UniFi UNAS Pro 4 vs Pro vs Pro 8 NAS – WHICH ONE SHOULD YOU BUY?

Within UniFi, the UNAS line is positioned as a straightforward, storage focused, turnkey NAS platform that fits into the same single pane management style as the rest of the ecosystem, prioritizing file storage, sharing, snapshots, and backup workflows over broader server style expandability. In this 3 way comparison, the UNAS Pro (7 bay, Nov 2024), UNAS Pro 8 (8 bay, Nov 2025), and UNAS Pro 4 (4 bay, Feb 2026) look similar on the surface, but they target different deployment constraints and ceiling limits in rack depth, storage scalability, cache options, memory headroom, network redundancy, and power design. Two of the units (Pro 4 and Pro 8) add M.2 NVMe cache support and higher availability 10GbE networking than the original Pro, while the Pro 8 also pushes furthest on RAM capacity and physical redundancy expectations for a rack install.

	UNAS Pro (7 Bay, $499)	UNAS Pro 4 (4 Bay, $499)	UNAS Pro 8 (8 Bay, $799)

At the same time, the lineup is notable for pricing that stays lower than many established rackmount NAS competitors at comparable connectivity, with both the UNAS Pro and UNAS Pro 4 landing at $499, and the UNAS Pro 8 stepping up to $799 for more bays, more memory, and more network paths. The practical decision usually comes down to whether the priority is maximum bays at the lowest buy in, a tighter 1U footprint with newer cache and dual 10GbE links, or a higher ceiling platform with the strongest long term headroom in bays, RAM, and connectivity for users who expect growth rather than a fixed storage target.

IMPORTANT – It is worth highlighting that all three UNAS solutions include the same software and updates in the UniFi Drive and NAS OS services. Alongside the client tools (eg Identity Endpoint and File/Folder services remotely) and can be easily integrated into an existing Ubiquiti/UniFi network landscape. HOWEVER crucially, it is not ‘mandotory’ – you can run any of the UNAS Pro systems completely ‘offline’ (i.e LAN only) and there is no need to already have an existing UniFi network (existing 3rd party network landscapes work perfectly fine) and you also do not need to use/register any kind of UI.com/Ubiquiti account to setup the device.

UniFi UNAS Pro 4 vs Pro vs Pro 8 NAS – Design

At a chassis level, the lineup splits into 2U and 1U designs, and that difference shapes how each unit fits into smaller racks and shallow cabinets.

The UNAS Pro is the shortest depth of the 3, while the UNAS Pro 4 and UNAS Pro 8 extend further back, which matters once you account for cable bend radius and rear clearance.

For compact wall racks and shorter cabinets, the older UNAS Pro tends to be easier to accommodate purely on physical depth, even before you consider anything about performance or features.

UNAS PRO 8 480MM DEPTH	UNAS PRO 325MM DEPTH
UNAS PRO 4 400MM DEPTH	DON’T FORGET RAILS!!!

The UNAS Pro also stands apart on the front panel experience, because it includes a 1.3″ touchscreen that can surface live status information without needing to log into the UI. That is not present on the UNAS Pro 4 or UNAS Pro 8, which lean into a more conventional rack appliance faceplate focused on bay access and basic indicators. In day to day use, the screen is mainly a convenience feature for quick checks and basic local interaction, rather than something that changes how the system is deployed.

Another practical design difference is port placement philosophy. The UNAS Pro places its primary network connectivity on the front, while the UNAS Pro 4 and UNAS Pro 8 move connectivity to the rear, matching the typical layout most rackmount NAS systems follow. Front facing ports can reduce visible cabling in front of a rack and shorten patch runs in some UniFi heavy layouts, but rear mounted ports are generally easier to route cleanly in deeper cabinets with rear cable management.

Power implementation also affects the physical serviceability profile of each unit. The UNAS Pro 8 uses hot swappable power modules, which changes how you handle failure or planned maintenance compared with the fixed internal power approach used by the UNAS Pro and UNAS Pro 4.

All 3 use a steel enclosure and ship as purpose built rack devices rather than desktop conversions, but the UNAS Pro 8 is the one that most closely matches what many buyers expect from a higher end rack appliance in terms of field replacement for key physical components.

