• preasket@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    Not much point in using SSDs in a NAS if it’s there just for holding your files

    • Chobbes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Lower power usage and smaller and maaaaaaaaybe better reliability. I’d probably do it if it was cost competitive… but it’s not yet.

      • mihies@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not sure whether adding more power consuming devices results in less power consumption, though. I guess it depends on drives power usage and files use.

      • Eccitaze@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Smaller doesn’t matter if they’re going in a 3.5" tray. There are some models that only come with 2.5" trays, but go figure, the only 2.5" model that isn’t a 5-figure all-flash enterprise-scale model is one of our least popular models

    • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      If the NAS supports tiered storage, you benefit from high I/O performance for things like video editing.

      My home storage is a NAS connected over 10GbE, I never bothered trying to play games off of it, but I’ll bet they’d run great. Read & write over the network at 10 gigabit is faster on a machine with (separate) RAID arrays of SSDs and HDDs than internal SATA3 connectivity which is kind of bonkers for a home user. Plus that has virtual machines and cloud backups running on the NAS side.