points than Synology’s equivalents. TOS 5.1 and the newer TOS 6 have brought meaningful improvements in UI and functionality, while still maintaining a more open approach to compatibility and user customization. Features like native Jellyfin support, VirtualBox VM deployment, and the ability to install TrueNAS or Unraid without voiding warranty make TerraMaster a standout for DIY-leaning users or those with niche requirements. However, its software, while improving, does not yet match the polish or depth of Synology DSM, especially in areas like virtualization, surveillance, and enterprise security.

TerraMaster NAS – 5 Strengths vs Synology in 2025 Better hardware value: Offers more powerful CPUs, RAM, M.2 slots, and 10GbE in the same or lower price bracket. Flexible OS options: Users can install TrueNAS, Unraid, or other OSes without voiding the warranty, offering unmatched flexibility. Open storage support: No restrictions on drive brand or SSD use, supporting Seagate, WD, Toshiba, Samsung, and more. More aggressive expansion options: TOS systems often support more USB and hybrid expansion units across the portfolio. Integrated Jellyfin support: TerraMaster includes native Jellyfin installation without relying on Docker or community packages. Cons: Less mature software ecosystem: TOS apps are less polished and lack some advanced features found in DSM tools. Weaker track record on security: Past vulnerabilities (e.g. Deadbolt) and slower public patching place more responsibility on the user for hardening.

In the end, choosing between Synology and TerraMaster depends heavily on user needs and expectations. Synology suits users who want a highly stable, all-in-one solution with minimal configuration and long-term support. TerraMaster offers greater adaptability and value for power users who are comfortable managing third-party apps and want to stretch their hardware investment further. Neither approach is inherently better—each has its strengths and trade-offs. Buyers seeking a tightly controlled, secure environment may gravitate toward Synology, while those who value hardware scalability, open software choices, and affordability may find more freedom with TerraMaster.

Synology DS925+ NAS		Terramaster F4-424 / Max / Pro
Check Amazon in Your Region for the Synology NAS Solutions	Check B&H for the Synology NAS Solutions	Check Amazon in Your Region for the Terramaster NAS Solutions	Check B&H for the Terramaster NAS Solutions

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Does the Orico Cyberdata Vault CF56 and CF56 Pro Deserve Your Data?

IMPORTANT – This is a review of two early prototypes of the Orico Cyberdata Vault NAS devices that will be launching on crowdfunding in July, and likely will see improvement and optimization as time and development continue. I provide this rolling/dynamic review as an indication of what the system is aiming fo ran a full and detailed review of the final product will arrive much closer to launch.

The Orico CyberData Vault CF56 and CF56 Pro NAS systems are part of a newly developed six-model lineup that will be launched via Kickstarter, aimed squarely at prosumers, media professionals, and small business environments in need of hybrid local storage with higher bandwidth connectivity and ZFS support. Both systems are built around the same chassis design but differ significantly in internal capabilities: the CF56 features an Intel Core i3-N305 processor (8-core, 8-thread), while the CF56 Pro steps up to an Intel Core i5-1240P (12-core, 16-thread). The units combine traditional 3.5-inch HDD storage (five bays) with six M.2 NVMe SSD slots for caching or tiered storage configurations, housed within a structure that offers magnetic access panels and multi-zone active cooling.

These models also introduce Orico’s new CyberData OS, a ZFS-based operating system featuring snapshots, real-time media indexing, and AI photo recognition—although in its current form it remains incomplete and in early development. With features such as dual 10GbE on the Pro model, USB4 connectivity, and flexible expansion via a GPU dock or RAID cabinet, these NAS systems reflect Orico’s shift from accessory brand to full-scale storage solution provider. While still prototype units, the CF56 and CF56 Pro demonstrate hardware ambition aligned with recent trends in semi-professional NAS design, echoing earlier moves from competitors like UGREEN, Aoostar, and Minisforum.

Orico Cyberdata Vault Review – Quick Conclusion

The Orico CF56 and CF56 Pro offer a promising blend of modern hardware, hybrid storage design, and ZFS-based data protection aimed at prosumers and small creative teams seeking high-speed, subscription-free private cloud solutions. With a total of five 3.5” HDD bays and six M.2 NVMe SSD slots, both units provide considerable flexibility for building tiered or cache-accelerated storage environments, while their use of efficient Intel processors—the N305 in the CF56 and the more powerful i5-1240P in the Pro—positions them for a wide range of workflows from basic file serving to heavier tasks like 8K transcoding, Docker hosting, and AI media indexing. The CF56 Pro, in particular, stands out with its dual 10GbE networking, USB4 ports, GPU dock support, and multi-zone cooling—placing it closer to workstation-class NAS territory. However, both models are currently limited by the early state of their CyberData OS software, which, while promising in features like snapshots, AI recognition, and mobile integration, suffers from missing essentials such as two-factor authentication, a complete app ecosystem, and consistent language localization. Performance results also reflect this unfinished software layer, with SMB transfer speeds and transcoding performance falling short of the hardware’s full potential. Concerns like elevated NVMe temperatures on the Pro model and the lack of ECC memory support—despite ZFS being the default file system—underscore the need for careful expectations among more advanced users. Nonetheless, as hardware platforms, the CF56 and CF56 Pro are well-designed and competitive, particularly if Orico can deliver on its planned optimizations and enhancements by the time of full release.

BUILD QUALITY - 8/10

HARDWARE - 8/10

PERFORMANCE - 7/10

PRICE - 8/10

VALUE - 8/10

7.8

PROS

Hybrid storage: 5x HDD + 6x M.2 NVMe SSD (flexible ZFS configurations)
Dual 10GbE on CF56 Pro for high-speed networking
Modern CPUs: Efficient N305 and powerful i5-1240P
Expandability via GPU dock (CF56 Pro only) and USB4 RAID cabinet
Up to 64GB DDR5 RAM with dual-channel (CF56 Pro)
Multi-zone active cooling and manual fan profiles
HDMI + DisplayPort output with 4K/8K support
Integrated AI media management and Docker support

CONS

No ECC memory support
USB4 ports lack network-over-USB functionality (Coming Later Apparently)
Early firmware lacks optimization (e.g. SMB transfer speeds)
CyberData OS lacks two-factor authentication and app store currently
Top NVMe region on CF56 Pro runs hot under load (80°C) on this protoype
Localization/UI inconsistencies in current OS build (still pre-launch) and Software still in development; not final at time of review
Crowdfunding is Not For Everyone

Orico Cyberdata Vault Review – Design

The exterior design of the CF56 and CF56 Pro is clearly built around practical serviceability and visual minimalism, with both devices using a shared chassis that prioritizes easy access to internal components. The most distinctive feature is the magnetic front panel, which is removable without tools and serves both an aesthetic and functional purpose. This panel provides ventilation along the sides and top edges, as well as system information through onboard LED indicators.

Behind it, the five 3.5-inch drive bays are arranged vertically on a dedicated SATA backplane, pre-wired for direct access to the internal storage controller. This layout streamlines maintenance and makes drive replacement relatively simple, although hot-swap capability has not been officially confirmed in the prototype documentation.

Above the HDD area, users will find four top-facing M.2 NVMe SSD slots located beneath a secondary magnetic lid, which includes a washable mesh dust filter. This dual-layered design gives quick tool-less access to the upper SSDs, and the system provides enough internal clearance to accommodate full-height heatsinks.

Underneath the chassis are two additional M.2 NVMe slots, accessed by removing the base plate, which is secured with standard screws. Combined, this provides a total of six M.2 bays, enabling hybrid storage setups where SSDs can be allocated for cache, metadata pools, or as part of a tiered ZFS configuration. While the layout appears consistent across both models, there are minor internal structural differences, especially in the power and thermals between the N305 and i5 variants.

Build quality varies slightly depending on perspective. The chassis exterior is predominantly plastic for reduced weight and cost, but the internal structure—such as drive cages, shielding, and board mounting points—is fully metal, contributing to better durability and heat dissipation.

Ventilation is managed by a single large rear fan, with the Pro variant including additional improvements in thermal zoning. Noise levels remained within reasonable limits during testing, with the CF56 model averaging 29–31 dBA in quiet mode and the CF56 Pro rising to 46–47 dBA under full load. This suggests that although the design is visually consistent, thermal demands increase substantially with the i5-1240P model under sustained workloads or dense NVMe configurations.

One notable design concern relates to the temperature observed in the upper M.2 bay region of the CF56 Pro. During extended stress testing, the top section of the chassis reached temperatures close to 80°C, prompting early correspondence with Orico about hardware revision plans. According to the brand, this issue has already led to a second- and third-generation PCB redesign, aiming to reduce thermal concentration around the CPU and top NVMe slots. It’s expected that the final retail revision of the CF56 Pro will include enhanced heat dissipation features in that area, potentially including better ventilation cutouts or redesigned passive cooling components on the board level.

Lastly, the system’s approach to internal power delivery differs subtly between models. Both the CF56 and CF56 Pro use an external PSU that connects via a barrel plug, but the wattage and thermal ceiling requirements are significantly higher on the Pro due to its 12-core CPU and expanded 10GbE networking. These differences also manifest in fan curve behavior and system-wide power consumption. Under light but active load (including live network activity and idle CPU), the CF56 consumed around 45–46W. In contrast, the CF56 Pro peaked at 79–81W during 8K transcoding and full NVMe/HDD population. This further emphasizes how both models share a common enclosure but diverge internally to meet their respective performance tiers.

Orico Cyberdata Vault Review – Internal Hardware

Internally, the CF56 and CF56 Pro share a similar board layout, but the differences in their processors define the target use case and overall capabilities of each unit. The CF56 is powered by the Intel Core i3-N305, an energy-efficient 8-core/8-thread processor based on the Gracemont architecture. This CPU is commonly used in fanless mini PCs and excels in multi-threaded workloads at low power consumption, making it suitable for light-to-moderate NAS tasks such as SMB file serving, local backups, Docker containers, and light Plex usage. Meanwhile, the CF56 Pro features the Intel Core i5-1240P, a significantly more powerful 12-core/16-thread processor with four performance cores and eight efficiency cores. This hybrid architecture provides greater burst throughput and a better foundation for AI-enhanced services, real-time media indexing, and virtualization tasks.

Both systems come with DDR5 memory pre-installed—16GB in the prototype units—but with different slot configurations. The CF56 includes a single DDR5 SO-DIMM slot, limiting it to a maximum of 32GB of memory and restricting dual-channel capability. In contrast, the CF56 Pro includes two SO-DIMM slots, supporting up to 64GB DDR5 and enabling dual-channel operation, which offers a notable performance uplift in workloads such as memory-intensive VMs or media databases. However, ECC memory is not supported on either model, due to both CPUs lacking ECC validation. This may concern users intending to rely on ZFS for mission-critical operations, as ECC is typically recommended in those scenarios to prevent silent data corruption.

