DS420+ vs DS923+

Last updated on 09 Jan 2023 📧 Subscribe
Contents hide
1 Overall DS420+ vs DS923+ comparison based on hardware
2 Specs DS420+ vs DS923+ table
3 Functionality comparison DS420+ vs DS923+
4 Performance comparison DS420+ vs DS923+
5 Price and warranty comparison DS420+ vs DS923+

DS420+ vs DS923+

Overall DS420+ vs DS923+ comparison based on hardware

The Synology DS420+ and DS923+ are two advanced network attached storage (NAS) devices that offer an array of features for the modern user. These devices are designed to provide a centralized location for storing and organizing data, as well as serving as a platform for various applications such as file sharing, backup, and surveillance. In this article, we will delve into the details of these two models and compare their capabilities in order to determine which one would be the best fit for your needs.

Starting with the processors, we see that the DS420+ is equipped with an Intel Celeron J4025 CPU, a 64-bit processor with two cores running at a base frequency of 2.0 GHz and a burst frequency of 2.9 GHz. The DS923+, on the other hand, has an AMD Ryzen R1600 CPU, a 64-bit processor with two cores running at a base frequency of 2.6 GHz and a turbo frequency of 3.1 GHz. It is worth noting that the AMD processor is generally considered to be more powerful due to its higher base and turbo frequencies. However, the Intel processor in the DS420+ is still a capable choice that may be sufficient for most users’ needs.

 

 

Moving on to memory, we find that both models come with 2 or 4 GB of DDR4 memory. The DS420+ can be upgraded to a maximum of 6 GB, while the DS923+ can be upgraded to a maximum of 32 GB. One key difference between the two models is that the DS923+ has ECC (error-correcting code) memory, which helps to prevent data corruption by detecting and correcting errors in the data. This can be especially important in mission-critical environments where data integrity is of the utmost importance.

 

 

In terms of storage, both models have four drive bays that can accommodate 3.5″ and 2.5″ SATA HDDs and SSDs, as well as M.2 NVMe SSDs. The DS923+ can be expanded to hold up to nine drives with the use of an additional expansion unit, while the DS420+ has a maximum of four drive bays. Both models support a variety of file systems, including Btrfs, EXT4, and NTFS, among others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Turning to connectivity, we find that both models have two RJ-45 1GbE LAN ports with link aggregation and failover support, as well as two USB 3.2 Gen 1 ports and one eSATA port. The DS923+ also has a PCIe expansion slot, which can be used to add additional features such as a 10 GbE network card. This can be particularly useful for users who need to transfer large amounts of data at high speeds, such as video editors or scientists working with large data sets.

In terms of design, both models are similar in size and weight, with the DS923+ being slightly heavier at 2.24 kg. Both models have adjustable front LED indicators and scheduled power on/off capabilities, as well as wake on LAN/WAN support. This allows users to set the devices to turn on or off at specific times, which can be useful for conserving energy and reducing power costs.

 

DS923+ allows you to create a storage pool using NVMe drives, which are known for their fast data transfer speeds of up to 500MB/s. On the other hand, the DS420+ also allows for the use of NVMe drives, but only as a cache and not for creating a storage pool. The NVMe slot on the DS420+ has a speed of 2000MB/s, which is even faster than the DS923+. Both of these devices offer the option to utilize the high performance of NVMe drives, but with slightly different capabilities.

The DS923+ does not come with a graphics chip, so it is unable to use hardware transcoding. This means that it can only perform transcoding using software, which is limited to 1080p resolution. This can be a limitation if you plan on transcoding higher resolution videos. On the other hand, the DS420+ comes with a transcoding chip that allows for transcoding of both 1080p and 4k videos without affecting the overall performance of the CPU. However, it’s worth noting that even with the transcoding chip, Plex transcoding may still be limited to 1080p quality for most videos. Both devices offer the ability to transcode videos, but with different limitations and capabilities.

 

 

 

To summarize, the Synology DS420+ and DS923+ are two high-quality NAS devices that offer a range of features and capabilities. The DS923+ has a more powerful processor, ECC memory, and the ability to expand to hold up to nine drives with the use of an additional expansion unit. It also has a PCIe expansion slot, which can be used to add additional features such as a 10 GbE network card. On the other hand, the DS420+ is a solid choice for those who don’t need as much power and are looking for a more affordable option. It still offers a range of features, including a solid processor, expandable memory, and various connectivity options.

When choosing between the two models, it’s important to consider your specific needs and how you plan to use the device. For example, if you need a NAS device for a mission-critical environment, the ECC memory and additional expandability of the DS923+ may be worth the extra cost. On the other hand, if you are looking for a more affordable option for home or small business use, the DS420+ may be the better choice.