---

UniFi UNAS Pro vs Pro 4 vs Pro 8 NAS – Storage

The most obvious storage difference is the bay count and what that does to capacity planning. The UNAS Pro provides 7 front accessible 2.5 inch or 3.5 inch bays in a 2U chassis, the UNAS Pro 4 offers 4 bays in a 1U chassis, and the UNAS Pro 8 increases that to 8 bays in 2U. If you expect to grow into larger pools over time, the 7 bay and 8 bay models give more headroom before you are forced into drive replacements, a second NAS, or a new storage tier. With no official expansion chassis support referenced here, the physical bay count is effectively the ceiling for each system.

The UNAS Pro 4 and UNAS Pro 8 add 2 M.2 NVMe slots intended for SSD caching, while the UNAS Pro does not include NVMe slots. This changes how you can approach mixed workloads, because cache can reduce latency for repeated small file access and help smooth bursts of writes, depending on how the platform applies caching. It does not change the underlying reality that the main capacity tier is still the SATA bay set, but it gives the Pro 4 and Pro 8 a path to improve responsiveness for specific access patterns without committing to full SSD storage across all bays.

RAID flexibility also varies, not in the list of RAID levels available, but in how storage can be organized. All 3 units support RAID 5, RAID 6, and RAID 10, but the UNAS Pro 4 is listed as supporting a single RAID group, while the UNAS Pro and UNAS Pro 8 are listed with multiple RAID groups. In practice, the single group limitation matters if you prefer separating workloads or isolating different retention policies into distinct pools, rather than placing everything into 1 volume. On the larger models, multiple groups give more options for structuring storage around different priorities, such as performance versus redundancy, or shared storage versus dedicated project space.

Operational features tied to storage protection are also not identical across the range. Hot spare support is listed on the UNAS Pro and UNAS Pro 8, but not on the UNAS Pro 4, which affects how you plan for unattended recovery after a drive failure. All 3 support snapshots, file encryption, share links, Time Machine backup, and cloud and network backup targets, which makes baseline data protection and recovery workflows broadly consistent regardless of bay count.

The larger differentiation is therefore less about whether core protection features exist and more about how much flexibility you have in pool layout and drive management within the limits of each chassis.

All 3 systems are built around a quad core ARM Cortex A57 platform, but they are not configured identically. The UNAS Pro runs the Cortex A57 at 1.7 GHz, while the UNAS Pro 4 and UNAS Pro 8 are listed at 2.0 GHz. In day to day use, this tends to show up less as a dramatic jump in peak throughput and more as extra headroom when the system is handling several background jobs at once, such as indexing, snapshots, and multi user access, while still servicing file activity. The architecture choice is aligned with lower draw compared with typical x86 NAS hardware, but it also sets a ceiling on heavier compute workloads that some buyers associate with higher end NAS platforms.Memory is where the split is clearer. The UNAS Pro and UNAS Pro 4 ship with 8 GB, while the UNAS Pro 8 steps up to 16 GB. The practical impact is less about basic file sharing and more about how much concurrent activity the system can absorb before responsiveness drops, particularly when you add more users, larger file operations, more snapshot activity, and cache related behavior on models that support it. None of these systems are positioned as memory expandable platforms in the provided specifications, so the installed capacity is effectively the long term limit.

Power delivery and serviceability differ meaningfully between the range. The UNAS Pro and UNAS Pro 4 use internal AC to DC power supplies with an additional USP RPS DC input for redundancy, and their overall platform power limits are lower, matching their smaller scale.

The UNAS Pro 8 uses hot swappable power modules and is designed to support more demanding configurations, reflected in the higher maximum power consumption and the larger drive power budget. This does not automatically translate into higher idle power, but it does indicate how much overhead the chassis is designed to tolerate when fully populated and under sustained activity.

---

UniFi UNAS Pro 4 vs Pro vs Pro 8 NAS – Ports and Connections

Across the 3 systems, the shared theme is 10 GbE as the primary path for file access, but the implementation differs. The UNAS Pro provides a single 10G SFP+ port plus a 1 GbE RJ45 port, which typically ends up used either for management traffic or as a slower access fallback. The UNAS Pro 4 shifts to a dual 10G SFP+ layout, giving more flexibility for link aggregation or failover planning, even if the practical benefit depends on the storage configuration and client support. The UNAS Pro 8 goes further with 2x 10G SFP+ and adds a 10 GbE RJ45 port that supports multi speed negotiation, which makes it easier to drop into networks that are already built around copper 10 GbE.

