Skip to content

A first NAS enclosure, chosen on bays before terabytes

The enclosure is a five-year decision and the drives inside it are not, which is why bay count deserves more thought than capacity. The second decision is the software, because that is what you will actually use every week — and the third is being clear about what redundancy in this box is for.

Choose the bay count first, because it is the part you cannot change

Capacity is revisitable at any moment by buying a bigger drive. Bay count is not: adding a bay means a new enclosure and a migration, and migrations are the job nobody volunteers for.

One bay is a place to put files, and every question about protection lives outside the box entirely.

Two bays can hold two independent volumes or one mirrored volume, which gives the capacity of one drive and keeps the volume readable when the other fails.

Four bays and up is where distributed redundancy starts to make sense, because giving up one drive’s worth of capacity costs proportionally less the more drives there are. It is also where the unit becomes audible.

Where the enclosure allows it, buy it empty and fill it over time. A spare bay is an upgrade path; a unit full on arrival is a migration with a date on it.

Be exact about what the redundancy is for

This is the point on which the site does not equivocate.

A redundancy level buys continuity: the volume survives the failure of a drive, and you replace that drive without stopping. That is worth having and it is what the feature was designed to deliver.

It does nothing about the events that reach every drive at once — a file deleted, a folder overwritten by an application or a synchronization running the wrong way, software encrypting what your account can reach, a power event, a theft, a fire. Nor does it help if the enclosure itself fails in a way that makes the array unreadable outside that machine.

So the enclosure and the copies are two purchases, not one. What the enclosure can contribute to the second is snapshots or file versioning, which keep previous states of a file and are the feature that recovers something overwritten. Check whether the enclosure offers them, how far back they reach and how much space they need.

The software is what you will live in

Two enclosures with identical hardware are different products if their software differs, and for a first NAS the software is the larger part of the experience.

Look at how shares and users are created, because a household with several people needs more than one account and a sensible way to decide who sees what. Look at the mobile and desktop applications, particularly whether photographs from phones can be brought in automatically, since that is the job that turns an enclosure from a novelty into infrastructure.

Look at snapshots, at what the maker publishes about update policy, and at whether the unit can copy itself to somewhere else on a schedule — an external drive, another enclosure, a remote service — because that is the mechanism your copy routine will use.

And look at what happens if the enclosure dies: whether the drives can be read in another unit of the same family, and what the maker documents about that.

Ports, processors and the ceiling on a transfer

The network port is the ceiling for everything the enclosure serves. A gigabit port is the common case and serves a household comfortably; a faster port matters when a specific machine at the other end can also use it, and when the drives inside can sustain it.

The processor and memory decide what the unit can do beyond serving files: several people at once, media handled on the fly, containers or applications. A first NAS used as shared storage asks very little of them; a first NAS that becomes a household’s media system asks a great deal.

Expansion is worth a glance — a socket for a solid-state card to hold the small, busy part of the workload, or an external port for a copy target.

Noise and heat decide where it can stand

A multi-bay enclosure with mechanical drives makes noise: a fan, and the drives themselves seeking. In a cupboard or a utility room this is irrelevant. In a bedroom or a study it is the specification you will regret ignoring.

Read what the maker publishes about the fan, and about the clearance the unit needs around it. Then choose a position that satisfies the clearance rather than one that satisfies the furniture.

Capacity, last, and in the maker’s units

Once the bays are decided, the drive size is the easy part. Buy for the collection plus growth, leave real headroom rather than planning to run drives near full, and remember that a machine displaying in units of 1024 will show a different figure from the one printed on the drive. Both describe the same hardware; compare drives in a single unit and plan against the maker’s own number.

Which situation is yours?

The need is backup
Two bays are enough, and the rest is comfort.
The box will also serve media
The stated processor becomes a criterion in its own right.
The box will live in a bedroom
Stated cooling decides ahead of any other line.
The data volume grows fast
The published bay count counts for more than the first drive’s capacity.

Picking by what you run

The household backup

Two bays, matching drives, and a copy that goes elsewhere now and then.

Twenty years of photographs

The volume grows slowly and never comes back down. The bay count decides what happens next.

Sharing between machines

Here the stated link speed becomes the real ceiling, not the drives.