Overall, both the Synology DS420+ and DS923+ are excellent NAS devices that offer a range of features and capabilities. They can serve as a central hub for storing, organizing, and accessing data, as well as providing a platform for various applications. Whether you need a powerful device for a demanding work environment or a more affordable option for home or small business use, either of these models is sure to meet your needs.

Specs DS420+ vs DS923+ table

 

Model DS420+ DS923+
CPU
CPU Model Intel Celeron J4025 (benchmark 1700) AMD Ryzen R1600 (benchmark 3246)  47% Faster
CPU Quantity 1 1
CPU Architecture 64-bit 64-bit
CPU Frequency 2-core 2.0 (base) / 2.9 (burst) GHz (2 threads) 2-core 2.6 (base) / 3.1 (turbo) GHz (4 threads)
Processor Graphics 
 Intel® UHD Graphics 600 (variable 250-700 MHz) NONE
Memory
System Memory 2 GB DDR4 non-ECC 4 GB DDR4 ECC Auto Error Correcting
Memory Module Pre-installed 4 GB (4 GB x 1)
Total Memory Slots 1 2
Maximum Memory Capacity 6 GB (2 GB + 4 GB) 32 GB (16 GB x 2)
Storage
Drive Bays 4 4
Maximum Drive Bays with Expansion Unit 9 (add extra 5 drives via DX517)
M.2 Drive Slots 2 (NVMe) PCIe 2.0 1X – 500MB/s 2 (NVMe) capped at PCIe Gen 3 x1 (2GB/s) 4 times faster
Compatible Drive Type* (See all supported drives) 3.5″ SATA HDD
2.5″ SATA HDD
2.5″ SATA SSD
M.2 2280 NVMe SSD (CACHE ONLY)		 3.5″ SATA HDD
2.5″ SATA SSD
M.2 2280 NVMe SSD (CACHE OR STORAGE)
Hot Swappable Drive*
External Ports
RJ-45 1GbE LAN Port 2 (with Link Aggregation / Failover support)
RJ-45 1GbE LAN Port* 2 (with Link Aggregation / Failover support)
USB 3.2 Gen 1 Port* 2 2
eSATA Port 1
PCIe
PCIe Expansion 1 x Gen3 x2 network upgrade slot (10GBE)
File System
Internal Drives Btrfs
EXT4		 Btrfs
EXT4
External Drives Btrfs
EXT4
EXT3
FAT
NTFS
HFS+
exFAT		 Btrfs
EXT4
EXT3
FAT
NTFS
HFS+
exFAT
Appearance
Size (Height x Width x Depth) 166 mm x 199 mm x 223 mm 166 mm x 199 mm x 223 mm
Weight 2.18 kg 2.24 kg
Others
System Fan 92 mm x 92 mm x 2 pcs 92 mm x 92 mm x 2 pcs
Fan Speed Mode Full-Speed Mode
Cool Mode
Quiet Mode		 Full-Speed Mode
Cool Mode
Quiet Mode
Brightness Adjustable Front LED Indicators
Power Recovery
Noise Level* 19.8 dB(A) 22.9 dB(A)
Scheduled Power On / Off
Wake on LAN / WAN
Power Supply Unit / Adapter 90 W 100 W
AC Input Power Voltage 100V to 240V AC 100V to 240V AC
Power Frequency 50/60 Hz, Single Phase 50/60 Hz, Single Phase
Power Consumption 28.30 W (Access)
8.45 W (HDD Hibernation)		 35.51 W (Access)
11.52 W (HDD Hibernation)
British Thermal Unit 96.5 BTU/hr (Access)
28.81 BTU/hr (HDD Hibernation)		 121.09 BTU/hr (Access)
39.28 BTU/hr (HDD Hibernation)
Temperature
Operating Temperature 0°C to 40°C (32°F to 104°F) 0°C to 40°C (32°F to 104°F)
Storage Temperature -20°C to 60°C (-5°F to 140°F) -20°C to 60°C (-5°F to 140°F)
Relative Humidity 5% to 95% RH 5% to 95% RH
Certification FCC
CE
BSMI
EAC
CCC
KC
VCCI
RCM		 FCC
CE
BSMI
VCCI
RCM
UKCA
EAC
CCC
KC
Warranty 3-year hardware warranty, extendable to 5 years with Extended Warranty Plus 3-year hardware warranty, extendable to 5 years with Extended Warranty Plus
Environment RoHS Compliant RoHS Compliant
Packaging Content Main Unit X 1
Accessory Pack X 1
AC Power Adapter X 1
AC Power Cord X 1
RJ-45 LAN Cable X 2
Quick Installation Guide X 1		 Main Unit X 1
Accessory Pack X 1
AC Power Adapter X 1
AC Power Cord X 1
RJ-45 LAN Cable X 2
Quick Installation Guide X 1
Optional Accessories DDR4 non-ECC SODIMM: D4NESO-2666-4G
3.5″ SATA HDD: HAT5300
2.5″ SATA SSD: SAT5210
M.2 2280 NVMe SSD: SNV3410
VisualStation: VS360HD
Surveillance Device License Pack
DDR4 ECC SODIMM: D4ES02-4G/D4ES02-8G/D4ES01-16G
Expansion Units: DX517
3.5″ SATA HDD: HAT5300
2.5″ SATA SSD: SAT5210
M.2 2280 NVMe SSD: SNV3410
10GbE Network Upgrade Module: E10G22-T1-Mini
VisualStation: VS360HD
Surveillance Device License Pack
Maximum Concurrent SMB/AFP/FTP Connections 500 1,000
Maximum Concurrent SMB/AFP/FTP Connections (with RAM expansion) 1,500 2,000
Maximum Shared Folder Sync Tasks 8 16
Maximum Number of Concurrent Users on MAIL plus 50 100
Surveillance Station
Maximum IP cam (Licenses required) 25 (including 2 Free License) (see all supported IP cameras) 40 (including 2 Free License) (see all supported IP cameras)
Synology Office
Maximum Users 600 1,200
Virtual Machine Manager
Recommended Virtual Machine Instances 2 (Learn more) 4
Recommended Virtual DSM Number (Licenses required) 2 (including 1 Free License) 4 (including 1 Free License)

