Cheap NAS drive options that works with Macs and PCs?

[sebalvarez]

I'm currently doing a lot of rendering in Blender and Fusion, all to EXR sequences. My main machine is a Mac Studio M1 Ultra, and my second machine is a PC I built in 2012 but recently upgraded with an RTX 3060 card, and the main drive is an internal SSD, plus an external USB 3 SSD for the working files.

So I divide the render tasks between my Mac Studio and my PC, then copy the files from the PC to the Mac over the wired LAN. This is not super fast, but I know I'm working with a PC from 2012 and the router is from 2016, a Motorola MG7550, which has no USB port.

If I go the route of having a NAS drive setup in my PC, I slow down everything because for some reason the USB 3 ports make my Crucial SSD slow down a lot compared to when it's connected to the Mac. In the Mac it gives me close to 1 GBps, in the PC around 230 MBps, about 100. MBps faster than my internal Toshiba hard drive

So I need to find the cheapest option I can that will give me a NAS drive. I'd be happy to use the Crucial one I have in the PC, as long as both the PC and the Mac can see it, and somehow all computers see it as the same drive. Meaning, if I have a source file in a project that points to a path, that path has to be the same in both the PC and the Mac. Is that possible to do?

So I wanted to check here before doing the usual and getting from Amazon what I think is best because I don't have any time to look into these things, and then end up returning it because it wasn't what I needed.

So anyone who is currently using an inexpensive NAS drive of any kind with both Macs and PCs, please give me your take.

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

I'm currently doing a lot of rendering in Blender and Fusion, all to EXR sequences. My main machine is a Mac Studio M1 Ultra, and my second machine is a PC I built in 2012 but recently upgraded with an RTX 3060 card, and the main drive is an internal SSD, plus an external USB 3 SSD for the working files.

So I divide the render tasks between my Mac Studio and my PC, then copy the files from the PC to the Mac over the wired LAN. This is not super fast, but I know I'm working with a PC from 2012 and the router is from 2016, a Motorola MG7550, which has no USB port.

If I go the route of having a NAS drive setup in my PC, I slow down everything because for some reason the USB 3 ports make my Crucial SSD slow down a lot compared to when it's connected to the Mac. In the Mac it gives me close to 1 GBps, in the PC around 230 MBps, about 100. MBps faster than my internal Toshiba hard drive

So I need to find the cheapest option I can that will give me a NAS drive. I'd be happy to use the Crucial one I have in the PC, as long as both the PC and the Mac can see it, and somehow all computers see it as the same drive. Meaning, if I have a source file in a project that points to a path, that path has to be the same in both the PC and the Mac. Is that possible to do?

So I wanted to check here before doing the usual and getting from Amazon what I think is best because I don't have any time to look into these things, and then end up returning it because it wasn't what I needed.

So anyone who is currently using an inexpensive NAS drive of any kind with both Macs and PCs, please give me your take.

Maybe a WD MyCloud NAS? Affordable and works with PC and Mac. Much cheaper than Synology and the like but also with less bells and whistles. But for your purposes it should fit the bill.

Amazon, WD MyCloud

The price is without disks. I am using one for around 5 years now. Still works great. I have put 2 hard disks in it (4 TB each).

 

[erihp]

get a device that runs openwrt. hook up your ssd to a usb adapter.

or use a linux sbc, like a pi.

hell maybe you have an old pogoplug laying around? those work too, some have sata!

 

[sebalvarez]

The price is without disks. I am using one for around 5 years now. Still works great. I have put 2 hard disks in it (4 TB each).

Thanks for the tip. Normally I stay away from Western Digital storage because several of them crapped out in barely any time, but this is diskless. Now, the two bays, what drives do you connect to them? SATA 6 GBps? And the ethernet port, you connect that to your router and that's all it takes?

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

Thanks for the tip. Normally I stay away from Western Digital storage because several of them crapped out in barely any time, but this is diskless. Now, the two bays, what drives do you connect to them? SATA 6 GBps? And the ethernet port, you connect that to your router and that's all it takes?

The housing takes standard SATA disks. On the WD website you can find the max. size of the disks it takes and other prerequisites. From memory I believe max 8 TB each (but I could be wrong). It is also advisable to take 2 equal disks (same size, same brand, same type).

Yes you connect the ethernet port to your router and then basically you can reach the NAS from your PC and from your Mac. Beforehand you need to modify some settings in the GUI of the NAS (web interface). But that is the same as with any NAS. It goes too far to explain it all here, but the WD comes with instructions and it is not very complicated.

Basically you create your own local cloud over your Local Network.

 

[Slartibart]

For the protocol: A Synology 2 bay NAS is in the same price range the WD mycloud case mentioned.

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

Thanks for the tip. Normally I stay away from Western Digital storage because several of them crapped out in barely any time, but this is diskless. Now, the two bays, what drives do you connect to them? SATA 6 GBps? And the ethernet port, you connect that to your router and that's all it takes?

Also see Slartibart's post above. Synology used to be much more expensive, but the 2 bay Synology is also a good option.