Port placement is also part of the decision, because the UNAS Pro uses front mounted networking, while the UNAS Pro 4 and UNAS Pro 8 keep network connections on the rear. Front mounted ports can simplify short patch runs in racks that are set up around front facing switching, while rear mounted ports follow the more common rack NAS convention and can be cleaner in racks that route cabling at the back. None of the 3 is positioned as a platform for network expansion cards, so what you buy is the long term connectivity ceiling.

In day to day operation, the multi port models are mainly about resiliency and network design options rather than guaranteeing linear scaling for a single user. You can plan for redundancy across switches, use bonding where your environment supports it, or segment traffic patterns in a more controlled way.

The UNAS Pro 8 is also the only model here with 10 GbE available on both SFP+ and RJ45 in the base hardware, which reduces the need for media converters or additional transceiver planning if your network is not SFP+ centric.

---

UniFi UNAS Pro 4 vs Pro 8 vs Pro NAS – Price and Value

At list pricing, the UNAS Pro and UNAS Pro 4 sit at the same $499, but they are selling different priorities. The UNAS Pro concentrates its value in raw bay count and a shorter 2U chassis, trading away NVMe cache support and additional 10 GbE links to keep the platform simple. The UNAS Pro 4 is priced the same while reducing the HDD bay count and moving to a 1U chassis, but it adds 2x NVMe cache slots and a second 10G SFP+ port, positioning it more as a “small but fast access” rack NAS rather than a capacity first box.

The UNAS Pro 8 steps up to $799 and is priced like a higher tier option, but the spec sheet shows where that uplift is meant to land: more drive bays than either $499 model, NVMe cache capability like the Pro 4, more total 10 GbE ports, and a jump to 16 GB memory. It is also the only one of the 3 with a 10 GbE RJ45 port alongside SFP+, which can reduce friction in mixed copper and fiber environments. If the goal is to keep the same platform longer term, the Pro 8 is the only one here with both the capacity headroom and the memory ceiling to match it.

Using the simplified “price per bay” and “price per element” approach, the headline result is that the Pro 8 looks strongest once you count all the included hardware features rather than only the number of drive bays. The UNAS Pro has the lowest cost per bay because it is a 7 bay system at the same price as the 4 bay model, but the Pro 4 catches up when the NVMe slots and dual 10 GbE are treated as part of the value calculation. The Pro 8 is not the cheapest upfront, but it ends up close to the Pro 4 on cost per bay and is the lowest on cost per element because it stacks more of the “platform” features in one chassis.

---

UniFi UNAS Pro 8 vs Pro vs Pro 4 NAS – VERDICT

The UNAS Pro 4, UNAS Pro, and UNAS Pro 8 are close enough in naming to look like simple capacity steps, but they are positioned more like 3 different takes on the same UniFi Drive appliance idea. The UNAS Pro is the most capacity oriented at $499, giving 7 bays in a shorter depth 2U chassis with a built in 1.3 inch touchscreen and a straightforward port layout that suits some front of rack workflows. The UNAS Pro 4 shifts the emphasis away from bay count and toward “newer platform features” at the same $499 price, combining a 1U form factor with 2x 10G SFP+ and 2x NVMe cache slots, at the cost of a deeper chassis and fewer total drive bays. The UNAS Pro 8 is the most complete hardware package in the lineup, adding more bays, NVMe cache, more total 10 GbE connectivity including 10 GbE RJ45, and 16 GB memory, while also being the only one of the 3 to use hot swappable power modules. None of the 3 supports an official expansion shelf approach, so the bay count you buy on day 1 is effectively the long term ceiling unless you plan a separate NAS later.

Choosing between them mostly comes down to which ceiling matters first in your deployment: total bays, total network options, or overall platform headroom. If you want the most bays at $499 and the chassis depth is a priority, the UNAS Pro remains the obvious pick, with the tradeoffs being no NVMe cache path and a simpler network layout than the newer units. If you want the $499 option that aligns most with modern expectations for a small rack NAS, the UNAS Pro 4 has the cleanest argument, because dual 10G and NVMe cache can matter more than extra bays in smaller, faster working sets, even if those cache slots are not usable as standalone storage pools. If you are planning for longer retention cycles, heavier multi user access, or you simply want the most complete feature set in a single chassis, the UNAS Pro 8 is the one that most clearly justifies its higher price, particularly once memory, network flexibility, and the power module design are considered together. The main limitation across the lineup is that the ARM platform and fixed memory approach sets expectations about the long term performance ceiling, but within that constraint, the decision is primarily about how you want the hardware budget divided between capacity, connectivity, and overall platform resources.