 

Functionality comparison DS420+ vs DS923+

The only difference regarding the software functionality is the transcoding chip absence on ds923+. This means no 4k video streaming outside the home with ds923+. This also includes the inability to access 4k CCTV footage over the internet.  Only DS420+ will allow remote media streaming above 1080p.

Both NAS support the first two tiers of the Synology features

Essential features

Audio Station

Synology Calendar

Synology Chat Server

Download Station

Hyper Backup iTunes Server

Synology Office

Surveillance Station

Synology Drive

Synology Photos

Video Station

Web Station

Plex Media Server

Maria DB 5

SHR

Additional features

Active Backup for Business

Active Backup for Google

Workspace

Active Backup for Microsoft 365

Synology Directory Server

Synology High Availability

Synology MaiiPlus

Migration Assistant

Presto File Server

Replication Service

Virtual Machine Manager

Docker

BRTFS /SHR

Link aggregation/ ballancing

Expansion / upgrades

 

 

Performance comparison DS420+ vs DS923+

Performance – IOPS, top speed, latency

 

SMB 10GbE – Sequential Throughput with M.2 NVMe SSD (64KB)

The SMB 10GbE test was conducted to measure the sequential throughput of an M.2 NVMe SSD with a block size of 64KB. The results showed that the DS923+ had a read speed of 1179.75MB/s and a write speed of 772.84MB/s. These speeds indicate that the DS923+ is capable of handling high-bandwidth tasks and can transfer large amounts of data quickly. Overall, the performance of the DS923+ in this test was impressive.

 

 

 

SMB 10GbE – Sequential Throughput with HDD (64KB) (DS923+ alone)

SMB 10GbE – Sequential Throughput with HDD (64KB)
Model DS923+
Read 592.65
Write 562.54

 

 

 

 

 

SMB 1GbE – Sequential Throughput with HDD (64KB) (DS923+ vs DS420+ )

The SMB 1GbE sequential throughput with HDD using a DS923+ showed a read speed of 225.85 and a write speed of 225.83. The SMB 1GbE sequential throughput with HDD using a DS420+ showed a slightly higher read speed of 225.95, but a slightly lower write speed of 225.69. Overall, both the DS923+ and DS420+ performed similarly in terms of SMB 1GbE sequential throughput with HDD, with the DS420+ having slightly better read speeds and the DS923+ having slightly better write speeds.

SMB 1GbE – Sequential Throughput with HDD (64KB)
Model DS923+ DS420+
Read 225.85 225.95
Write 225.83 225.69

 

 

 

 

1GbE Web Server – Nginx PHP Response Performance with HDD

The 1GbE Web Server test was conducted to measure the Nginx PHP response performance of a HDD. The results showed that the DS923+ had a response rate of 9,710.53 responses per second, while the DS420+ had a response rate of 6,690.60 responses per second. This means that the DS923+ was able to handle more requests per second and had faster response times compared to the DS420+. These results suggest that the DS923+ is better suited for web server applications that require quick response times and high levels of concurrent requests.

1GbE Web Server – Nginx PHP Response Performance with HDD
Model DS923+ DS420+
Responses per second 9,710.53 6,690.60

 

 

Price and warranty comparison DS420+ vs DS923+

Price difference + warranty + eol time

Both NAS come with 3 years warranty by default (extendable up to 5 years if purchased separately).

The price difference is £449 for DS420+ and £577 for DS923+ . This means that you pay extra 22% for a 50% faster CPU which allows two extra virtual machines and above 100 users. Additionally, you get 10GbE Slot and NVme volume.

