QNAP TS-563-8G 5-Bay AMD 64bit x86-based NAS, Quad Core 2.0GHz, 8GB RAM, 2 x 1GbE, 10G-ready

Terrible quality product (and the repair under RMA isn't any better). I purchased the production on March 14, 2016. On December 14, 2016 bays 4 and 5 both died simultaneously. I contacted QNap and they made me RMA the drives in bays 4 and 5 before they would RMA the device itself. I get it, two drives can die simultaneously, but not likely at the exactly same time (not even 1 second apart). There are also several other people that have had the exact same issues if you look through other reviews of this product.Due to Christmas, holidays and travel (so some of it was on me) I didn't end up getting the repaired device back to me until January 20.Then, just this morning (December 19 2017) bays 4 and 5 died again...exactly same issue. Less than 1 second apart both drive bays failed simultaneously. This is TWO failures of drives bays 4 and 5 in less than two years! Not what I want from a NAS device that is supposed to help keep my data safe.I have another RMA open with QNap, actually hoping they can somehow switch me to another model as the TS-563 has some serious issues with those two drive bays. If not, I very well may count my losses and switch to either another QNap model or move over to Synology. Either way, I highly discourage anyone from purchasing this model. If you do, make sure you do at least RAID 6 so that when drive bays 4 and 5 fail you don't loose you data.

This thing rocks! My main usage is for file and drive image backup, and is excelling at both. I also own the Synology DS412+ four bay from a couple years back  Synology DiskStation 4-Bay (Diskless) Network Attached Storage DS412+ (Black) , but like this unit much better. Three main reasons - 5 bays vs. four means you can get 3X drive size in total storage space and still be proof against up to two drive failures using RAID 6, the hardware based volume encryption means much greater security against certain kinds of physical attacks, and the much more open QNAP approach to software. Synology does a bit too much hand holding for my taste, while QNAP allows a broader range of apps and configuration options. And the speed of the QNAP is quite a bit better (I know, the Synology is two years old and underpowered processor wise vs. the QNAP, but speed is speed and I appreciate it).Configuration: 5x6TB Hitachi DeskStar NAS drives  HGST Deskstar NAS 3.5-Inch 6TB 7200RPM SATA III 128MB Cache Internal Hard Drive (0S03839)  in RAID 6, for 16+ TB of double drive failure redundant storage when fully formated. Single hardwired gigabit connection from NAS to a TP-LINK gigabit switch  TP-LINK TL-SG105 5-Port Gigabit Ethernet Desktop Switch, 10/100/1000 Mbps,IEEE 802.1p QoS, Up to 65% Power Saving . My laptop is also connected to this switch via cable to maximize speed of file transfer and backups, while other computers are coming in via WiFi (Router is  TP-LINK AC3200 Tri-Band Wireless Gigabit Wi-Fi Router (Archer C3200)  with the NAS hard wired to the Netgear Range Extender  Netgear AC1200 Wi-Fi Range Extender Dual Band Gigabit (EX6150-100NAS) .Very easy to set up the NAS itself. Upped the RAM to 16GB using  Crucial 16GB Kit (8GBx2) DDR3-1600 MT/s (PC3-12800) 204-Pin SODIMM Notebook Memory CT2KIT102464BF160B / CT2CP102464BF160B  just to be sure any operations that required RAM on the NAS would not be bottle-necked. Upgrading memory this way is much cheaper than buying the NAS with the extra RAM already installed. You do have to remove the outer case to access the RAM slots of course, but no big deal. Then mounted the drives on the trays and booted it up.Long time to create the volume (overnight plus) but to be expected for RAID 6 volume of this size. Enabled encryption on the full volume, which is why I bought this model, as this is unit has *hardware encryption* that means full disk encryption protection without a huge hit on throughput. Ran a couple of firmware updates, assigned a static IP to the NAS, and added the IP address to my Favorites in File Explorer so that I have direct access to the shared folders on the NAS vs. going though a browser (again, much faster, as you're using Windows networking vs. HTTP for the file transfers).Then started backing up, trying out the NetBack Replicator app for Windows, and using my usual means like drag and drop in Windows, Acronis for drive images, and SyncBack Pro. In drag and drop file transfers I'm getting 30 MBps +, thats 240 Mbps, WITH Replicator ALSO writing to the NAS! That is some very good speed indeed for data flowing over twisted pair! Looking forward to doing a bit of benchmarking. In terms of backup software, it will take a little while to really compare NetBack (few options, simple) to SyncBack (lots of options, but I often use them), we'll just have to see.Pros:+Very capable NAS for file backup and security, including hardware encryption of the storage volumes.+Simple physical and digital setup.+Very wide range of server apps including QNAP and third party.+Quite in operation, runs cool.+Frequent firmware updates as QNAP continues to evolve the QTS operating system.+Four USB3 ports + dual Gigabit connections means lots of add-on and network options.+All the flexibility and expand-ability I'll need for quite some time!Cons:-Drive trays do not lock-Haven't been able to get email notifications working yet to my gmail account.Overall, highly recommended for local/whole house data backup and file sharing.************10/4/2015 Update - Benchmarks, Backup Software************Mapped the QNAP as a Network drive under Window 7 Enterprise. Connection to QNAP is a follows: ThinkPad OneLink Pro Dock gigabit Ethernet to TP-Link gigabit switch to QNAP.-----------------------------------------------------------------------CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : [...]-----------------------------------------------------------------------* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 39.193 MB/s Sequential Write : 39.596 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 38.339 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 37.005 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 3.976 MB/s [ 970.8 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 3.220 MB/s [ 786.1 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 33.376 MB/s [ 8148.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 36.370 MB/s [ 8879.4 IOPS] Test : 1000 MB [Z: 20.0% (3325.9/16624.7 GB)] (x3) Date : 2015/10/04 1:25:33 OS : Windows 7 Enterprise Edition SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)Strong performance, as 39 MBps is 312 mbps, an appreciable portion of the total available bandwidth on gigabit ether.Regarding the NetBack software, found it unreliable and slow, so back to using combination of SyncBack Pro for file backups and Acronis for disk image backups. Working fine.************5/18/2016 Update - New Benchmarks, Faster backups!************Set up the QNAP in my home office after a move, with same hardware in the link from laptop to QNAP, i.e., ThinkPad Yoga 12>OneLink Pro Dock>TPLink Gigabit Switch>QNAP, but with a newer version of the laptop (faster processor, newer chipset). For some reason, am getting much faster writes! This is shown in the DiskMark results below, but also born out by the speed of my backups to the QNAP using SyncBack Pro. The write speeds are essentially saturating the gigabit ether. NICE! Not sure WHY this is the case, nor why writes would be faster than reads, but appreciate the results none the less. It seems most likely to me that QNAP updates to the QTS OS have improved things on the write side.Here are the new DiskMark results.-----------------------------------------------------------------------CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : [...]-----------------------------------------------------------------------* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 35.058 MB/s Sequential Write : 98.200 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 33.587 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 92.749 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 7.753 MB/s [ 1892.9 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 7.307 MB/s [ 1783.9 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 33.899 MB/s [ 8276.2 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 40.936 MB/s [ 9994.2 IOPS] Test : 1000 MB [Q: 18.3% (3045.0/16624.7 GB)] (x3) Date : 2016/05/18 4:42:30 OS : Windows 7 Enterprise Edition SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)