---

 

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

 

Beelink ME Pro NAS Review

The Beelink ME Pro is a 2-bay NAS-style mini PC that aims to deliver a full home or small office storage setup in a much smaller chassis than most traditional 2-bay systems. It is sold in 2 main versions, based on the Intel N95 or Intel N150, and both ship with pre-attached LPDDR5 memory and a bundled NVMe SSD as the system drive. Storage expansion is a mix of 2 SATA bays for 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives, plus 3 internal M.2 NVMe slots (1 running at PCIe 3.0 x2 and 2 running at PCIe 3.0 x1), and networking includes 5GbE plus 2.5GbE alongside WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.4. This review is based on several weeks of use and a set of structured tests covering temperatures over extended uptime, noise in idle and active states, power draw across different drive and workload combinations, and storage and network performance over both HDD and NVMe, with additional notes on the system’s internal layout and the practical limitations that come from its compact design.

Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Quick Conclusion

The Beelink ME Pro is a very compact 2-bay NAS-style mini PC that combines 2 SATA bays with 3 M.2 NVMe slots and multi-gig connectivity, aiming to deliver a small footprint system without dropping features that are often reserved for larger enclosures. It is sold in N95 and N150 versions, both with pre-attached LPDDR5 memory (12GB or 16GB) and a bundled system SSD, and its internal layout uses 1 PCIe 3.0 x2 NVMe slot plus 2 PCIe 3.0 x1 slots, with 5GbE plus 2.5GbE Ethernet, WiFi 6, USB-C 10Gbps (with video output), HDMI 4K60, and a barrel-powered 120W PSU. In testing over extended uptime, external chassis temperatures stayed broadly in the mid-30C range with the rear around 38C, HDDs sat around 34C to 36C with modest 4TB drives installed, and NVMe temperatures rose sharply if the base thermal panel was removed, indicating the thermal pads and chassis contact are part of the cooling design and leaving no practical clearance for NVMe heatsinks. Noise in the tested setup remained in the mid-30 dBA range both at idle and under mixed access, power draw ranged from around 15W to 16W with no drives installed, 18W to 19W with only NVMe, about 22W to 23W with HDDs and NVMe idle, and peaked around 41W to 42W under a combined heavy workload. Performance was consistent with the hardware layout: HDD RAID1 throughput landed around 250MB/s to 267MB/s and will not saturate 5GbE, while NVMe could saturate the 5GbE link and internal testing showed about 1.5GB/s to 1.6GB/s reads and 1.1GB/s to 1.2GB/s writes on the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot, with the PCIe 3.0 x1 slots closer to roughly 830MB/s reads and 640MB/s to 670MB/s writes; media server use handled 4 simultaneous high bitrate 4K playback streams with CPU usage in the teens using Jellyfin. The main drawbacks are tied to the compact design choices: the RAM is not upgradeable, the chassis and storage fitting are very tight during installation, fan control outside BIOS was not straightforward in early testing, the NVMe slots are mixed speed by design, and the CPU options are closely spaced, meaning the upgrade decision is often about the bundled memory and SSD tier as much as the processor. Official messaging also says hot swapping is not supported, yet it worked during testing in a RAID1 scenario, suggesting a support-position limitation rather than a strict hardware block.

Where to Buy the Beelink ME Pro NAS: Beelink ME Pro (N95 + 12GB + 128GB) $369 – HERE Beelink ME Pro (N150 + 16GB + 512GB) $529 – HERE Beelink ME Pro (N150 + 16GB + 1TB) $559 – HERE

Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Design & Storage

The ME Pro is built around an all-metal unibody chassis that prioritizes footprint over easy internal spacing. In physical terms it sits noticeably smaller than many mainstream 2-bay enclosures, and in my comparisons it looked roughly 20% to 25% smaller next to typical 2-bay units from brands like Synology and TerraMaster. The front panel styling leans into a speaker-like look, and it has been compared to a Marshall speaker design, which is likely intentional given the mesh and badge layout. Functionally, that front area is not a speaker, and the design choice is mostly about appearance and airflow rather than adding any front-facing audio hardware.