Software updates (DSM and apps) will be issued 10 years after their release. So DS923+ has 3 years extra of software updates before it goes end of life in 2033.

 



 

 

 

 

 

locked content ko-fi subscribe

DISCUSS with others your opinion about this subject.
ASK questions to NAS community
SHARE more details what you have found on this subject
CONTRIBUTE with your own article or review. Click HERE
IMPROVE this niche ecosystem, let us know what to change/fix on this site
EARN KO-FI Share your knowledge with others and get paid for it! Click HERE

ASK YOUR QUESTIONS HERE!

126 thoughts on “DS420+ vs DS923+”

  9. Ryzen 9 7950X supports ECC RAM.
    Also, some consumer motherboards, like the ASRock X670E Taichi mention the support for ECC & non-ECC DIMMs.
    Will a combo like that work with ECC RAM 100%?
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  10. So I do unreal engine stuff and need like 2 8tb on m.2 pci5 12gb/s available and 48tb on hard drive that I can drag back and forth to work on whenever I change projects. Can you make that video????? thank you love your work.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  11. I’m a software developer. I have tens of thousands of lines of codes stored on my computers, some of the code being decades old. A flipped bit in any of those text files would likely manifest as a syntax error when I compiled the source code. In all those years and all those lines of code I have not once experiences such a syntax error from a flipped bit. I think the problem is overblown for the typical user. For a corporation that keeps a giant multi-terabyte database in memory for months on end maybe it could be an issue.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  15. Any system with long uptimes should be using ECC, almost without regard for the system size (An exception at the microcontroller level, but they use a different kind of memory cell anyway). The longer the uptime the more chance for errors to propagate through the calculations. All modern 64bit machines are large machines, 1GB of memory is substantial in regard to bit flip error rates. A corrupted pixel in a video is inconsequential but if the corrupted bit is within a CPU instruction, a starting constant in a long calculation, or part of some compressed data then the effect can have a chain reaction.
    eg. JPG images are very sensitive, due to the high level of compression one bit flip can destroy the color over half or more of the photograph. (While an uncompressed bitmap would only slightly scew one pixel, at the cost of 10 times the data so maybe a few scewed pixels.)

    Yes the 10% cost may appear huge at exascale but consider the impact of error uncertainty when a single computation set uses weeks of machine time and $100k just in electricity cost.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  19. Hello Brother. I understood that Synology approved for use only its SSD/NVMe model, but in practice can I use it on 1522+ brands like WD SN770 or Kingston FURY?
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  23. I don’t understand why you would not want to optimise your CPU performance with SMT. It’s basically just saying you’re happy to have your CPU sitting idle instead of working, for a slight improvement on task completion times.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  32. Hey guys – really good video. I really researched this topic a lot and decided against the 923+ or 723+ due to dual core and no embedded graphics. I will tell you though, the the 1500B Ryzen in the RS1221+ is a beast. It is by far the fastest NAS I have. My RS422+ has the Ryzen 1600 in it and I’m not super impressed. Most home users are not going to benefit from 10GBE yet because everything else in the house runs 1GBE or less. I’m sticking with the DS920+, DS720+, and RS1221+ for now and skipping the 23+ series. I think Synology really let us down on this one. Also, the hard drive selection on these from the QVL is getting stupid for something that crosses between home and business NAS for the home user who wants more power.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  33. I just purchased a 723+ and a pair of 12TB drives. Did I make a mistake? What would you purchase instead, staying in the Synology family, DSM is the requirement. I am not going to use Plex ever, It will be mostly used for personal cloud and Synology Photos for local management of my family’s photos’ and videos.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  36. Thanks! I’ve gone through a myriad of sites to gain an understanding of available NAS options, and your site is THE ONLY site I’ve found that will allow me to spec out the components of my NAS properly – in other words, the confidence to “know” that what I “think” I know about the service levels I’ll receive from my NAS, is actually what I “know” I’ll receive from that NAS. Nothing worse than knowing that what you thought you knew, you now know you didn’t really know. (unless you’re inventing a new light bulb or something). Marketing brochures only get you so far…
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  37. Just upgraded from a DS1812+ recently and ended up with DS920+ instead of the 923+ purely because Synology opted to use an iGP-less chip for the new generation. There are ryzen embedded chips with igp. So disappointed with Synology for cutting out the igp in their new prosumer models.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  38. @nascompares Now that DSM supports M2 for storage and cache is it possible to do both at the same time? E.g. put 2x4TB in the DS923 and use 4TB for cache and 4TB for data storage? Both in mirrored partitions
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  40. So does this mean instead of the 2.5 or 3.5 HDD drives bays for storage , we will be able to use NVME m.2 SSDs for faster storage speeds ? Or is it just casheing? So is this a new NAS system enclosure they will be releasing or is this a current model that will get a update ? I’m confused . Sorry I’m new to this,
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  41. Interesting, as I was just looking into getting a NAS after my external classic HDD is taking too long to get going. Anyhow, the first thought I had was, “Can I use m.2 drives to make a NAS even faster?” Turns out – NO. Next thought was, “How about using an adapter from m.2 to SATA?” That said, is that not an option? Thanks.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  44. I’ve been using an NVME storage pool on my DS918+ for nearly two years now — which needs some command line volume creation — which is absolutely brilliant for VMM and Docker use.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  48. I just read your article about this. Thanks for testing! Storage pools only availble if you use the overpriced Synology SSDs and even if you do so, no possibility to use them as boot drive for DSM. Overall the DS923+ is a joke and partial downgrade to the DS920+. Even the CPU seems to be slower despite consuming more power since it’s only a dual core while the J4125 is a quad. Synologys policy reminds me of Apple.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  50. that would be really awesome and also could justify use of 10Gbe on smaller (less bays) NASes,
    NVME SSD offer superior performance even on 1Gbe with tons of small files operations indeed 🙂
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  52. Too bad I own a 918+… However, I wish in the future we are offered super compact NAS system (the size of an old VCR cassette or even a cigarette pack) with only NVME slots (4 or 8) and one or two 10Gbe ETH ports. It’s not only about performance: I need a 100% silent NAS. And also an extremely low power comnsumption one. In a couple of year it’s possible SSD drivers are going to cost the same as mechanical ones, per TB. When 16TB NVME are out, I think mechanical disks are dead.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  53. Until now, I have no NAS, so please forgive this silly question, but wouldn‘ t it make sense to install DSM for better performance on a SSD?
    Could the M.2 NVMe storage on Synology an option to run DSM on it?
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  54. PCI-x Gen2 has 2Gbit per second bandwidth, and that is a million miles beyond any sniping rust speed, not to mention IOPS. So there is no reason for Synology not to enable this in DS920+, but greed (if you want it buy new hardware).
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  56. Honestly the PCI-E gen 2 argument is kind of moot; sure it won’t give you the full bandwidth of the SSD… but at the same time, it would still not be bottlenecked on things like VM’s or other docker containers, it’s still worthwhile having. I’m more interested as to whether you can use the solid state drive with multiple partitions; having a mix of storage and caching by using a relatively large drive.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  59. Ryzen R1600 , Why would they use this Chip ?