Storage throughput is also heavily influenced by the PCIe lane allocation on each model. In the CF56, all six M.2 NVMe SSD slots operate on Gen 3 lanes, with those on the top four slots running at PCIe 3.0 x1 speeds and the bottom two reaching PCIe 3.0 x4. While this limits maximum per-slot bandwidth to around 1 GB/s on the upper four, it allows for cost-effective use of Gen 3 drives, which remain widely available and affordable. The CF56 Pro offers higher total bandwidth, with its top four M.2 slots upgraded to PCIe 3.0 x2, and the bottom two retaining PCIe 3.0 x4. Despite the i5-1240P supporting Gen 4 PCIe, Orico appears to have intentionally limited all M.2 slots to Gen 3 to manage thermals and ensure system stability under prolonged load.

An unexpected discovery during prototype testing revealed a possible seventh internal M.2 slot in the CF56 Pro, presumed to host the system boot drive or be reserved for future expansion. However, due to the lack of SSH access in the prototype firmware, further validation was not possible at the time of recording.

Regardless, the six main M.2 slots and five SATA drive bays offer ample storage configurability, especially when paired with the ZFS features of CyberData OS. System cooling, power delivery, and memory configuration all reflect Orico’s attempt to match their component selection with real-world use cases—balancing between hardware headroom, affordability, and the needs of semi-professional users handling mixed media workflows.

Orico Cyberdata Vault Review – Ports and Connections

The CF56 and CF56 Pro both offer a broad selection of ports, but the Pro model significantly extends external connectivity, particularly in terms of networking and high-speed data interfaces. On the CF56, the rear I/O includes a standard 2.5GbE LAN port alongside a single 10GbE RJ45 connection, suitable for most users looking to transfer large media files or operate light virtual environments. The CF56 Pro upgrades this to two dedicated 10GbE ports, allowing for simultaneous high-throughput tasks or link aggregation configurations. This networking setup makes the Pro variant especially attractive for multi-user environments, such as small studios, where heavy media file access and backups may occur concurrently across devices.

Both models include a similar array of USB ports on the rear and front panels. This consists of two USB 3.2 Gen 2 ports for high-speed peripheral or DAS connectivity, and two legacy USB 2.0 ports suitable for input devices or basic accessories. The CF56 Pro goes a step further by incorporating dual USB4 ports—though in testing, these were not available for direct network interface (as is possible on some modern NAS with Thunderbolt or USB-C network tunneling), but functioned as general-purpose USB interfaces. According to Orico, future firmware revisions may unlock additional functionality, but as of the current prototype, USB4 is primarily used for connecting high-speed external drives or expansion units.

Video output is supported across both systems, which include an HDMI 2.0 port and a DisplayPort 1.4 connection on the CF56, and upgraded HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs on the CF56 Pro. These allow users to output up to 8K display resolution, enabling the NAS to function as a lightweight desktop, digital signage server, or direct-play multimedia center. Integration with CyberData OS supports media playback and basic interface control over HDMI, though there are some limitations in UI optimization for direct screen navigation, especially in the current prototype firmware. Still, the availability of dual video outputs on both models reflects a growing trend in hybrid NAS/HTPC design.

Power input is provided via a barrel connector on both models, though the CF56 Pro uses a higher-wattage external PSU due to the increased demands of its CPU and dual 10GbE networking. Internal power distribution appears to be cleanly handled, and the systems remained electrically stable during tests. One area of future interest will be how Orico handles expandability. While Thunderbolt or USB4-based RAID cabinets are planned for the series, support was not fully implemented in the prototype stage. GPU dock support is also present only on the larger devices in the product family, leveraging the i5’s PCIe expansion capability for dedicated GPU tasks such as video rendering, AI inference, or VM acceleration.

Orico Cyberdata Vault Review – Performance, Heat and Power Tests

Initial performance evaluations of the CF56 and CF56 Pro revealed that while the underlying hardware is capable, real-world throughput is currently constrained by early-stage software optimization. During SMB file transfer testing over 10GbE, both models struggled to reach expected performance levels, with the CF56 averaging below 500 MB/s and the CF56 Pro rarely breaking 1 GB/s, even under favorable conditions. Orico acknowledged this limitation and confirmed that software-level optimization was ongoing. As such, these figures should be treated as provisional and not reflective of the final product performance. In both models, ZFS was used as the underlying file system, configured in a hybrid tiered setup with HDDs for capacity and NVMe for metadata and caching.

Transcoding tests were particularly revealing of the CPU differences between the models. The CF56 managed basic 1080p and some 4K H.265 transcodes via software decoding, but exhibited signs of strain under higher bitrates or simultaneous streams. In contrast, the CF56 Pro with its i5-1240P processor handled up to eight 8K transcodes concurrently during one benchmark, maintaining responsiveness while CPU usage hovered around 30%. Despite this impressive processing ability, peak system power draw climbed to 81W, highlighting the thermal and energy trade-offs required for sustained performance. Notably, neither system offers hardware transcoding via Intel Quick Sync, as support for it was not accessible in the current CyberData OS build.

Thermal management remained mostly acceptable, though not without concern on the CF56 Pro. Under stress, the top M.2 bay area reached 80°C, and while no thermal throttling occurred, prolonged exposure could reduce SSD lifespan or stability. Orico responded that this issue was already being addressed through a revised internal board layout and enhanced venting. The CF56 maintained lower temperatures during the same tests, remaining between 38–46°C under average usage. The difference is largely attributable to the lower TDP of the N305 CPU and reduced overall system throughput, which in turn generated less heat throughout the chassis.

Noise levels were measured in all three fan modes (Quiet, Standard, and Turbo) to assess usability in home or small office settings. In Quiet mode, the CF56 registered 29–31 dBA, making it suitable for desktop deployment or living room environments. The CF56 Pro remained silent under light use, but escalated to 46–47 dBA under Turbo mode, with fan noise becoming noticeably audible. Most of the ambient sound during low to moderate use came from HDD activity, rather than the cooling fans. The OS includes manual fan control and profile scheduling, allowing users to balance performance and acoustics based on workload and time of day.

Orico Cyberdata Vault Review – Software and Services

The desktop client software included with the Orico CF56 and CF56 Pro NAS systems is built on fnOS, a closed-source NAS operating system developed in China and increasingly licensed by various hardware brands. In its current state, the desktop interface provides access to all core storage functions, including RAID management, user permissions, snapshot control, and file operations, but it clearly reflects a system still undergoing development.

While the application is responsive and offers real-time monitoring of CPU, memory, and storage activity, it lacks polish in both design layout and localization. Several UI elements remain inconsistently translated, and some modules—such as the multimedia suite and AI functions—exhibit a mixture of English and untranslated Chinese text even when the system language is set to English.

Functionally, the OS supports the major protocols expected from a ZFS-based platform, including SMB, NFS, FTP, and Time Machine backup for macOS. File-level encryption, inline deduplication, and snapshot creation are all available within the storage management interface, with options for cache acceleration using the M.2 NVMe drives.

However, the absence of certain administrative features—most notably two-factor authentication, SSH access, and a dedicated app store—limits its appeal for security-conscious users or those looking to expand functionality via community-developed tools.

The system does include Docker support with a container manager interface, but VM deployment and third-party service integration (e.g., Plex, Jellyfin) are currently unavailable or not pre-installed.

The file management system in the desktop client is functional but basic, offering drag-and-drop file operations, preview support for common file types, and options for setting sharing permissions. Remote access features rely on a relay service provided by Orico, and while this worked reliably during testing, there was no visible option for configuring custom domain access, HTTPS certificates, or firewall profiles—features typically expected in more mature NAS operating systems.

Some of the advanced AI features, such as facial recognition and semantic photo tagging, are accessible through this desktop interface, but their functionality is inconsistent due to metadata scraping issues and interface reliability.

On the mobile side, the fnOS-derived application shows greater completeness. The Android client used during testing allowed for quick setup, user management, remote file access, and snapshot control. Photo and video libraries are indexed automatically and presented with timeline views, location tags, and album sorting. The app also supports real-time uploads, camera roll backups, and basic editing metadata tagging.

AI recognition features such as object detection and face grouping are available, although semantic search accuracy remains mixed.

Remote control of HDMI playback from the phone is supported, allowing content streaming directly to a connected display, but the controls remain basic and lack the refinement of dedicated media remote interfaces.

Overall, while the mobile app appears more polished and covers most core user needs, both desktop and mobile software clients reflect a platform that is not yet feature-complete. The reliance on fnOS gives Orico a functional foundation with native ZFS support and UI consistency across devices, but the closed nature of the system, combined with the lack of extensibility and incomplete localization, may limit its immediate appeal outside of its domestic market.

If Orico follows through on promised optimizations and expands the software stack with a proper app ecosystem and advanced security controls, the platform could become more viable in international NAS markets. Until then, the software should be considered a work-in-progress that supports basic NAS tasks but may fall short for more demanding or technical deployments.

Orico Cyberdata Vault Review – Verdict and Conclusion

The Orico CF56 and CF56 Pro represent a calculated step into the semi-professional NAS market by a brand historically known for accessories and external storage enclosures. By leveraging Intel’s N305 and i5-1240P processors, DDR5 memory, and a mix of HDD and NVMe storage options, Orico offers a compelling hardware platform on both models—especially in terms of expandability and bandwidth potential. The CF56 is well-suited for users who require reliable local storage with some containerization and light media usage, while the CF56 Pro pushes into territory typically occupied by entry-level rackmounts or high-end desktop NAS systems, thanks to its dual 10GbE ports, USB4 support, and improved thermal zoning. While the lack of ECC memory may deter more cautious enterprise buyers, most of the design trade-offs appear intentional and aligned with prosumer priorities.

That said, both units remain in a pre-release state at the time of writing, and their software platform—CyberData OS—is clearly still under development. While the ZFS integration, AI media indexing, and snapshot management show promise, issues such as language inconsistencies, incomplete feature sets, and missing essentials like two-factor authentication may limit early adoption. File transfer and multimedia performance also require further optimization, with current speeds falling short of the hardware’s capabilities. As prototypes, the CF56 and CF56 Pro demonstrate strong hardware foundations, and if the OS matures as expected by launch, these units could become legitimate alternatives to mainstream NAS systems in the increasingly crowded hybrid storage space.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Is the CWWK N355 Soft Router Firewall / NAS Box Worth Your Data? (Review)

DIY router boxes have gained popularity in recent years, especially those coming out of China with various hardware configurations. The CWWK N355-powered firewall appliance is an intriguing option, not just as a high-performance router but also as a potential NAS device. Unlike many reviews that focus on its networking capabilities, this review explores its viability as a compact and efficient NAS solution.