The specifications that decide

The published bay count
It fixes the box’s future. Drives get changed; the number of bays does not.
The stated processor
It decides what the box can do beyond storing.
The stated link speed
It caps exchanges with the machines, whatever the drives' speed.

Which figure for which household

The needWhat decidesWhat can change later
StoringThe bay countThe drives
Sharing fastThe link speedNothing
Running servicesThe processorSometimes the memory
Living quietlyThe coolingThe drives

The usual wrong turns

Confusing redundancy with backup
Two mirrored drives protect against a drive failure, not against deletion or theft.
Choosing a single-bay box
It offers no fault tolerance and no room to grow.
Buying drives at random
NAS drives form an aisle of their own, with different stated workload ratings.

By the household and its devices

The family backup
Two bays, a simple box, and the discipline of an off-site copy.
The media library
Looks at the stated processor, because that is what does the work.
The home business
Counts bays for five years out, not for this year.

Firmware, heat and working life

A storage box runs without stopping, and that is exactly what wears its drives and its fan. The day it starts making noise, something has already changed.

  • Watch drive health with the maker’s tool, not by ear.
  • Dust the fan: it is the part that goes before the electronics.
  • Check that the backups really go elsewhere, not just onto the box.
  • Note the exact drive model: replacing like for like simplifies everything.

Safety

This site publishes stated specifications and describes no storage configuration.

  • A box exposed from outside has to be kept updated permanently.
  • Stated redundancy never replaces a copy outside the home.
  • Default accounts get changed before the first network connection.
  • Stated encryption protects stolen drives, not an open account.

What we shortlist, and why

  1. UGREEN DH2300

    two bays · 64 TB ceiling on RAID 0 · processor unnamed · 4 GB soldered down · one 1GbE socket at 125 MB/s · no Docker, no virtual machines

    A two-bay enclosure that publishes a list of what it will not do — no Docker, no virtual machines, no Wi-Fi — and whose headline capacity rests on the array arrangement that carries no redundancy at all.

    Best for: A first NAS for photographs and backups, where knowing in advance what it will refuse to run is worth more than a specification sheet.

    ≈ $240

  2. Synology DS225+, two-bay enclosure with one 2.5GbE and one 1GbE socket

    two bays · Intel Celeron J4125, quad-core · 2 GB DDR4 to 6 GB · one 2.5GbE and one 1GbE socket · compatibility list required

    A two-bay enclosure that publishes its processor, its memory ceiling and the exact module that raises it, and one 2.5GbE socket beside a 1GbE one — but no drive size, no array level and no software name.

    Best for: A household or small office replacing an older two-bay unit, where the applications matter more than the price and where a compatibility list is not an obstacle.

    7.8/10

    ≈ $421

  3. Synology DiskStation DS124

    one bay, sold empty · DSM named and license-free · surveillance with people and vehicle detection · 24 months · no processor, no memory, no socket

    One of two Synology listings on this shelf that name DSM, and one of three here that publish a surveillance function — on a page that publishes no hardware figure at all.

    Best for: A first one-bay machine chosen for DSM and the surveillance function, by someone who will pick the drive themselves.

    ≈ $160

  4. UGREEN DXP4800 GT

    four bays, two of them U.2 · two M.2 slots · AMD Ryzen R2514, four cores and eight threads to 3.70 GHz · 8 GB DDR4 to 64 GB, ECC on upgrade · two 10GbE sockets

    The most completely specified enclosure on this shelf: a processor with cores, threads and a clock, a 64 GB memory ceiling with an ECC upgrade path, two ten-gigabit sockets and bays that take three different kinds of drive.

    Best for: A four-bay machine asked to transcode, run containers and serve several people at ten gigabits, where the specification has to be readable before buying.

    ≈ $660

  5. QNAP TS-464-8G, four-bay enclosure with two 2.5GbE sockets

    four bays · Intel Celeron N5095, four cores to 2.9 GHz · 8 GB · two 2.5GbE sockets, 5 Gbps trunked · M.2 NVMe and a PCIe Gen 3 slot · no drive size, no RAID level, no software name

    A four-bay enclosure whose Amazon.com description names an Intel Celeron N5095, two 2.5GbE sockets that trunk to 5 Gbps, M.2 and PCIe Gen 3 expansion and 8 GB of memory — and whose title and bullets carry almost none of it.