    Chip came out in Feb 2020, I can’t find Price for Ryzen R1600 , If someone can find the Chip Price I am sure it would be cheap by now.
    Please Post the Price,

    I bought a 1522+ Installed 10Gb Network card , I like the box doing Backups no Plex so Graphics not hurting me , HyperBackup across VPN to another Synology Box
    30+ Workstations Bare Metal , 40 Mailbox Backups, What helped I bought 2x 2TB NVME Gen 3 Crucial drive, in a Read Write Configuration. Number of Files is 15 Million + takes a awhile to count these files. I have it hooked up to Netgear 10,5,2.5.1 Switch. Server has 10GBNics Workstation 2.5Gbe Standard with Workstations now. Even Lowest Intel Nucs have 2.5GB Network cards.

    Even with this I don’ use 4GB Max Ram on This Box Comes with 8GB ECC Ram. Why use faster Chip , I just see Synology trying to save $$ on Hardware. Can this box Max out
    Hard drives not sure. When I backup my VMware Server for Incremental takes about 2.5 mins.

    People cry about this not being fast enough . I am happy with the 1522+ , I looks like you could have 2x 10GbE if Synology wants to.

    Is Qnap ahead in some ways yes they are in the Hardware side , Before Synology I used Qnap Worried about Security on Qnap.

    Ryzen R1600 Last Time Buy 2029 from AMD So this chips will be around for sometime in the future for Synology. I would say at least another 3 years , then 3 years later maybe for the low end Synology boxes that will come in the future .

    Comments Welcome

    Specs Below
    Ryzen Embedded R1600 is a mobile processor with 2 Cores, launched in February 2020. Embedded R1600 on a 14 nm production process TDP of 25 W , SoC Features
    Ethernet: 2x 10GbE
    USB: 2x USB 2.0, 4x USB 3.1 Gen2
    SATA: 2x SATA3
    Ethernet 2x 10GbE
    PCIe® Lanes 8L Gen3