CWWK N355 DIY 10GbE Router/NAS Review – Quick Conclusion

The CWWK N355 is a well-rounded and versatile device that excels in networking, virtualization, and compact NAS applications, thanks to its dual 10GbE SFP+ ports, 2.5GbE LAN, expandable DDR5 RAM, and M.2 NVMe storage support. It is a compelling choice for firewall applications, Proxmox virtualization, and even lightweight NAS or media server setups, offering a balance of performance and connectivity in a compact and durable metal chassis with active cooling. The Alder Lake-N N355 CPU delivers efficient multi-core performance, making it suitable for running multiple services, including Docker containers, VMs, and network security applications. Additionally, its expandable memory and storage options give users flexibility, though its storage implementation is somewhat restrictive due to only one native NVMe slot and a SATA port with no internal mounting space. However, its aging Intel 82599ES 10GbE controller, high idle power consumption of 21-22W, and lack of full-speed PCIe lanes limit its potential for high-performance NAS deployments. While it can handle moderate file-sharing and media streaming workloads, users who require full 10GbE speeds, extensive storage expansion, and power efficiency may find better options in dedicated NAS motherboards with PCIe slots or higher-efficiency processors. Still, for those looking for a compact, high-speed network appliance with strong customization potential, the CWWK N355 remains a solid choice for advanced home labs, small business networking, and hybrid router-NAS setups. As long as users are aware of its networking bottlenecks and storage limitations, it offers impressive versatility and performance at an attractive price point.

Where to Buy? CWWK N355 2x10GbE Box Router/NAS ($304 AliExpress) – HERE CWWK N355 2x10GbE Firewall Box U.S ($460 Amazon) – HERE CWWK N355 2x10GbE Firewall Box U.K (£304 Amazon) – HERE CWWK N355 MITX NVMe NAS ($184-295 AliExpress) – HERE DIY N355 NAS Products ($254-349 Amazon) – HERE

The CWWK N355 features a robust industrial design, with an all-metal chassis that acts as a heat sink, efficiently dissipating heat from critical components. The exterior is entirely metal, including the base panel, which features mesh ventilation to enhance airflow. A top-mounted active cooling fan ensures consistent airflow across the CPU and networking components, preventing thermal throttling under sustained workloads.

Internally, copper heat plates are placed over the CPU and 10GbE controllers, allowing for direct heat transfer to the chassis. This cooling system is highly effective, maintaining temperatures within safe limits even under heavy network and storage loads. During testing, the device remained at an average of 50-55°C under full load, with the fan producing minimal noise.

The cooling implementation makes the CWWK N355 a viable option for extended use in high-performance NAS, virtualization, or firewall applications where thermal efficiency is crucial. Given its mix of powerful networking features, ample connectivity, and storage options, this device has the potential to serve a broader range of applications than just routing. However, evaluating its strengths and weaknesses is crucial before repurposing it for a NAS setup.

One of the standout features of the CWWK N355 is its impressive network connectivity. Equipped with dual 10GbE SFP+ ports and two 2.5GbE i226V LAN ports, it offers significantly more bandwidth than traditional consumer NAS devices.

These high-speed connections enable rapid file transfers, efficient virtualization networking, and multi-user simultaneous access without bottlenecks.

It also includes two M.2 NVMe slots and a SATA 3.0 port, making it highly flexible for storage configurations. This means users can integrate fast NVMe storage while still having the option to include traditional SATA drives for cost-effective capacity expansion.

The aluminum chassis with active cooling enhances its thermal efficiency, ensuring stable operation even under load, a crucial aspect for maintaining performance in continuous 24/7 operation.

The N355 CPU, an Alder Lake-N processor, brings 8 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 1.8GHz and a boost up to 3.8GHz. This processor is designed for efficiency while maintaining a respectable level of performance for various workloads.

It also features integrated Intel UHD graphics, which allows it to handle lightweight GPU tasks such as video decoding, remote desktop applications, and low-power graphical processing.

The DDR5 SO-DIMM slot supports up to 48GB RAM, although some listings mention 32GB as the maximum. This expanded memory capacity is particularly beneficial for virtualization, allowing users to run multiple lightweight VMs, containers, and even a Plex media server with modest hardware-accelerated transcoding capabilities.

Component	Specification
Processor	Intel Alder Lake-N N355, 8 Cores / 8 Threads, 1.8GHz base, 3.8GHz boost
Graphics	Integrated Intel UHD Graphics
Memory	1 x DDR5 SO-DIMM slot, up to 48GB (some listings state 32GB max)
Storage	2 x M.2 NVMe (one requires adapter), 1 x SATA 3.0 (no internal mounting)
Networking	2 x 10GbE SFP+, 2 x 2.5GbE i226V LAN
Power Consumption	21-22W idle, up to 36W under load
Cooling	Aluminum chassis with active cooling fan
Ports	1 x Type-C, 1 x USB 3.2, 4 x USB 2.0, 2 x HDMI 2.0, TF Card Slot
Operating System Support	Windows 11 Pro, OPNsense, Linux, ESXi, OpenWrt
Dimensions	12.7 x 17.8 x 5.5 cm
Weight	1.3 kg

The combination of efficient CPU performance and expandable RAM makes it versatile, but users should be aware of its limitations when handling resource-intensive applications.

However, storage expansion comes with some challenges. While the device technically supports two M.2 NVMe drives, only one slot is a standard 2280 interface. The second slot requires an adapter, which is included, but adds complexity to installation. This additional requirement may be a concern for users who are less experienced with hardware modifications or prefer simpler plug-and-play configurations.

The SATA drive support is somewhat limited—while the port is available, there is no dedicated internal space for mounting a 2.5-inch drive inside the enclosure, meaning external mounting is necessary. This lack of internal SATA mounting may be a dealbreaker for those who prefer a more integrated and clutter-free build. While external enclosures or adapters could be used to house SATA drives, it introduces additional complexity and potential cable management issues.

Power consumption is another area of concern. Under idle conditions, the device draws 21-22W, which is quite high compared to traditional NAS appliances. Many consumer NAS systems are designed to run efficiently at around 10W to 15W when idle, making this unit significantly more power-hungry when not under load.

Under load, with 10GbE connections active, VMs running, and storage drives in use, power consumption reaches 36W. While this is still within reasonable limits for a device offering high-speed networking and multi-core processing, it is something to consider for users prioritizing energy efficiency. Over time, the additional power draw may add up, especially for those running multiple devices in a home or small business setup. If power efficiency is a critical factor, other lower-power options might be preferable.

Performance-wise, the M.2 NVMe drives achieve read speeds of up to 720MB/s and write speeds of 690MB/s.

While SATA performance peaks at around 200MB/s with a standard HDD. These speeds are respectable but fall short of fully utilizing the available 10GbE networking potential.

While this is acceptable for most home NAS applications, the 82599ES 10GbE controller is a notable bottleneck. It is an older PCIe Gen2 x4-based controller (in this deployment at least), which limits full 10GbE speeds.

In testing, even with dual 10GbE connections active, network transfers maxed out at around 600-700Mbps per link, rather than saturating the full 10GbE bandwidth on each of them.

This suggests that while it is capable of handling high-speed transfers, it is not the ideal choice for users who need to maximize 10GbE connectivity for large-scale data transfers or enterprise workloads.

While the CWWK N355 offers excellent networking and processing power, its relatively aging 10GbE controller, high idle power consumption, and limited internal storage space make it less ideal for an all-purpose NAS. However, it excels as a high-performance firewall/router, Proxmox host, or Plex server for users who can work around these limitations.

Users interested in setting up an advanced home lab or small business server might find this device appealing due to its networking flexibility, processing capability, and virtualization potential. While it lacks native software optimization found in dedicated NAS brands, those comfortable with manual setup and open-source NAS software will find it a capable and adaptable device.

For those seeking a dedicated NAS solution with full 10GbE performance, an ITX motherboard with PCIe 3.0 slots and dedicated storage expansion might be a better alternative. Such options would provide greater flexibility for storage expansion, more efficient networking solutions, and overall better optimization for NAS workloads. But if you’re looking for a compact, all-in-one networking and storage device, the CWWK N355 is an impressive contender.

Just be mindful of the legacy components and potential bottlenecks before making your final decision. With the right configuration and expectations, it can serve as a cost-effective and powerful addition to a home lab or small business network setup.

PROs of the CWWK N355 DIY 10GbE Box

CONs of the CWWK N355 DIY 10GbE Box

High-Speed Networking: Equipped with dual 10GbE SFP+ ports and two 2.5GbE LAN ports, providing excellent connectivity for advanced networking setups. Expandable Storage: Features two M.2 NVMe slots (one requiring an adapter) and a SATA 3.0 port, allowing for versatile storage configurations. Efficient Alder Lake-N CPU: The Intel N355 (8C/8T, up to 3.8GHz) offers efficient performance for firewall applications, Proxmox, lightweight NAS, and media servers. DDR5 Memory Support: Supports up to 48GB DDR5 RAM, enabling smooth multitasking, virtualization, and Docker/containerized environments. Robust Build and Cooling: Full aluminum chassis acts as a heat sink, with a top-mounted active cooling fan for effective thermal management. Wide OS Compatibility: Works with Windows 11 Pro, Linux distributions, ESXi, OPNsense, pfSense, OpenWrt, and TrueNAS, making it highly flexible. Compact and Power-Efficient: Small form factor and 15W TDP CPU make it space-saving and relatively low-power compared to traditional rack-mounted alternatives.

Aging 10GbE Controller: The Intel 82599ES 10GbE chipset is outdated, limiting maximum network speeds and performance efficiency in high-bandwidth workloads. Limited SATA Storage Options: While it includes a SATA 3.0 port, there is no internal mounting space for a 2.5-inch drive, requiring external solutions. Higher Idle Power Draw: Consumes 21-22W at idle, which is higher than dedicated NAS devices, potentially affecting long-term energy costs.

 

Where to Buy? CWWK N355 2x10GbE Box Router/NAS ($304 AliExpress) – HERE CWWK N355 2x10GbE Firewall Box U.S ($460 Amazon) – HERE CWWK N355 2x10GbE Firewall Box U.K (£304 Amazon) – HERE CWWK N355 MITX NVMe NAS ($184-295 AliExpress) – HERE DIY N355 NAS Products ($254-349 Amazon) – HERE

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Synology vs QNAP NAS – Which Should You Buy in 2025?