From a storage perspective, the ME Pro is a hybrid layout rather than a traditional “2-bay only” NAS. It supports 2 SATA bays for 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives, and Beelink positions it as supporting up to 30TB per SATA bay, giving a stated 60TB HDD ceiling. Alongside that, it has 3 internal M.2 NVMe slots with a stated 4TB per slot limit, which Beelink frames as up to 12TB of SSD capacity. Taken together, that is the basis for the commonly quoted 72TB maximum figure, although most buyers will treat that as an upper boundary rather than a typical real-world configuration due to drive cost and heat considerations.

The SATA bays are accessed from the rear by removing a magnetic cooling mesh cover, then sliding out the drive bracket assembly. The trays are screw-mounted rather than tool-less, and the manual specifies different screw types depending on whether you are installing 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives. In practice, it is possible to physically place a drive in a tray without fully fastening it, but the design clearly expects proper screw mounting for stability and vibration control. The device also includes silicone plugs intended to reduce vibration and protect the drives, and the overall bay system is designed to sit very flush once reassembled.

One unusual design detail is that each HDD tray includes a thermal pad intended to draw heat away from the drive’s underside. That is not common on many 2-bay systems, and it suggests Beelink is trying to compensate for the compact enclosure by using direct contact points for heat transfer. The tradeoff is that this design pushes the product toward precision fitting, and it aligns with the wider theme of the ME Pro being tightly engineered rather than roomy.

If you typically choose NAS hardware where drive swaps are quick and frequent, this approach will feel more like a compact appliance that expects occasional changes, not a platform designed around constant drive rotation.

The compact chassis also affects how storage installation feels in the hands. Because clearances are tight, inserting the drive bracket and getting everything seated can feel less smooth than on larger 2-bay boxes, even though it looks clean once it is in place. This tightness is likely part of how Beelink is managing airflow paths and vibration control in such a small enclosure, but it still means you have less margin for error during installation. Overall, the storage design is best described as space-efficient and deliberate, but it asks for patience during assembly and it rewards users who install drives once and leave the configuration largely unchanged.

Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Internal Hardware

The ME Pro is sold in 2 CPU variants, based on Intel’s N95 or N150, both 4-core and 4-thread chips with integrated graphics. In practical NAS terms, these CPUs sit in the low power mini PC category rather than the heavier desktop class, so the platform is designed around efficiency and compact integration rather than raw compute headroom. In your testing and general use, that design target showed up as stable day-to-day responsiveness for typical NAS tasks, plus enough iGPU capability for common media server workloads when paired with the right software stack.

Memory is integrated rather than socketed. The configurations pair the N95 with 12GB LPDDR5 4800MHz and the N150 with 16GB LPDDR5 4800MHz, and there is no user-accessible SO-DIMM slot to expand it later. In the context of a small NAS, this matters less for basic file serving and backups, but it becomes more relevant if the device is expected to run multiple containers, heavier indexing, or virtual machines. Because the memory is fixed at purchase, the CPU choice is also effectively tied to your long-term memory ceiling.

Internally, the platform is constrained by limited PCIe resources, which affects how the storage and networking are wired. In the review you noted the CPU platform has 9 lanes available, and the device uses a split approach across its internal components rather than giving every subsystem the same bandwidth. The NVMe area reflects this most clearly, with 1 slot operating at PCIe 3.0 x2 while the other slots operate at PCIe 3.0 x1, which makes slot choice part of performance planning for any workload that leans heavily on NVMe. This lane budgeting also helps explain why the system lands at 5GbE plus 2.5GbE rather than a single 10GbE port, since 10GbE would typically add pressure to an already tight allocation.

Controller choices are mixed rather than uniform, and you called that out as unusual. The 5GbE port uses a Realtek RTL8126 controller and the 2.5GbE port uses an Intel i226-V controller, which is not a common pairing in the same chassis. On the storage side, the SATA side is handled by an ASMedia ASM2116 controller, and in your notes you referenced it operating on a PCIe 3.0 x1 link, which is still sufficient for 2 SATA bays in most real-world use. These choices are relevant for OS compatibility and driver maturity, particularly if the unit is being used with NAS focused platforms rather than the included Windows 11 installation.