    TDP 12–25W
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  63. Looking forward to being able to use Samsung 990 Pro Gen 4 SSD’s in my Synology web server!
    Just wish I could get a decent CPU in an affordable system to handle the web hosting I do with mine… Thanks for the great videos…
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  66. Great job covering some of the possible Synology created pitfalls. Anyway, this gives some (a little) purchase to Syno’s push for 10GbE over 2.5GbE in its offerings (I still think they should have had 2.5GbE for consumer models).
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  67. It seems that users of Synology NAS devices have also finally had their time ???? I’ve been using M.2 NVMe modules on QNAP NASes in RAID as very fast data volumes moreover for VM (+ GPU) for many years now, and as I watch, I’m glad I switched to QNAP. Still waiting a few years for Synology to introduce something is quite a hassle ????
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  68. from a tech standpoint there is no reason not to enable pci-e gen 2 bays for storage.
    pci-e gen 2 offers 2gb bandwith, (net a bit less of course) but that is still 10 times faster than sequential read/write of hdds.
    nvme-disks may offer a bit higher sequential read and write in theory but for one you cannot utilize that speed even with a 10gbit connection and even if you could, you will tax the ryzen r1600 quite a bit with a maxed out pci-e gen3 raid setup. the chip is much more capable than the celerons before when it comes to io, but it still is only 2core/4threads at fairly moderate clock speeds.

    in practice there is very little advantage for this kind of hardware between pci-e gen 2 and gen 3. what we really want are the iops and those are not hindered by pci-e gen2.

    load times will be greatly improved and with this announcement a tiny windows vm that does not require a lot of compute but profits of fast disk access becomes a real possibility combined with the up to 32gigs of ram. imagine a small business that runs e.g. the accounting database for shared access on a 923+ (i’d have loved to have seen the 4core 8 thread amd chip for that very reason, it would have made this from a good into a great soho setup).
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  69. Really exciting! Great video, as always! I think with PCIe gen 5 becoming mainstream (4GBps per lane!) it would be cool to see what that would mean for all-NVME NAS builds. Even a relatively modest 16 PCIe5 lane slot could theoretically support 16 drives at “ok” speed or 8 drives at excellent speed, and that’s not even counting M.2 slots built into the board!
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  70. Another strange decision from Synology. This will annoy far more than it impresses because those that want this but need more drive slots will be left out and those who have recently bought other high end systems will be screwed over.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  71. Personally, I’m ripe to upgrade my 5 year old NAS, but I’m waiting for a truly modernized NAS product. By this I mean, a NAS chassis not built to accommodate 3.5”drives at all. I want a new NAS that only uses smaller, next gen devices such as NVMe SSDs, the benefits being a much smaller box, and correspondingly lower power use, noise, and heat.

    However, NAS makers seem to move pretty slow. It could be awhile.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  74. Having created another storage pool on NVME through SSH on a DS1019+ in the last 3 days (51 hours uptime) it provides a massive boost to Docker and VM’s even on PCIE 2.0. I look forward to it being native in DSM 7.2 even if it is not directly supported on my model.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  76. The way they’ve ignored what other NAS makers were doing with NVMe is yet another example of Synology embracing technology to the point where it makes little sense. It may be that they’re noticing a downturn in sales that forces them to act.
    That they still use ESATA for external storage connections, won’t provide 2.5GbE as a standard LAN port and insist on Synology branded upgrades (when they don’t make drives, NVMe or RAM) makes me wonder if its domination of the NAS market is destined to end abruptly.
    That they might not support older NVMe capable machines with the storage upgrade smacks of a company that is overconfident in its ability to dictate to the customers what the future will be.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  77. Not being able to use SSDs for Storage Pool is one of the 2 reasons I’m avoiding Synology (the other being the HDD compatibility story). It’s nice to see they’re (seemingly) fixing this.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  80. *Note* – I have only JUST uploaded this video! Youtube takes a while to process in 720P and 1080p (15+ mins). So if you are only seeing this in low quality, come back in a bit and it should be at full HD quality soon! Thanks for watching!
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  82. I’m sorry but this videos is just misinformed. The integrated graphics are not used for transcoding. There are dedicated chips for this purpose. The memory is a huge boon and the base model wattage is 15 not 25. They could have stuck with Celeron but the amd isn’t bad and was specifically created for embedded unlike the celeron.
    I think it’s a smart move
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  83. Changed from. 1817+ to 1821+ resulted into 3.5gbit to nearly 7gbit performance of a single 10gbe copy from my pc