When choosing a NAS solution in 2025, two brands dominate the conversation: Synology and QNAP. These Taiwan-based companies have evolved their offerings significantly over the years, adapting to changing user needs in backup, multimedia, virtualization, and enterprise storage. Synology, with a strong emphasis on software polish and ecosystem integration, continues to appeal to users who prioritize stability and consistency. QNAP, by contrast, leans into offering higher-spec hardware, customization, and flexibility, targeting tech-savvy users who want granular control over their system. This article explores how the two compare across hardware, storage capabilities, software platforms, security, pricing, and overall value. Both Synology and QNAP share a lot of baseline features: multi-platform support across Windows, Mac, and Linux; mobile apps for Android and iOS; web-based GUIs; encryption; multi-user access; and strong community ecosystems. Yet important distinctions emerge as you look deeper. These differences often boil down to Synology delivering a more consistent, “appliance-like” experience, while QNAP offers broader hardware choices and wider compatibility. Neither brand is universally better, but each fits different user priorities. Let’s break down how Synology and QNAP stack up in detail for 2025.

Synology vs QNAP NAS – Hardware Comparison

In terms of hardware variety and specification, QNAP clearly maintains an advantage in 2025. QNAP offers a wider range of NAS models across every price tier, providing more options for users looking for features like 2.5GbE or 10GbE ports, Thunderbolt connectivity, PCIe expandability, and support for AI or GPU cards. Many QNAP systems at even mid-tier levels offer multi-core CPUs, 2.5GbE as a minimum, and M.2 NVMe slots for caching or storage pools. Synology, while offering a hardware range from ARM-based entry units to Xeon-powered enterprise models, typically emphasizes efficiency and stability over raw horsepower, often shipping systems with lower-core-count processors and 1GbE networking by default.

However, Synology’s hardware strategy is tightly coupled to its software-first philosophy. Devices are designed to maximize compatibility, power efficiency, and seamless operation with DSM. Some newer 2025 Synology models do offer improvements — such as M.2 NVMe storage pools and optional 10GbE upgrades — but their pace remains slower compared to QNAP’s frequent hardware refresh cycles. For users whose priority is high performance, customization, or bleeding-edge hardware, QNAP offers far more compelling options. For those seeking low-power, quiet, turnkey systems, Synology still provides highly reliable appliances.

Synology vs QNAP NAS – Storage Services and Scalability 

Storage capabilities represent a growing area of divergence. Synology’s storage ecosystem emphasizes stability and data integrity through Btrfs file systems, SHR (Synology Hybrid RAID), fast RAID rebuilds, and snapshot technology. However, Synology has dramatically tightened its drive compatibility rules from 2025 onwards, particularly in the Plus series and higher, limiting users to certified Synology drives for initialization. This hardline approach restricts flexibility, as users cannot freely install third-party HDDs or SSDs. Meanwhile, users still benefit from technologies like SHR, making mixed-drive RAID arrays easier to manage, though concerns remain about SHR’s future viability under Synology’s evolving drive policies.

	SERVICE	SYNOLOGY	QNAP	Notes
File Services	SMB, AFP, NFS			Cross-platform sharing
	WebDAV			Remote access
	FTP/FTPS			Standard protocols
	Rsync/Remote Sync			Sync across systems
RAID & Storage	Basic, JBOD, RAID 0/1/5/6/10			Core RAID support
	SHR (Hybrid RAID)			Synology-exclusive
	Qtier Auto-Tiering			QNAP-exclusive SSD/HDD tiering
	ZFS Support	(DSM 7.2+ select models)	(QuTS hero)	Synology uses Btrfs more widely
	Storage Pools			Pool-based management
	Thin Provisioning			On supported file systems
	Storage Snapshots	(Btrfs-based)	(ZFS/ext4-based)	Both support snapshot schedules
	Inline Deduplication	(Btrfs)	(ZFS)	Both support dedup, method differs
	SSD Cache (Read/Write)			Model-dependent
	Encryption (AES-256)			Volume/folder-level encryption
Backup & Sync	Hyper Backup / HBS3	(Hyper Backup)	(Hybrid Backup Sync 3)	Functionally equivalent
	Active Backup for Business			Enterprise-grade backup (free)
	Snapshot Replication			Data versioning support
	Cloud Sync			Multi-cloud sync integration

QNAP’s storage flexibility is far greater. Users can utilize almost any NAS-rated or server-class drive from vendors like Seagate, Toshiba, and WD, without vendor lock-in. Beyond standard RAID levels, QNAP offers Qtier for intelligent auto-tiering between SSDs and HDDs and supports ZFS through its QuTS hero operating system. ZFS integration introduces enterprise-grade features such as inline deduplication, compression, triple-parity RAID options, and even faster rebuilds. Expansion is another strong suit for QNAP, with broad support for external expansion enclosures over USB and PCIe, while Synology supports far fewer expansion units. In short, QNAP offers a more powerful, flexible storage environment but demands more technical knowledge to manage effectively.

Synology DSM vs QNAP QTS/QuTS  – Software Compared

Synology’s DSM (DiskStation Manager) remains the benchmark for NAS operating systems in terms of polish, consistency, and ease of use. Its streamlined UI, consistent app design, and stable system management tools make it highly user-friendly. DSM’s integration with Synology Drive, Hyper Backup, Active Backup for Business, and its Office suite provide turnkey productivity and backup solutions. However, Synology is moving increasingly toward a closed ecosystem, prioritizing first-party apps and services over broader third-party integration. Applications like Surveillance Station remain best-in-class, but recent trends — such as discontinuing Video Station — indicate Synology’s increasing control over its ecosystem.

QNAP’s QTS and QuTS hero systems offer greater flexibility and third-party support at the cost of consistency. Users can deploy a much wider range of apps, including those for AI recognition, media streaming, and backup tasks, often with deeper customization options. QNAP’s app ecosystem embraces both QNAP-native and third-party applications, with tools like HybridMount and Hybrid Backup Sync offering robust cloud and backup integrations.

However, design inconsistencies and a more complex setup process make QNAP platforms better suited to technically proficient users. QNAP systems offer more functionality out of the box but can feel less cohesive than Synology’s more curated environment.

Synology vs QNAP NAS – Security 

Synology continues to lead in NAS security in 2025. The company’s multi-layered approach — including an in-house Security Response Team, bug bounty programs, pen-testing partnerships, and rapid patching policies — maintains its reputation as one of the most secure NAS ecosystems. Security Advisor, SSL certificate management, encrypted folders, and proactive system audits are standard across DSM systems. Remote access via QuickConnect is tightly controlled to minimize exposure. This emphasis on hardening and responding quickly to vulnerabilities makes Synology a strong choice for users prioritizing security with minimal manual intervention.

	Service	Synology	QNAP	Notes
Security & Access	2FA (Two-Factor Authentication)			User-level protection
	VPN Server (OpenVPN, L2TP, PPTP)			Standard features
	Firewall + IP Blocking			Security policy management
	SSL Certificate Management			Let’s Encrypt, custom certs
	Security Advisor			Built-in vulnerability scanner

QNAP has made substantial strides in recent years to bolster its security posture, responding to earlier criticisms following ransomware incidents. The introduction of its own PSIRT team, participation in Pwn2Own, and improvements to myQNAPcloud services represent real progress. However, QNAP’s security tools, like Security Counselor, often need to be manually installed and configured. While they now offer multi-factor authentication and SSL options, the user experience around setting up and maintaining a secure environment still lags slightly behind Synology. Power users comfortable with managing network-level protections can achieve strong security on QNAP, but casual users may find Synology’s default setup safer out of the box.

Synology vs QNAP NAS – Price Point and Value 

QNAP consistently offers better raw hardware value for the price across its product range. A mid-tier QNAP NAS typically features higher-core CPUs, 2.5GbE or 10GbE networking, and expandability features like PCIe slots and multiple M.2 NVMe slots — features that, with Synology, are only available at much higher price points.

Additionally, QNAP’s lack of strict HDD compatibility listing (as currently the case for the Synology 2025 series, at the time of writing) and broader compatibility with storage and memory components can significantly reduce the total cost of ownership for DIY-minded users. Synology’s pricing, while generally higher, reflects its software development investment and the overall polish of its systems.

Buyers are paying for a more turnkey experience, better documentation, and consistent performance across the board. Moreover, Synology’s inclusion of powerful free tools like Active Backup for Business and Synology Drive adds enterprise-grade features without additional licensing costs, which in some cases offsets the hardware premium. Nonetheless, for users whose priority is maximum hardware performance and component freedom, QNAP usually offers a stronger return on investment.

Synology vs QNAP NAS – Conclusion and Verdict 

Choosing between Synology and QNAP in 2025 depends largely on user priorities. Synology remains the best choice for users seeking a polished, consistent, stable, and secure NAS experience. Its streamlined DSM platform, reliable first-party apps, and strong support infrastructure make it ideal for small businesses, prosumers, and general users who want a “set it and forget it” solution. However, Synology’s movement toward hardware and software lock-in may be off-putting to users who value flexibility or those unwilling to buy only Synology-branded components. QNAP, by contrast, excels in offering more powerful hardware, greater configuration freedom, and broader third-party app support. Users who want to customize, expand, virtualize, and maximize their system’s capabilities — and who are comfortable managing more complex setups — will find QNAP to be the more empowering platform. While its software consistency and security history lag slightly behind Synology, the gap has narrowed considerably. Ultimately, Synology is the stronger pick for users valuing simplicity and long-term stability, while QNAP offers more opportunities for those willing to trade simplicity for flexibility and raw performance.

NAS Solutions	NAS Solutions
+ Better Software (In almost every respect!) + Much Better Global Support Presence + More business desirable + Larger Range of solutions – Compatibility restrictions on HDD and Upgrades More and more – Underwhelming hardware (comparatively)	+ Better Hardware for Price + Wider Variety of Solutions and Hardware Profiles + Supports ZFS and/or EXT4 (with ZFS platform now available on latest Intel Celeron Systems) + Wide accessory range and compatibility – Software can often feel inconsistent – Hit by Security Issues if the past
Check Amazon By Clicking Below:	Check Amazon By Clicking Below:

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

The Zimaboard 2 Single Board Server Review – The Best Yet?