Really all you could want out of a BASIC NASUpgraded to 16gb RAM .. Running RAID 6 .. 4 x 8TB drives nowWorks great !pretty much saturates my 1 gigabit connectiongetting 104 mb/s reads and writes (125 mb/s is max for 1 gigabit)considering an ssd cache .. but even without getting good speed, so may opt for a 5th hdd later (instead)update 1/12/17 .. tried ssd cache and really found no speed improvement, so ditched and added a 5th HDD and also switched to RAID 6 .. which is more reliable .. Still working great getting 110 reads/writes nowupdate 10/18/17 .. still working great. Had some reboot issues but switched memory and where I had plugged in and seems to have stabilized for now. Great buy when stable.update 2/8/18 .. I off and on was having issues with this unit (dropping drives randomly)Tech support right away said I needed to send in for RMA (which I finally did)I had upgraded RAM, but luckily saved original otherwise they would not repair.They will only repair original setup. 2 weeks later got my unit back and now it's been stable (20 days no issues) Looks like they replaced a faulty mobo.Tech support for me was great, they have been very helpful.I still really like this unit for the price, but my Synology seemed like a better built product. Hopefully, after this repair it remains stable (so far so good)4/15/2019 - The Unit has now dropped drives again, and is out of Warranty so will not RMABasically 2 years of service with an RMA after 1 year, and dead after the second year.Will not buy QNAP again

I had a perfectly capable 4-bay NAS by another vendor, but was intrigued by the virtualization features offered by QNAP. After having it for over a month, I have to say THIS THING ROCKS! I ordered it with the minimum RAM (2GB) and expanded to 16GB, parceling out half to the VM and half to the NAS. I think it may be faster than the physical server I have, which is pretty fast itself. Start/pause/stop/snapshot all work well from the QNAP VM dashboard, but from the outside, there's nothing that would indicate this isn't a separate physical server.I also like the ability to do RAID 6, which is a nice configuration for a 5-bay NAS.One thing missing is the ability to schedule snapshots. As far as I can tell, these can only be done manually. You can schedule regular backups, but I'd much rather do a snapshot for a VM.

Excelente equipo, trabaja de forma silenciosa y la instalación es muy intuitiva al igual que la administración de grupos y usuarios.Lo recomiendo ampliamente en conjunto con los discos RED para NAS.Tengo cerca de 50 empleados trabajando sobre el servidor sin complicación alguna.