    Same Intel card, same hdds… Just the Nas changed.. Thanks ryzen…
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  84. *Intel Celeron J4125* : _Release Date Q4 2019,_ 4-Core CPU with Integrated Graphics (Synology 2020 NASes)
    *AMD R1600* : _Release Date Q2 2019,_ 2-Core CPU with no Integrated Graphics (Synology 2023 NASes) Progress ? ????????????
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  85. i’ve watched your other vidoes of 4k comparasions but these NAS are not able to play HIGH BITRATE 4k content. So if the intel CPU is powefull enough then what is creating the bottleneck? because streaming is mostly IO bound process (as contracy to cpu bound process which requite more processing power) so processorer can’t be bottleneck. what are everyone thought on this?
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  88. Hello guys. I’m really confused ???? I want to buy a NAS but what should I buy? Synology? Qnap? What processor? I want to use it as a media player. Most of my video’s are 4K or 4K HDR/Dolby vision. Please some advice? Thank you.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  89. Hmmmm …. AMD is famous for it iGPUs.
    ???????????Welllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll why in the heck didn’t Synology just put a AMD CPU with iGPU in their darn home/office NAS???????????? (no entiendo senor 😉
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  90. I ended up buying the 1522+ as I was hopeful it would have a graphics processor but come to find out that it’s not really needed and not a hill to die on to be honest. Better option is the 10GBE (that should have been included) as a future proof option and more ram. If embedded graphics is a must for plex then just buy a NUC or use a old computer for a Plex server. Most if not all formats play on newer devices so transcoding isn’t needed.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  91. I think even the seagull behind Ed was totally unimpressed by the argument for AMD. Of course if Synology’s aim is to have a separate range of commercial NAS and a separate range of consumer, media, NAS then fine.
    But they should announce their intentions as I guess half their customer base wants Plex and also 1gb Ethernet and has no use for 2.5 gb or non embedded graphics
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  92. Trying to “both sides” this is a bad look for your credibility as an independent reviewer. Call it like it is – this is a bad move from almost any angle, and the few advancements in the -23 series are things that could have easily been achieved with a newer CPU with integrated graphics. Synology cheaped out because they got a good bulk deal on low end Ryzen chips, and their product lineup is going to suffer for home users for the next few years because of it.

    It feels like you’re so committed to Synology because your YT channel relies on them being successful, so you don’t know how to react to bad decisions like this other than to put on a brave face.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  94. What is the NAS going to be used for? I think with the support of virtual machines and containers, your NAS can also double as your main home server. If that’s what you’re looking for, I’d say go QNAP.

    That’s what I did. I bought the QNAP TVS-H1288x. Yes, it is expensive, but it also serves many purposes in my home. I have a Plex server, along with a Windows 11 and Ubuntu VM running, and a few containers to handle various duties in my house. It has 4 2.5Gbe ports, 2 10 Gbe ports, and 2 Thunderbolt 3 ports for any imaginable network needs you might have. I can still add a GPU if I want and I’m currently only using a portion of the machine’s potential. So I won’t be needing to upgrade this H/W anytime soon.

    If you just want a NAS, then the CPUs offered by Synology are more than capable of handling the task. I prefer the Synology S/W over QNAP, but Synology needs to up their H/W game to include at least one 10Gbe port on every model they sell. Buying a NAS today with 1Gbe ports is a waste of money, and quite honestly link aggregation does not do the job. I have an old DS1512+ that is over a decade old and still running fine. None of these new 2023 Synology boxes you’ve been discussing offer much more than that old DS1512+ I already have as far as a NAS is concerned.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  97. Had moved to 1621+ last year, i never found losing the gpu cost me anything. My prefered way to watch video is through ds file and native player, both in home and on the go. I don’t had much those extreme high bit rate video file outside of a select few of collections. Those are wast of storage and money in my opinion.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  98. This whole apparent myth about threads = cores is BS. Even at slightly higher clock speeds, the R will underperform vs. the Celeron in a server environment especially, when running multiple processes 24/7 is key. If they had opted for a 4c/8t ofc no contest, but they didn’t. Incidentally that also makes the whole point about more RAM totally moot. Not to mention the lack of iGPU, which makes this plus generation utterly irrelevant to many of the usual customers in this segment. Oh, and that’s not even mentioning the outdated 1G NIC which is laughable at this point.
    Btw, Pentium branding is also gone as well as Celeron in case anyone wonders.

    I like the back and forth that you guys do though. It’s a great service to your viewers, and ultimately help them choose the right product, ofc on that note your advice should be to avoid this plus generation all together because it’s nothing but a cash grab on Synology’s part 😉
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  101. I’m very disappointed about there being no integrated graphics because I think most home users are going to want to play movies on it. Luckily I didn’t hold out on the 923. I gave us waiting and bought the 920 and I’m glad i did. Seems like Synology is definitely heading down the business market on the small units instead of home user.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  103. AMD makes power efficient APUs with integrated graphics – the Ryzen U series processors. The Ryzen 3 5400U has 4 cores, 8 threads, 3 GHz base clock, 4 GHz boost clock, and integrated graphics, all with 15W of power consumption. It seems like that APU would be a perfect fit for a NAS that is going to be used to decode and stream 4k video. It may increase the cost a bit, but consumers who want to stream 4k video from their NAS probably would be willing to pay it.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  104. I’ve been using Synology NAS for 11 years on a 1Gb/sec wired network and am a Plex user. I’ve experimented with various setups to maximize 4K video delivery to various output sizes, as in iPad/iPhone, PC/Mac, 4K smart TV and 1080p projector. Any time a 4K video had to be transcoded to another size, the Synology CPU was buried. By one user. I found out that the Apple TV 4K also performs transcoding of 4K input to match the display it’s connected to. So the server no longer needs to perform the transcoding (unless I’m on my iPhone/iPad, which requires transcoding, and it isn’t pretty)! This means that the Synology NAS needs less processor cores/speed (in most cases) when transmitting video media.