In an increasingly saturated market of single-board computers and compact servers, the ZimaBoard 2 arrives with a clear goal: to offer an affordable, x86-powered, DIY-friendly alternative that bridges the gap between embedded systems and full-blown home servers. Developed by IceWhale, a brand that has already seen crowdfunding success with products like the original ZimaBoard, ZimaBlade, and ZimaCube, the ZimaBoard 2 aims to refine the company’s mission of delivering low-power, highly customizable devices for tinkerers, creators, and homelab enthusiasts. At its core, the ZimaBoard 2 is designed for users who want flexibility without complexity—whether that’s spinning up a lightweight virtualization platform, building a smart home hub, deploying a personal cloud, or running a local media server with minimal noise and energy consumption.

Unlike consumer-grade NAS systems or ARM-based boards, ZimaBoard 2 taps into the x86 ecosystem, offering broader OS compatibility and performance benefits while maintaining a compact, passively cooled footprint. This review explores the hardware, thermal and network performance, and software environment of the ZimaBoard 2, evaluating where it fits in the broader landscape of edge computing and personal infrastructure. As with previous IceWhale launches, this unit is being released initially through crowdfunding—a factor that calls for cautious optimism. Still, with a track record of fulfilling past campaigns, IceWhale appears confident in ZimaBoard 2’s readiness. Whether that confidence is justified, and whether the board truly earns its place in a crowded DIY server landscape, is what we’ll determine over the course of this review.

Zimaboard 2 Review – Quick Conclusion

The ZimaBoard 2 is a compact, x86-based single board server that strikes a balance between flexibility, efficiency, and affordability. It offers solid performance for its size, thanks to an Intel N150 processor, dual 2.5GbE ports, and a PCIe 3.0 x4 slot for meaningful expansion, making it suitable for tasks like media serving, light virtualization, and home automation. However, limitations such as non-upgradable 8GB RAM, slow onboard eMMC storage, and reliance on passive cooling require careful consideration for more demanding workloads. ZimaOS provides a user-friendly starting point with Docker support and basic file management, though advanced users may prefer to install alternative operating systems. Overall, the ZimaBoard 2 is a capable and well-engineered device for DIY server enthusiasts who understand its constraints and plan their use case accordingly

NOTE – You can visit the Zimaboard 2 Crowdfunding Page (live from 10:30AM ET 22nd April 2025) by clicking the banner below. The entry price for early backers is $169, but that will revert to $179 (and $239 for a scaled-up storage and memory version). I DO NOT receive any kind of affiliate commission or sponsorship for this review (and this review, like all reviews at NASCompares, was done without the brand in question’s interference or input). You can use the link HERE to see the campaign for yourself and/or click the banner below:

Zimaboard 2 Review – Design and Hardware

The physical build of the ZimaBoard 2 continues IceWhale’s trend of delivering thoughtfully designed hardware. The full aluminum enclosure gives the board a sturdy, premium feel, while also serving as its main cooling surface. Every port is clearly labeled, and the board layout is practical and accessible.

The PCIe slot includes a pre-cut section to accommodate longer cards, allowing for flexibility even in this small form factor. IceWhale also includes eco-friendly packaging, a detail that reflects both brand identity and attention to user experience. A cardboard insert allows users to hold the board upright alongside drives, useful for initial setup before a case is selected.

Optional accessories like a SATA adapter board with combined data/power connectors and third-party-compatible drive cages help complete the DIY experience. However, there are some practical limitations to consider: the soldered RAM means users must carefully plan for memory demands, and the internal storage, while functional, will not satisfy users looking for fast OS performance.

At the core of the ZimaBoard 2 is the Intel N150 processor, part of Intel’s Twin Lake architecture, offering four cores with a base clock that boosts up to 3.6GHz. This chip represents a significant step forward compared to the Celeron N3450 used in the original ZimaBoard, delivering better single-thread and multi-thread performance while maintaining a low 6W TDP.

Complementing the CPU is 8GB of LPDDR5x memory clocked at 4800MHz. While the use of fast memory is a welcome improvement, the limitation lies in its soldered nature—users cannot expand beyond this capacity.

This decision may be acceptable for light workloads such as running a Plex server, Docker containers, or Home Assistant, but it could become a bottleneck for users planning to run multiple VMs or resource-heavy services. The N150 CPU does support hardware virtualization and Intel AES-NI, which is essential for tasks like encrypted storage or virtual machine deployment.

In testing scenarios, the CPU delivered solid performance across typical tasks, and managed to keep up during multi-tasked environments with multiple services active. However, users with ambitions for more demanding applications will need to balance those expectations against the non-upgradable memory ceiling.

ZimaBoard 2 comes with 32GB of onboard eMMC storage, a choice that is both practical and limiting. This eMMC module is soldered to the board and is intended to house ZimaOS out of the box, giving users a ready-to-use system upon first boot. While this inclusion lowers the barrier to entry and simplifies setup for beginners, it presents performance limitations and a lack of flexibility. In testing, write speeds hovered around 35MB/s during mixed I/O operations, which is noticeably slow for tasks that involve frequent read/write cycles.

Moreover, should a user opt to install a different OS—such as TrueNAS SCALE, Proxmox, or Unraid—they would either overwrite the bundled ZimaOS or need to boot from an external USB or PCIe-based drive. Since the internal storage is neither M.2 nor socketed, it lacks the speed and modularity enthusiasts often seek in modern setups. As a result, users planning to use ZimaBoard 2 as a primary virtualization or storage server are better off supplementing it with faster storage via USB 3.1, SATA, or the PCIe slot for booting alternative OS environments. This caveat underscores a recurring theme with ZimaBoard 2: it’s well-positioned for entry-level use but requires external upgrades for more ambitious workflows.

One of the ZimaBoard 2’s most compelling features is its inclusion of two SATA 3.0 ports alongside a full PCIe 3.0 x4 slot. This greatly expands the device’s potential beyond typical SBCs, offering users a reliable way to build custom NAS setups, integrate high-speed NVMe storage, or even install networking and accelerator cards. During testing, a Synology combo card featuring two M.2 NVMe slots and a 10GbE Ethernet port was installed in the PCIe slot. The board successfully recognized all interfaces, demonstrating full PCIe compatibility and allowing throughput measurements to confirm the system could push high-bandwidth traffic.

With up to 4GB/s of bandwidth over PCIe, users can install expansion cards for fast storage, additional networking, or even compute offloading—although the small form factor means thermal and power considerations become important quickly. The SATA ports, while standard in speed, proved perfectly functional for connecting 2.5″ SSDs or traditional HDDs. IceWhale’s own accessories, like SATA power adapters and drive cages, help streamline this process, though third-party solutions work just as well.

For users aiming to transform this board into a flexible micro-server, this PCIe slot is a gateway to many possibilities and a key reason ZimaBoard 2 stands out in its category.

In terms of networking, the ZimaBoard 2 comes equipped with two 2.5GbE Ethernet ports, both powered by Intel chipsets—a choice that emphasizes reliability and driver compatibility across various operating systems. These ports are more than just a checkbox feature; they performed reliably under load and achieved full link saturation during file transfer tests and when used in conjunction with PCIe expansion.

In more advanced setups, users can configure bonding or load balancing to maximize throughput or redundancy. Additionally, there are two USB 3.1 ports for attaching external drives, peripherals, or USB-bootable OS images.

The inclusion of a Mini DisplayPort 1.2 allows for 4K video output at 60Hz, which is useful for users who want to use the board as a lightweight desktop or for initial OS installation and diagnostics—though it does require an adapter to convert to standard HDMI. Notably absent is built-in Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, which aligns with its target audience of wired-first home labs and embedded installations. Overall, ZimaBoard 2 offers a well-rounded set of connectivity options that exceed expectations for its size, with the dual 2.5GbE ports making it particularly attractive for networking-focused use cases like firewalls, proxies, or containerized gateways.

Thermal management on the ZimaBoard 2 is entirely passive, with the aluminum enclosure doubling as a heatsink to dissipate heat away from the CPU and other key components. This fanless approach results in completely silent operation, which is ideal for home or office environments where noise is a concern.

However, the trade-off is that the board’s temperature will steadily rise over time, especially in enclosed cases or cabinets with poor airflow. During idle operation, with minimal system load and attached drives in standby, temperatures hovered around 50°C after an hour, increasing slightly to 52–54°C over a 24-hour window.

Under heavier usage—including Plex playback, VM activity, active networking, and full PCIe slot utilization—the system remained thermally stable but showed significant heat buildup. Power consumption in these high-usage scenarios peaked at approximately 39–40W, which is quite efficient given the workload.

Still, users planning to run the board continuously under load are strongly encouraged to introduce active airflow or leave the system in a well-ventilated space. The all-metal build is a clever and minimalist solution, but it has practical limitations that users need to plan for—especially if operating in warmer environments or planning to enclose the unit in a tight chassis.

When put through real-world workloads, the ZimaBoard 2 delivered performance that largely aligned with its specs and design goals. File transfers over the onboard 2.5GbE interfaces reached full saturation in controlled conditions, proving the CPU and I/O subsystems are capable of pushing maximum throughput without significant bottlenecks. PCIe expansion further unlocked performance potential—especially with the Synology combo card, where simultaneous NVMe and 10GbE performance were tested. While NVMe read speeds reached up to 1.6GB/s, write speeds hovered around 500–700MB/s depending on traffic from the 10GbE port.

These variances are expected, given shared PCIe lanes and bandwidth contention, but overall results were respectable. Multimedia performance was also acceptable, with Plex running smoothly and able to stream and scrape metadata while supporting light VM usage concurrently.

In these scenarios, RAM utilization climbed past 50% and CPU usage approached 100%, but the board remained operational and responsive. It’s clear that ZimaBoard 2 is well-suited to low-to-moderate workloads, and can punch above its weight with strategic expansion. However, pushing it into more demanding territory—like simultaneous virtualization, AI inferencing, or high-speed file serving across multiple interfaces—will begin to test its limits.

The lack of active cooling makes thermal planning essential for any serious workload. But overall, the ZimaBoard 2 feels polished and reliable, with a design philosophy that caters well to its core audience of DIY server builders and edge compute experimenters.

Zimaboard 2 Review – Software

ZimaBoard 2 ships with ZimaOS, a custom-built operating system from IceWhale that is based on CasaOS—a lightweight, open-source platform designed for simplicity and ease of deployment. ZimaOS retains the core principles of CasaOS but adds refinements tailored to the Zima ecosystem, particularly features that emerged during development of the more powerful ZimaCube. The out-of-the-box experience is beginner-friendly, offering an intuitive web dashboard called “LaunchPad,” which centralizes access to installed applications, system controls, and file management.

ZimaOS is pre-installed on the board’s eMMC storage, enabling immediate setup without requiring users to flash a drive or download additional software. Despite the modest resources of the ZimaBoard 2, the OS performs responsively, even with several services running in parallel. The interface is clean, albeit minimalistic, focusing on usability over deep customization.