    Best for: A household or small office that wants faster-than-gigabit transfers on existing cabling and a slot to add 10GbE or an SSD cache later.

    8.4/10

    ≈ $1,003

The questions that come up before an order

Two bays or four?

Two is enough for a household that wants files in one place and can keep working through a drive failure. Four becomes worthwhile when a distributed redundancy scheme is wanted — the capacity given up costs proportionally less as the bay count rises — and when the collection is growing fast enough that a fifth bay is a real prospect.

Does a NAS with mirrored drives mean my files are safe?

It means the volume stays readable when a drive fails, which is what the feature was built for. A deletion, an application overwriting a folder, hostile encryption, a theft or a fire reaches every drive in the box at the same moment, because the box does faithfully what it is told. Copies held elsewhere cover those, and they are a separate purchase.

Can I put any drives in it?

Physically, most 3.5-inch drives fit most 3.5-inch bays. What differs is what the maker publishes about continuous operation, a workload rating in terabytes per year and the recording method used, and those are the figures that describe the job an enclosure asks a drive to do.

How much does the software matter?

More than the hardware, for most households. The interface, the mobile applications, the way shares and users are set up, whether snapshots exist and how updates arrive are what you meet every week; the chassis is what you meet twice.

Each pick, and who it suits

UGREEN NASync DH2300 · $240

For homes that: A first NAS for photographs and backups, where knowing in advance what it will refuse to run is worth more than a specification sheet.

Main advantage: Publishes what the software will not do — no Docker, no virtual machines, no SAN Manager, no Plex through Docker — where almost nothing else on this shelf names its software at all

Main shortcoming: No processor model, no core count and no clock speed anywhere on the page

Read the full review: UGREEN NASync DH2300 →

Synology DS225+ · $421

For homes that: A household or small office replacing an older two-bay unit, where the applications matter more than the price and where a compatibility list is not an obstacle.

Main advantage: The memory path is published completely: what ships, the ceiling, how it is reached and the part number of the module

Main shortcoming: Only one of the two sockets is 2.5 Gbit/s, and no clock speed is given for the processor

Read the full review: Synology DS225+ →

Synology DiskStation DS124 · $160

For homes that: A first one-bay machine chosen for DSM and the surveillance function, by someone who will pick the drive themselves.

Main advantage: Names its operating system — DSM — and states that its solutions are license-free, where most enclosures on this shelf never name their software at all

Main shortcoming: No processor, no memory, no network socket and no port speed: not one hardware figure anywhere on the page

Read the full review: Synology DiskStation DS124 →

UGREEN NASync DXP4800 GT · $660

For homes that: A four-bay machine asked to transcode, run containers and serve several people at ten gigabits, where the specification has to be readable before buying.

Main advantage: Cores, threads and a clock all published, which only the TerraMaster F8 SSD Plus here also manages — four cores, eight threads and up to 3.70 GHz

Main shortcoming: No figure in watts and no decibel value, on a 6.6 kg (14.6 lb) four-bay machine likely to sit in a room someone works in

Read the full review: UGREEN NASync DXP4800 GT →

QNAP TS-464-8G · $1 003

For homes that: A household or small office that wants faster-than-gigabit transfers on existing cabling and a slot to add 10GbE or an SSD cache later.

Main advantage: Two 2.5GbE sockets that trunk to 5 Gbps over existing Cat5e cabling, stated in the first bullet and the description

Main shortcoming: The title is a model number and a memory figure; the processor and the sockets are only in the description

Read the full review: QNAP TS-464-8G →

What each band of spending connects

One line, then the detail

Pairings that help here

Box against box, where the comparison is already on the site.

What this page is built from

The hardware listed is taken from the catalog of this site. Specifications are the ones the manufacturer states and the ones on the Amazon page; prices are the Keepa reading for the date shown, and both change. Ranking follows declared specifications, stated strengths against stated limits, and price. Nothing here has been racked or benchmarked by us, and no page claims it has.

Last checked on

Every price named in a summary was read on the date that review carries. What a shop asks today is shown beside the product, and it moves.