Cooling is one of the main internal design decisions that enables the smaller enclosure. Instead of a traditional rear fan placed at the drive backplane, the system uses a CPU fan working with a vapor chamber arrangement, and airflow is routed so that it also passes over other internal heat sources rather than treating the CPU as a separate cooling zone. In your thermal testing, you observed that the front panel area ran warmer than the rest of the chassis due to the WiFi hardware placement, and you also saw a noticeable rise in NVMe temperatures when the base thermal panel was removed, which supports the idea that the chassis panels and pads are intended to be part of the heat management system. Power is delivered via a barrel connector using a 120W external PSU, which provides headroom for spin-up and load, but it also means this is not a USB-C powered design.

Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Ports and Connections

Up front, the ME Pro keeps things simple: a power button and a single front-mounted USB port for quick access. This suits the NAS-first intent, where most interaction is remote, but it also sets expectations for local use. If you plan to attach multiple peripherals directly to the unit, you are quickly pushed toward using a hub or relying on network-based management rather than treating it like a conventional mini PC with generous front I/O.

Most connectivity is placed at the rear and along the base section of the chassis, which also helps keep cables routed in one direction when the unit is placed on a desk or shelf. Wired networking is split across 2 Ethernet ports, a 5GbE port and a 2.5GbE port, and the unit also includes WiFi 6 plus Bluetooth 5.4. That mix allows both a standard single-cable setup and more flexible layouts such as separating traffic across the 2 wired links, or keeping WiFi available for temporary placement, troubleshooting, or scenarios where pulling Ethernet is not straightforward.

For general external connectivity, the ME Pro includes a USB-C port rated at 10Gbps for data and it supports video output, but it is not used for power input. Power is delivered through a barrel connector and the unit ships with a 120W external PSU, which provides comfortable headroom and removes any questions around USB-C PD negotiation. Alongside USB-C, it includes 1 USB 3.2 port rated at 10Gbps and 2 USB 2.0 ports at 480Mbps, which covers basic keyboard, mouse, UPS signalling, or low bandwidth accessories, but it is still a small selection compared with many mini PCs.

For local display and basic audio, there is 1 HDMI output rated up to 4K 60Hz and a 3.5mm audio jack. The manual also calls out a reset hole and a CLR CMOS function, which is useful context for users who intend to experiment with different operating systems, boot media, or BIOS settings, since recovery options are clearly exposed rather than being hidden inside the chassis. Overall, the port selection feels intentionally weighted toward networking and core connectivity, with enough display and USB support for setup and troubleshooting, but not a layout aimed at heavy local peripheral use.

Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Noise, Heat, Power and Speed Tests

Testing was done over several weeks of general use and targeted measurements, with a focus on temperatures, noise, power draw, and storage and network throughput. The typical configuration used for the core measurements included 2 SATA HDDs and 3 installed NVMe drives, with the system left running for extended periods and accessed regularly throughout the day. In addition to network file transfers, I also checked internal storage performance directly over SSH to separate storage limits from network limits.

On thermals, external chassis temperatures after a 24-hour period of operation with regular hourly access sat around 34C to 35C across most sides. The base area was a little warmer at roughly 34C to 38C, and the rear section around the motherboard and vapor chamber area was around 38C. The installed HDDs sat around 34C to 36C in that same period, using 4TB IronWolf drives, so not high power enterprise class media. The front panel area peaked higher than the rest of the enclosure, which aligned with the internal placement of the WiFi hardware near the front of the chassis.

The NVMe area showed the clearest example of how much the chassis panels and pads matter. With the base thermal panel in place, the panel itself sat around 36C over the same extended uptime. When that panel was removed, temperatures on the NVMe drives rose noticeably, with the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot drive reaching around 45C to 46C and the PCIe 3.0 x1 slot drives sitting around 38C to 41C. The difference suggested that the base panel and thermal pad contact are doing meaningful work as part of the heat path, and it also reinforces that there is no practical clearance for NVMe heatsinks in this chassis.

Noise levels were measured in a modest drive configuration, and they stayed in the mid-30 dBA range in the test environment. With the HDDs idle and the system otherwise sitting in standby, noise came in around 36 dBA to 37 dBA. With both HDDs being accessed simultaneously and NVMe activity occurring, it sat around 35 dBA to 38 dBA. The system uses a compact fan approach tied to the CPU cooling path, and one limitation I ran into is that I did not find a straightforward way to control the fan outside the BIOS during early testing, including attempts via SSH, which reduces fine tuning options for users who want tighter acoustics control.