For users who are new to home servers or Docker deployments, the learning curve is surprisingly gentle. Though it lacks some of the granularity of more established platforms like OpenMediaVault or TrueNAS, it’s clear that IceWhale has designed ZimaOS to get users up and running quickly without sacrificing key functionality.

One of the more distinctive features of ZimaOS is its integrated App Store, which acts as a curated hub for Docker-based applications. Unlike traditional NAS interfaces that require command-line Docker commands or extensive Portainer configuration, ZimaOS simplifies deployment through one-click installation and automated environment setups.

Popular applications like Plex, Jellyfin, Stable Diffusion, and more are available by default, with the option to add third-party sources for broader container variety. Behind the scenes, the system leverages containerization frameworks to handle resource isolation and volume mappings, but much of this complexity is hidden from the end user.

Application setup is further eased by pre-configured defaults such as port assignments, directory structures, and even PUID/PGID settings, reducing friction for non-technical users. For those with more experience, ZimaOS still allows you to tweak or override these settings manually. Notably, ZimaOS also includes a basic virtualization interface that supports downloading and running lightweight VMs using prebuilt images.

While this feature is better suited to the higher-specced ZimaCube due to memory and cooling constraints, its presence on the ZimaBoard 2 is still a nice touch and shows that the OS is aiming to grow into a more comprehensive platform. Overall, the application and container ecosystem here punches above its weight, especially considering the resource constraints of the board itself.

In terms of storage and file sharing, ZimaOS delivers a capable if somewhat minimal feature set that prioritizes simplicity over enterprise-style depth. Users can create RAID groups—a new feature compared to earlier CasaOS iterations—manage individual drives, and set up file-level sharing using standard protocols like SMB.

The file manager, accessible through the main dashboard, allows for browsing, copying, and sharing content in a familiar web-based interface. Integration with IceWhale’s own client tool enables a peer-to-peer feature called “peerdrop,” which links multiple Zima-based systems or client devices (like phones and laptops) for rapid syncing and data exchange.

This is especially useful for users who want an easy method to upload media, backup devices, or move files between multiple systems on a local network. Remote access can be enabled through a simple relay-based mechanism, which generates shareable links for specific files or folders, complete with read/write controls. While more advanced access control, encryption, or user quotas are not present in this build, the essentials for home or small office use are here and function as expected.

Cloud integration is also available, allowing the addition of third-party storage such as Google Drive or Dropbox for backup or syncing purposes. Though ZimaOS doesn’t try to replace full-fledged NAS operating systems in terms of depth, it successfully delivers the features most users will need, and its lightweight design ensures responsiveness even on modest hardware like the ZimaBoard 2.

Zimaboard 2 Review – Conclusion & Verdict

The ZimaBoard 2 is a competent and thoughtfully assembled single-board server that builds meaningfully on IceWhale’s earlier efforts, especially the original ZimaBoard and the ZimaBlade. Its design clearly targets users who want more flexibility and performance than traditional ARM-based boards can offer, but who also value power efficiency, silence, and a small footprint. The use of an Intel N150 CPU, 8GB of LPDDR5x memory, dual 2.5GbE ports, and a PCIe 3.0 x4 slot makes it viable for a variety of home server roles—from basic NAS and smart home coordination to lightweight container hosting and local media streaming. Features like onboard SATA, USB 3.1, and a DisplayPort connection further add to its utility. However, there are hardware limitations that may affect long-term suitability for advanced deployments. The soldered RAM cannot be upgraded, and the internal eMMC storage, while useful for initial setup, is too slow for OS-level responsiveness in more demanding use cases. Passive cooling, while appreciated for silence, also imposes some thermal limitations depending on the deployment environment.

On the software side, ZimaOS offers a decent out-of-the-box experience that caters to users with minimal technical background. It handles core tasks like application deployment, file sharing, and system monitoring without requiring advanced configuration, and its Docker-based App Store simplifies access to popular tools. For more experienced users, the system supports third-party OS installation, which is likely how many will ultimately use the ZimaBoard 2. Still, as a bundled solution, ZimaOS has matured significantly and now presents itself as a lightweight, capable, and non-intrusive platform for those who prefer to get started immediately. In the broader context of DIY server hardware, ZimaBoard 2 occupies a middle ground: more powerful and modular than Raspberry Pi-class systems, yet more constrained than full x86 mini PCs or enthusiast-grade NAS hardware. For those who understand and accept these trade-offs, and are willing to plan around its limitations, the ZimaBoard 2 offers a reliable and flexible foundation for compact, energy-efficient computing at the edge.

PROs of the Zimaboard 2

CONs of the Zimaboard 2

x86 Architecture – Compatible with a wide range of operating systems including ZimaOS, Unraid, TrueNAS SCALE, and Proxmox. Dual 2.5GbE LAN Ports – Offers strong networking capabilities for multi-service workloads and gateway setups. PCIe 3.0 x4 Slot – Enables high-speed expansion for 10GbE NICs, NVMe storage, or combo cards. Fanless, Silent Operation – Completely passively cooled, ideal for home or quiet office environments. Compact and Durable Build – Small footprint with an all-metal chassis that doubles as a heatsink. ZimaOS Included – User-friendly OS with a Docker-based App Store and basic VM tools, ready out of the box. Flexible Storage Options – Dual SATA ports plus USB 3.1 support for connecting SSDs, HDDs, or external drives. Low Power Consumption – Efficient 6W CPU with ~10W idle and ~40W max under heavy load scenarios.

Non-Upgradable RAM – 8GB of soldered LPDDR5x limits long-term scalability for memory-intensive tasks. Slow/Small Default Internal Storage – 32GB eMMC is convenient but underperforms for OS-level responsiveness or high I/O workloads. Thermal Headroom is Limited – Passive cooling alone may not be sufficient in closed environments or under sustained load without added airflow. Not launching on Traditional Retail, but instead on Crowdfunding.

NOTE – You can visit the Zimaboard 2 Crowdfunding Page (live from 10:30AM ET 22nd April 2025) by clicking the banner below. The entry price for early backers is $169, but that will revert to $179 (and $239 for a scaled-up storage and memory version). I DO NOT receive any kind of affiliate commission or sponsorship for this review (and this review, like all reviews at NASCompares, was done without the brand in question’s interference or input). You can use the link HERE to see the campaign for yourself and/or click the banner below:

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Visiting a NAS Production Facility in Shenzhen, China – The CWWK Factory and Office Tour

As part of a broader effort to explore the landscape of Chinese tech manufacturers, I recently visited the facilities of CWWK (ChangWang) in Shenzhen, China. CWWK is best known in enthusiast circles for producing NAS motherboards and compact computing solutions, often associated with budget-friendly, DIY network storage builds. My visit aimed to independently assess the scope and structure of their operations. What made this particular tour notable was the access I was granted: no NDAs were signed, there were no editorial restrictions placed on what I could film or ask, and I was permitted to record freely inside their production and R&D spaces.

This is uncommon, particularly in the tech hardware space, where many brands—especially in Asia—are typically guarded about internal processes, even when media are invited. The open format allowed for a more thorough and independent evaluation, without needing to speculate based on secondhand reports or promotional material.

It’s important to contextualize how the visit came about. CWWK did not arrange or sponsor my trip to China in any way. I was in the region for a series of self-funded visits to multiple tech companies, looking to gain a clearer understanding of how various hardware brands operate behind the scenes. The idea was to go beyond spec sheets and product listings and see what real infrastructure, if any, stood behind companies whose products are often marketed under many different brand names on platforms like AliExpress, Amazon, and Alibaba.

I reached out to CWWK on short notice—roughly 10 to 14 days prior—and they agreed to the visit. The fact that they were able to accommodate the tour with minimal lead time is worth noting. It doesn’t rule out the possibility of some presentation enhancements being made in preparation, but it does suggest that the company was not reliant on elaborate staging to present a working production environment.

The first location I visited was a mixed-use building that included administrative offices, logistics personnel, and access to part of the factory floor. Externally, the building bore no clear CWWK branding, which initially raised questions about ownership or exclusivity. Inside, however, the picture was more cohesive: staff wore uniforms bearing CWWK logos, and product runs on the factory floor featured motherboards that matched CWWK’s catalog.

While I wasn’t given lease documentation or corporate records, the volume of CWWK-branded activity suggested the company either occupies a substantial portion of the facility or has secured long-term, semi-exclusive use of the space. Several floors were accessible, and the presence of both production and support teams indicated that this was more than a satellite or temporary operation. Even so, it’s likely this building is part of a larger industrial complex shared with other tenants, which is common practice in Shenzhen’s manufacturing zones.

One of the key questions I brought to the visit concerned product design and IP ownership—specifically, whether CWWK truly engineers its own hardware or rebrands ODM (original design manufacturer) platforms that are available generically to other companies. In a formal meeting with several members of their team, facilitated by a translator, I was told that all motherboard designs are created in-house.

The company emphasized that while many of their designs do appear under other brand names, including through known resellers or system integrators, the core engineering and schematics originate from their internal teams. Some of these designs, they explained, are distributed under license or through contract manufacturing relationships.

While I wasn’t shown the full design pipeline or documentation for each SKU, I was given access to product schematics, test rigs, and development areas. Based on what I observed, it’s reasonable to conclude that CWWK controls the design process and that their platforms are later distributed—often without clear attribution—by partner companies.

Technical support and warranty policies are often ambiguous when it comes to imported tech from overseas sellers, so I took the opportunity to ask about their post-sales procedures. According to CWWK staff, customers who purchase through major e-commerce channels like AliExpress and Alibaba are serviced directly by the company’s internal support team. This contradicts the assumption that resellers handle all inquiries. They described a standard one-year warranty policy, during which defective products are repaired where feasible rather than replaced outright.

While this approach may not satisfy buyers expecting instant replacements, it aligns with broader industry trends aimed at reducing e-waste and extending hardware lifespans. I observed a dedicated support office where staff were responding to issues, many of which involved firmware or BIOS concerns. The responses to my questions were generally clear but did follow a templated structure, which made it difficult to determine how adaptable their support might be in complex cases.

Moving onto the factory floor, I was able to observe multiple stages of the production workflow. The environment combined automated processes—such as SMT (surface mount technology) component placement and soldering—with manual checkpoints, where staff would verify board integrity, inspect connector alignment, and move products between stations. The factory space showed signs of active use: floor scuffing, desk wear, and tooling marks suggested long-term operation rather than short-term setup.