    I, too, am awaiting a new Synology box that provides 4 or 5 discs with at least one 2.5Gbs network connection and a processor/GPU configuration that supports fast video decoding. Without that option, I have no need to upgrade. Synology’s focus is not on multimedia so I look to the near future with doubt. Perhaps Intel will eventually create new devices with this market in mind.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  105. I wanted to upgrade my 713+ / DX513 to an 1821+.. ( 1823 ? 1824?..)
    If it came out with an R1600 I wouldn’t take it.

    I’m ready to put 100 euros more and have power
    they piss off synology not to offer a powerful NAS with graphics
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  106. Not that TDP means much at all, but the R1600 is 12-25w. The old J4125 was 10w. Current Celerons are 40-60w. The R1600 has a graphics version and all R1600 support 2 10Gbe. They could have at least given people that. The R1600 from a computing standpoint beats most celerons and people do want to run docker and maybe VMs, so gimping it with a weak CPU would have been a bad decision.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  107. So, I have a DS1821+ with an AMD CPU and all my media on it; Photos, video, and music. I run Plex on an old Dell Latitude laptop with a 2nd Gen i7. I stream my media to 2022 Apple TV’s. Not a single day buffering, local or remote. Works for me, or I’d say so.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  108. It depends on the use of the NAS – for me, the primary function of my current DS920+ is to run a Plex Server for remote devices not direct connected devices – in this case, having an IGPU is very important for me so I was naturally disappointed with the DS923+ using an AMD Ryzen which means I now have to look at QNAP or Asustor Lockstor 4 Gen2 with the N5105 CPU when it comes to upgrading – that or switch to using a Windows PC to run Plex which is not desirable due to power consumption
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  109. Synology is going in the wrong direction. They dropped the ball across the field with not only the cpu shift, but not investing in their hardware. Their software is getting stale as well. They clearly are about bottom line profit and not about product… I’m done with them. QNAP is putting money and thought into what they are doing, I’m with them.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  111. I am 100% with Eddie here. This is a pure business release of products cause they “had” to put out their xx2/3 models. Its obvious for anyone that knows this product category that these amd cpu`s is not suited for these nas`es. They are only in there to give themselves a bigger profit.

    They fail on both power consumption and media which is a big deal for this product category. Feel sad for those ending up buying these without knowing this big flaw.

    Not to talk down on amd cpu`s btw, They are great for many things.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  112. Both Intel or AMD is generally fine, lack of integrated graphics is on Synology. I would be happy with DS423+ if it had integrated graphics, but i doubt it will if it’s not Intel CPU, since 4xx+ usually has cheaper CPU and AMD with graphics would be more expensive.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  118. Please, Unraid vs TrueNAS. I’m fed up with Synology’s cheating out on parts and charging tons with crippled systems, with no GPU/ HW encoding, dual cores in 2023, No built in 10GBe. I was waiting for years to upgrade my DS916+ which is still rock solid, but I need to run VMs (I run 1 virtual DSM currently) and to have extra power for more dockers Plex, and I needed more than the 8GB RAM I have and a built in 10GBe.

    I’ve already bought a Lenovo mini PC from 2010 with 6 core 12 threads Intel CPU and upgraded it to 32GB DDR4 RAM and installed Proxmox for my VMs, but confused whether to install TrueNAS or Unraid for Plex and shared drives.

    Thanks for all the efforts mates. I’m an avid follower. Keep up the great work and salute to to seagulls, lol ????????
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  121. Honestly, Synology accessories are way to expensive. I bought a second hand Intel X520-DA2 with dual SPF+ ports and use it just fine for a fraction of the price Synology asks. Now I can run multi channel because the NIC is a dual port…2×10 Gbe ????
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  122. Can anyone help me with a question regarding gbe? (I’m a noob) Doesn’t 1gbe mean you can have max 1gb/s transfer speeds over ethernet? And most home routers have this to my understanding. With most people’s internet speeds only going into the low hundreds mb/s. So what’s the point in a Nas that has 2.5gbe ports unless your router can give you more than 1gb/s internet speed?
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  123. The nature of being proprietary really turns me away in general but I suspect they see it as cost savings…unless the price is right this should really just be standard and built in anyway in 2022 otherwise could be overall too expensive compared to competition. I am questioning performance also (cheap chipset?) and the heat sync is very small.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply

  126. Not weird that they were going to do this eventually. Lenovo, hpe, dell all havd dedicated ocp network cards. Cheaper to produce. But synology could have made them pcie gen 3×8. Like the earlier named brands make.
    REPLY ON YOUTUBE

    Reply