Power consumption was tested in several stages to isolate the impact of installed storage. With no HDDs or NVMe installed and the system powered on, it drew around 15W to 16W. With 3 NVMe installed and no HDDs, it rose to around 18W to 19W. With 2 HDDs and 3 NVMe installed but all media idle, it sat around 22W to 23W.

Under a heavy combined workload with HDD and NVMe activity plus the CPU at full utilization, power draw reached around 41W to 42W, which reflects a worst case state rather than typical idle or light service operation.

For throughput, 2 HDDs in a RAID1 style setup were able to deliver around 250 MB/s to 267 MB/s, which is consistent with what you would expect from 2-bay HDD performance and means the HDD side will not saturate a 5GbE link.

NVMe storage over the 5GbE connection was able to reach full saturation of the network link in testing, so the network became the limiting factor rather than the SSD. Internal NVMe testing over SSH showed the expected split between slots, with the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot delivering roughly 1.5 GB/s to 1.6 GB/s reads and 1.1 GB/s to 1.2 GB/s writes, while the PCIe 3.0 x1 slots delivered around 830 MB/s to 835 MB/s reads and roughly 640 MB/s to 670 MB/s writes with more variability.

On media server use, 4 simultaneous high bitrate 4K playback streams ran with CPU usage in the teens, using Jellyfin. One extra operational note from testing is that while official messaging indicates hot swapping is not supported, I was able to remove and replace a drive in a RAID1 environment without powering down and continue the rebuild process, which suggests the limitation may be a support stance rather than an absolute hardware block.

Beelink ME Pro NAS Review – Conclusion & Verdict

The ME Pro’s main practical strengths are the space-efficient chassis, the combination of 2 SATA bays with 3 internal NVMe slots, and a connectivity set that includes 5GbE plus 2.5GbE and WiFi 6. In measured testing it delivered controlled external temperatures under typical always-on use, mid-30 dBA noise levels in the tested configuration, and power draw that stayed in the low-20W range at idle with drives installed, rising into the low-40W range under a full combined workload. Storage performance matched the internal design limits: HDD throughput was solid but not enough to saturate 5GbE, while NVMe performance split clearly between the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot and the PCIe 3.0 x1 slots, with the faster NVMe slot capable of saturating the 5GbE link in network transfers.

The main limitations are tied to the same compact, integrated approach that makes it unusual. Memory is fixed at purchase with no SO-DIMM upgrade path, NVMe cooling relies on chassis contact and leaves no clearance for heatsinks, and the lane allocation results in mixed NVMe slot speeds rather than uniform bandwidth across all 3 slots. The launch CPU options also remain close enough that the decision is often as much about bundled memory and SSD tier as it is about a clear performance tier shift. For buyers who want a small, always-on NAS with mixed SATA and NVMe storage, multi-gig networking, and reasonable thermals, noise, and power characteristics, the ME Pro aligns with that goal, but it is less suitable for users who expect frequent hardware changes, want expandability in RAM, or prefer a more conventional 10GbE-first network design.

PROs of the Beelink ME Pro NAS

CONs of the Beelink ME Pro NAS

Very compact footprint for a 2-bay NAS class system (166 x 121 x 112mm, metal chassis) 2x SATA bays (2.5-inch or 3.5-inch) plus 3x M.2 NVMe slots in the same enclosure Multi-gig wired networking: 5GbE + 2.5GbE, plus WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.4 Strong idle efficiency in testing with drives installed and idle (about 22W to 23W) Noise stayed in the mid-30 dBA range in the tested HDD and NVMe configuration NVMe performance is sufficient to saturate the 5GbE link, with the PCIe 3.0 x2 slot clearly faster than the x1 slots Chassis thermal design appears effective under typical always-on use, with external temps broadly in the mid-30C range Practical service access features: magnetic rear cover, base access for M.2, stored tool in the base, reset and CLR CMOS available

RAM is fixed (no SO-DIMM), so memory cannot be upgraded after purchase Very tight internal tolerances make drive and bracket insertion less forgiving during installation and changes Mixed NVMe slot speeds (1x PCIe 3.0 x2 and 2x PCIe 3.0 x1) and no 10GbE option

 

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