Workers were equipped with anti-static wrist straps, and safety protocols appeared to be in place, though a few inconsistencies were observed. For instance, not all staff were wearing the full lab coats or coverings that I was required to wear as a visitor. While that’s not uncommon in similar facilities, it’s worth noting in the context of manufacturing discipline. Overall, the workflow followed a logical structure, and there were observable quality checks along the line, including one instance where a misaligned port was flagged and redirected for correction.

Direct interaction with factory personnel was limited, mainly due to language barriers and the guided nature of the tour. I attempted brief conversations, but most staff were focused on their tasks and understandably uninterested in lengthy exchanges with a foreign visitor.

I did not observe any signs of distress or visible overwork, but equally, I did not have enough time or context to draw firm conclusions about working conditions. The facility walls displayed motivational signage, some of which featured quite stern phrasing around responsibility and company reputation.

These types of messages—such as “Your mistakes are our mistakes”—may reflect common workplace culture in the region rather than specific managerial attitudes. In contrast, a separate building used for research and marketing featured more aspirational language. These environmental details may offer some insight into the tone and structure of the company, although they should be interpreted cautiously.

A portion of the facility was allocated to repairs and technical diagnostics. I observed several staff members actively responding to customer-reported issues and working on returned products. Desks were equipped with diagnostic tools and some BIOS interfaces were visible on screens.

In a nearby room, technicians were repairing or reworking boards—examples included reseating CPUs, correcting poorly soldered connectors, and inspecting DIMM slots.

Although the scale of this area was not massive (around six to eight desks), it indicated an operational RMA process. I did not assess how quickly repairs are processed or whether every return is examined manually, but the team appeared to be addressing real customer issues, not simply staging activity for the tour. Staff in this area were dressed more casually than the production line workers, likely due to the nature of their tasks involving pre-owned or defective components.

The second facility, located in the Beta Industrial Park, was clearly identified as a CWWK property. Unlike the first building, this one included prominent company branding, product showcases, and internal signage referencing CWWK’s development roadmap.

The upper floors were used by the R&D and marketing teams. In a dedicated product room, I was shown nearly every motherboard they’ve developed, including legacy models and upcoming releases. Several new boards were in early development, featuring high-density SATA fan-outs via SFF-8654 and NVMe expandability.

Designs ranged from micro-ITX to mATX, with plans to scale modularly using add-on cards for storage and connectivity. I also viewed design schematics and 3D renderings used to plan component layout and case compatibility. CWWK is working on 10GbE-capable models using newer Intel and AMD platforms, including boards with ECC memory support and USB4 integration. While I was not permitted to document everything in detail, the scope and clarity of the development process suggested an active, technically capable engineering team.

After spending a full day across both facilities, my overall impression of CWWK was that of a mid-sized but competent hardware developer with a growing international presence. While the first building’s exact ownership remains somewhat ambiguous, the second building was clearly operated and branded by CWWK, housing their product, development, and marketing teams. More significantly, based on my observations and the responses given, it is clear that CWWK designs and owns the intellectual property behind their motherboards.

There were also strong indications that they serve as an upstream supplier for other brands—likely including companies like Topton, MrRoute, and similar resellers often seen on Chinese e-commerce platforms. Whether these partners act as distributors, integrators, or white-label resellers wasn’t explicitly stated, but the relationship appears to exist.

CWWK is not a shell company or brand-only operation; it is a functioning developer and manufacturer of computing hardware with its own IP, infrastructure, and personnel. For buyers, this doesn’t automatically guarantee performance or support satisfaction, but it does lend some credibility and traceability to a product category often dominated by opaque supply chains and unbranded goods.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

Updates on the Minisforum N5 and N5 Pro NAS

Minisforum is no stranger to shaking up established markets. Known primarily for its innovative and compact mini PCs, the brand has now turned its attention to network-attached storage (NAS) solutions. Earlier this year at CES 2025, Minisforum unveiled the N5 Pro NAS — a five-bay, AI-optimized device that instantly caught the attention of NAS enthusiasts. Now, after a visit to Minisforum’s headquarters and production facilities in Shenzhen, we have a deeper look into this bold new entry into the NAS market.

The N5 Pro is confirmed to be nearing launch, and joining it is a new, more affordable sibling: the Minisforum N5. These new devices aim to strike a compelling balance between powerful performance, modular flexibility, and enthusiast-grade features. Whether you’re building a high-performance TrueNAS server, exploring AI-assisted photo management, or just want to future-proof your home media solution, the N5 Series looks like it could be one of the most exciting NAS hardware releases of 2025. To top it off, Minisforum is also experimenting with their own NAS operating system, which could give users a turnkey alternative to the usual DIY route. Let’s break down what’s been confirmed, what’s new, and why it matters.

Minisforum N5 Pro – Fully Featured and AI-Ready

The N5 Pro NAS remains the flagship of Minisforum’s 2025 storage push, and nearly all the specs shown at CES have now been fully confirmed. It arrives equipped with AMD’s Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 CPU, a 12-core/24-thread processor built on the Zen 5 architecture, which includes an integrated AI engine.

The design emphasizes airflow and modularity, with a sliding motherboard tray, magnetic front bay cover, and an updated second-gen chassis with better heat dissipation. The system is designed for prosumers and power users, featuring ECC memory support (a rarity in this price segment) and up to 128GB of DDR5 RAM.

Storage-wise, it supports five hot-swappable SATA drives and three M.2 NVMe SSDs — more than enough for a complex ZFS setup or tiered storage architecture. Expansion capabilities are strong as well, with PCIe 4.0 x4, OCuLink for external GPUs or JBODs, and dual Ethernet (10GbE + 5GbE).

Minisforum is also considering offering a 64GB M.2 module preloaded with their custom OS, allowing users to keep all M.2 slots free for data.

The N5 Pro is designed as an open system: while it may ship with Minisforum’s OS on request, users can freely install TrueNAS, UnRAID, OpenMediaVault, or any OS of their choosing — with no impact on warranty.

Category	Specification
CPU	AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 (12C/24T, up to 5.2GHz, Zen 5, NPU AI Engine)
GPU	AMD Radeon 890M (Integrated)
RAM	Up to 128GB DDR5 ECC (2x SODIMM, 5600MHz)
SATA Storage	5 x 3.5″/2.5″ SATA (Hot-swappable, up to 22TB each)
M.2 Storage	1x 2230/2280 PCIe 4.0 x1, 1x 2280/22110 PCIe 4.0 x1, 1x 2280/22110 PCIe 4.0 x2
Expansion	1 x PCIe 4.0 x4, 1 x OCuLink 4i (PCIe 4.0 x4)
Networking	1 x 10GbE RJ45, 1 x 5GbE RJ45
I/O Ports	2 x USB4 (40Gbps), HDMI 2.0, USB 3.2 Gen 2, Audio out
Power Supply	280W PSU
Optional Add-on	64GB OS Module (TBC)

---

Minisforum N5 – A More Affordable, Scaled-Down Option

The new Minisforum N5 is being developed as a cost-effective alternative to the N5 Pro. It retains the same chassis and internal layout but swaps out the high-end CPU and ECC memory support in favor of more accessible hardware.

This device is still in the evaluation phase, with Minisforum considering two CPU options: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS or Ryzen 5 7640HS. Both offer 6 cores and 12 threads, with clock speeds up to 5GHz, and may allow better PCIe lane distribution than the Pro model. Despite the lower-tier specs, the N5 is far from underpowered.

It still supports up to 128GB of DDR5 (non-ECC), the full five SATA bays, three M.2 NVMe slots, OCuLink, and even dual USB4 ports. Where it diverges is networking: the current prototypes drop 10GbE support and may ship with either dual 5GbE ports or a combination of 5GbE and 2.5GbE. For many home users, this is still more than adequate, especially if the N5 launches at a competitive price point.

Like the Pro version, the N5 may include the optional 64GB OS module and support for Minisforum’s in-house NAS OS. Alternatively, users can bring their own OS without voiding support. This flexibility means the N5 could become an attractive entry point for first-time NAS builders or budget-conscious prosumers.

Category	Specification
CPU	AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS and/or Ryzen 5 7640HS (6C/12T, up to 5.0GHz)
GPU	AMD Radeon 760M (Integrated)
RAM	Up to 128GB DDR5 (2x SODIMM, 5600MHz, non-ECC)
SATA Storage	5 x 3.5″/2.5″ SATA (Hot-swappable, up to 22TB each)
M.2 Storage	1x 2230/2280 PCIe 4.0 x4, 1x 2280/22110 PCIe 4.0 x1, 1x 2280/22110 PCIe 4.0 x2
Expansion	1 x PCIe 4.0 x4, 1 x OCuLink 4i (PCIe 4.0 x4)
Networking	2x 5GbE (UPDATE – Confirmed)
I/O Ports	2 x USB4 (40Gbps), HDMI 2.0, USB 3.2 Gen 2, Audio out
Power Supply	280W PSU
Optional Add-on	64GB OS Module (TBC)

---

MinisCloud OS – Minisforum’s In-House NAS Software

One of the most intriguing developments is Minisforum’s potential entry into the NAS software space. Internally referred to as MinisCloud OS, this new platform is based on the Siyouyun OS framework (a Debian-based system used by several emerging NAS brands). Still in early development, the OS aims to provide a balance of accessibility and advanced features for home and small business users. Minisforum is evaluating whether to offer the OS pre-installed on the 64GB module, as a downloadable image (possibly SN-locked), or as an optional add-on at checkout. Importantly, this software will be optional, and using TrueNAS, UnRAID, or any third-party OS will not affect warranty or support.

Key Features of MinisCloud OS (In Development):

• ZFS storage support (snapshots, compression, deduplication)
• Multi-user management with 2FA/MFA

• AI-based photo recognition (faces, objects)
• Docker container and App Center
• Built-in file manager & download manager

• Support for SMB, WebDAV, FTP, DLNA
• Multimedia center for streaming content

A Promising Disruption to the NAS Market

Minisforum’s bold entry into the NAS arena is more than a rehash of mini PC hardware — it’s a fresh and flexible approach to modern storage needs. With the N5 Pro targeting power users and the N5 aiming for budget-friendly builders, both models offer advanced connectivity, modularity, and optional OS features rarely seen in compact NAS systems. If pricing lands right, the N5 Series could challenge established NAS vendors and appeal to the DIY home server crowd in a big way. We’ll continue tracking release dates, pricing, and software developments — stay tuned for our full hardware reviews and performance testing. For more, check out our upcoming Shenzhen factory tour and hands-on videos at NASCompares

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE

 

CWWK N355 DIY NAS Motherboard Review

The CWWK N355 DIY NAS motherboard is a Mini-ITX board designed for users looking to build a compact yet powerful NAS system with high storage capacity and expansion potential. Featuring the Intel Twin Lake N355 processor, dual 2.5GbE networking, six SATA ports, and two NVMe slots, it balances performance and affordability. With PCIe 3.0 expansion and a power-efficient CPU, it provides a solid foundation for home lab enthusiasts and small-scale NAS builders. However, it does come with some limitations, particularly in PCIe lane allocation and component placement. This review covers design, hardware, storage, performance tests, and overall value to determine whether it’s the right choice for your next DIY NAS project.

Available in two configurations, the N150 quad-core version ($174) and the N355 octa-core version ($288), this motherboard positions itself as a budget-friendly but capable alternative to more expensive NAS solutions. While the onboard features are generous for the price, the placement of components and some design choices might limit expandability for certain users. Let’s dive deeper.

Component	Details
Processor (SoC)	Intel Twin Lake N355 (8 cores, 8 threads, 3.9GHz max turbo)
Memory	1x SO-DIMM DDR5 4800 MHz (up to 48GB, Non-ECC)
Storage Slots	2x M.2 NVMe PCIe 3.0 x1 (2280)
SATA Support	6x SATA3.0 ports (ASM1166 controller)
Networking	2x 2.5GbE RJ45 (Intel i226V controllers)
USB Ports	1x USB 3.0, 3x USB 2.0, 1x USB 3.0 internal header, 1x USB 2.0 internal header
Video Output	1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DP 1.4 (4K@60Hz)
Expansion	1x PCIe 3.0 x4 slot
Power Supply	24-pin ATX + 4-pin CPU power connector
BIOS Features	Auto Power On, Wake-on-LAN (WoL), PXE Boot
Form Factor	Mini-ITX (17 x 17 cm)

Where to Buy? CWWK N355 MITX NVMe NAS ($184-295 AliExpress) – HERE CWWK x86 P6 NVMe NAS Box ($160 AliExpress) – HERE DIY N355 NAS Products ($254-349 Amazon) – HERE

CWWK N355 NAS Review – Quick Conclusion

The CWWK N355 DIY NAS motherboard provides a solid balance between affordability and performance, making it a strong option for NAS builders and home lab users. With six SATA ports and two NVMe slots, it offers flexible storage options, while dual 2.5GbE networking ensures decent network speeds. The PCIe 3.0 x4 slot allows for expansion, but lane allocation limitations could be a bottleneck for certain configurations. Power efficiency is excellent, and during testing, the N355 CPU handled multiple VMs, media streaming, and general NAS tasks well. However, thermal management and component placement could have been better, particularly around the PCIe and SATA ports.

Overall, the CWWK N355 is a capable Mini-ITX NAS motherboard, especially for those comfortable with DIY setups. The lack of ECC memory support, PCIe lane sharing, and close component placement are drawbacks, but for the price, it remains a versatile and well-featured board.

CWWK N355 NAS Review – Design

The CWWK N355 DIY NAS motherboard follows a compact Mini-ITX design, offering a good mix of functionality and space efficiency. Its 10-layer high-density PCB provides durability, while the standard ATX 24-pin power and 4-pin CPU power connectors make it easy to integrate into various NAS chassis. The purple PCB aesthetic is unique, setting it apart from many other DIY NAS motherboards. However, despite its compact build, some of the design choices create challenges when it comes to expandability.

One of the most noticeable issues is the placement of the PCIe 3.0 x4 slot in relation to the SATA ports. While the board allows for expansion cards like RAID controllers or 10GbE adapters, the proximity of the PCIe slot to the six SATA ports means that larger cards can obstruct some of the SATA connections.

This could force users to choose between additional network connectivity and full SATA drive support, which is an unfortunate trade-off. Ideally, an SFF-8087 or OCuLink alternative for SATA connectivity would have been a better approach, reducing port congestion.

The built-in cooling options are fairly basic, with a single CPU fan header and two system fan headers (only one supporting PWM). While the board is designed for low-power efficiency, adding high-performance storage or running multiple VMs may generate additional heat that requires better cooling.

The included stock CPU cooler is not ideal, as it sits too close to nearby components, making it harder to install without interfering with the SO-DIMM DDR5 memory slot. Users are advised to invest in a third-party low-profile cooler for better thermal management.

On the connectivity side, dual 2.5GbE network ports (Intel i226V) provide solid networking performance for most NAS use cases, with support for SMB Multichannel and link aggregation. The limited USB selection, however, could be a concern.

With only one USB 3.0 port and three USB 2.0 ports, users relying on external storage or bootable USB setups may find the available connections restrictive. That said, the internal USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 headers provide some additional flexibility for internal USB-based boot drives, but a few more rear-facing USB ports would have been welcome.

CWWK N355 NAS Review – Storage

Storage is a key strength of the CWWK N355 motherboard, with a combination of six SATA3 ports and two M.2 NVMe slots offering flexibility for different storage configurations. The ASM1166 SATA controller is responsible for managing the six SATA ports, providing stable performance for hard drives and SSDs. Users looking to build a NAS with high-capacity drives will appreciate the dedicated SATA expansion, which supports RAID configurations through software.

The two M.2 NVMe slots, while a welcome addition, are limited to PCIe 3.0 x1 speeds, meaning they can only reach maximum sequential throughput of around 780-800MB/s. This is a clear limitation compared to PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe slots found in higher-end boards. However, these slots are still useful for caching or fast-access storage, especially when paired with SATA drives for bulk data storage.

During testing, a RAID 0 setup with six 4TB HDDs achieved 650MB/s sustained throughput, showing that the ASM1166 controller handles multiple drives efficiently. Performance with SATA SSDs was better, with speeds saturating the SATA3 interface at 550-560MB/s per drive. Users expecting enterprise-level speeds may find this limiting, but for general NAS applications, it performs well.

Another consideration is PCIe lane allocation. Because the ASM1166 controller operates on a PCIe 3.0 x1 interface, total throughput is shared across all six SATA ports. This means that in heavy read/write operations across multiple drives, users might encounter bottlenecks. Those planning on maximizing SATA performance should ensure efficient data distribution across drives.

Ultimately, while the storage configuration is flexible and functional, the PCIe 3.0 x1 restrictions on both NVMe and SATA controllers present some limitations. For users needing high-speed NVMe storage, a motherboard with PCIe 3.0 x4 support per NVMe slot would be preferable, but for most NAS applications, the N355 provides good storage expandability at a reasonable price.

Interestingly, when I rand 100x 1GB File tests via terminal on each of the Gen 3×1 m.2 NVMe, the numbers were pretty good (factoring in the efficient class CPU and 1 lane of Gen 3 – so was never gonna exceed 800-900MB/s anyway).

Afterwards, I wanted to check if the PCIe slot was sharing lane space with the 2nd m.2 slot (as is the case on some of the N100/N305 NAS Moos before) and I am pleased to confirm that I was able to use terminal and 100x 1GB Read on both the 2nd M.2 NVMe slot AND another m.2 NVMe on a PCIe Card mounted on via the PCIe 3×4 slot.

So I am quite happy with the data/internal bandwidth in these tests with such a modest CPU. Let’s discuss this internal hardware and performance more.

CWWK N355 NAS Review – Tests & Performance

The Intel N355 CPU offers efficient performance for NAS-related tasks, including file sharing, virtualization, and media streaming. During testing, it handled multiple VMs running concurrently, with each assigned a virtual CPU and minimal RAM. Even under load, the CPU maintained stable performance without excessive heat generation, making it suitable for users who need a lightweight but capable processing unit for home lab applications.

Network performance was another highlight, with the dual 2.5GbE interfaces providing a combined throughput of up to 550MB/s in link aggregation mode. Real-world file transfers over SMB showed consistent multi-gigabit speeds, demonstrating the board’s ability to handle data-heavy operations effectively. However, users aiming for 10GbE connectivity will need to rely on the PCIe slot, which introduces some trade-offs in terms of expansion options.

In media applications, the N355 CPU managed simultaneous 1080p and 4K Plex streams, with CPU usage remaining under 60% during software transcoding. Native playback and direct-streaming performed significantly better, with no noticeable impact on system resources. While the board lacks dedicated hardware transcoding support, it remains a viable option for users relying on direct-play workflows.

Power efficiency remained a strong suit, with idle power consumption measuring around 9-10W with SSDs installed, increasing to 30-40W under load with multiple drives and VMs active. The low TDP ensures minimal heat output, but active cooling is still recommended for prolonged high workloads. Overall, performance results confirm that this board is well-optimized for NAS duties, though users with high-end processing needs may require a more powerful solution.

---

CWWK N355 NAS MITX Board Review – Verdict & Conclusion

The CWWK N355 DIY NAS motherboard is an excellent choice for those seeking an affordable and feature-rich Mini-ITX solution for NAS applications. Its combination of dual 2.5GbE networking, six SATA ports, and two NVMe slots offers a strong foundation for storage and high-speed connectivity. Performance-wise, the N355 CPU handles virtualization and media streaming well, maintaining a low power draw while running multiple tasks efficiently. However, the limited PCIe lane allocation can restrict certain use cases, particularly when adding high-performance storage or networking upgrades. Despite these constraints, this motherboard delivers solid performance for users prioritizing a cost-effective and power-efficient NAS setup.

That being said, users should carefully consider their expansion needs before purchasing, as PCIe slot placement and bandwidth limitations may impact future upgrades. Additionally, the lack of ECC memory support may be a concern for enterprise-level deployments, though most home users and small-scale NAS setups will not be significantly affected. Ultimately, the CWWK N355 stands out as a capable and versatile board, offering good performance, reasonable expandability, and excellent value for money.

PROs of the CWWK N355 NAS MoBo

CONs of the CWWK N355 NAS MoBo

Compact Mini-ITX design, ideal for NAS builds Dual 2.5GbE ports for enhanced network performance Six SATA ports for ample storage expandability Two NVMe slots for high-speed SSD caching or storage Energy-efficient Intel N355 CPU with low power draw Good virtualization support for lightweight VMs and containers Strong media streaming performance, including Plex compatibility Affordable price point compared to similar NAS motherboards

PCIe slot placement may block SATA ports with larger cards Limited PCIe lanes constrain high-speed expansion options No ECC memory support, which may be a concern for some user

Where to Buy? CWWK N355 MITX NVMe NAS ($184-295 AliExpress) – HERE CWWK x86 P6 NVMe NAS Box ($160 AliExpress) – HERE DIY N355 NAS Products ($254-349 Amazon) – HERE

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER
[contact-form-7]
Join Inner Circle

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   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.

WE LOVE COFFEE