 

[Nguyen Duc Hieu]

I'm currently doing a lot of rendering in Blender and Fusion, all to EXR sequences. My main machine is a Mac Studio M1 Ultra, and my second machine is a PC I built in 2012 but recently upgraded with an RTX 3060 card, and the main drive is an internal SSD, plus an external USB 3 SSD for the working files.

So I divide the render tasks between my Mac Studio and my PC, then copy the files from the PC to the Mac over the wired LAN. This is not super fast, but I know I'm working with a PC from 2012 and the router is from 2016, a Motorola MG7550, which has no USB port.

If I go the route of having a NAS drive setup in my PC, I slow down everything because for some reason the USB 3 ports make my Crucial SSD slow down a lot compared to when it's connected to the Mac. In the Mac it gives me close to 1 GBps, in the PC around 230 MBps, about 100. MBps faster than my internal Toshiba hard drive

So I need to find the cheapest option I can that will give me a NAS drive. I'd be happy to use the Crucial one I have in the PC, as long as both the PC and the Mac can see it, and somehow all computers see it as the same drive. Meaning, if I have a source file in a project that points to a path, that path has to be the same in both the PC and the Mac. Is that possible to do?

So I wanted to check here before doing the usual and getting from Amazon what I think is best because I don't have any time to look into these things, and then end up returning it because it wasn't what I needed.

So anyone who is currently using an inexpensive NAS drive of any kind with both Macs and PCs, please give me your take.

For both options below, 2 SATA HDDs (WD Ultrastart, Red Pro or Seagate Exo, Ironwolf etc) will be required

2 options:

A. Windows NAS: (or Linux NAS)
A HP Prodesk 600G2 SFF is a nice item to have. It can accommodate 2 x 3.5" HDD easily.
Cheap one won't have HDD and OS: 20$ to start bidding (normally you can get one at the starting price)

HP ProDesk 600 G2 SFF Desktop PC Intel Core i5-6500 @3.20GHz 8GB RAM No HDD | eBay

Model: ProDesk 600 G2 SFF. Hard Drive: No. Optical Drive: Yes. Defects: Case has signs of use. Adhesive residue on case. Bluetooth: No. No exceptions. We have a limited knowledge of their prior use.

www.ebay.com

Expensive one (90$) has SSD and Windows 10 pre-installed.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/195449063636


B. Mac NAS
The above 2 HDDs plus a 2 bay USB 3.0 enclosure with RAID function maybe the easy thing to set-up and runs. Plug it in your Mac Studio and make some configuration with the Mac OS to turn it to a NAS.
If you are afraid that it will use some CPU power, then add a Mac mini 2014(60$).

Apple A1347 Mac Mini Core i5-4278U 2.6GHz 8GB RAM 1TB HDD Mac OS Late 2014 - Silver for sale online | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Apple A1347 Mac Mini Core i5-4278U 2.6GHz 8GB RAM 1TB HDD Mac OS Late 2014 - Silver at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

 

[sebalvarez]

Thank you all for your replies. What about going the route of a router with a USB 3 port and an SSD connected to it? I mean, many routers have that port for NAS purposes, right?

My Motorola MG7550 cable modem is starting to show its age, as many transfers over the LAN start fast and then slow down for no reason, even if both machines are not doing anything at all, and there's no downloads of any kind going on.

Plus, I keep my fingers crossed that eventually I will get fiber in this area and happily say goodbye to Spectrum cable. As far as I'm told by those lucky in my area to have fiber, they install a modem, but it's not a router, so I will need a full router anyway.

So does anyone have experience first hand with a decent Wi-Fi and ethernet router with a USB 3 port and a drive connected to it as a NAS?

 

[erihp]

Thank you all for your replies. What about going the route of a router with a USB 3 port and an SSD connected to it? I mean, many routers have that port for NAS purposes, right?

My Motorola MG7550 cable modem is starting to show its age, as many transfers over the LAN start fast and then slow down for no reason, even if both machines are not doing anything at all, and there's no downloads of any kind going on.

Plus, I keep my fingers crossed that eventually I will get fiber in this area and happily say goodbye to Spectrum cable. As far as I'm told by those lucky in my area to have fiber, they install a modem, but it's not a router, so I will need a full router anyway.

So does anyone have experience first hand with a decent Wi-Fi and ethernet router with a USB 3 port and a drive connected to it as a NAS?

I suggested that. Pretty much anything modern is going to perform better than what you have.

Also consider you could get a basic openwrt device with USB, turn all routing off, and keep everything else the same. When you later switch ISPs you could turn routing back on and it could be both router and nas.

 

[sebalvarez]

I suggested that. Pretty much anything modern is going to perform better than what you have.

Are you sure about that? I ended up buying a TP-Link Tri-Band BE9300 WiFi 7 Router Archer BE550 and it sucks. Wi-Fi coverage is much worse than my old Motorola MG7550, which is not even a router, but a cable modem router. And while the Wi-Fi coverage downstairs is not stellar, it's way better than this one.

And the USB 3 drive option? It's slow as hell. I connected to it the same external SSD that I had bought for my PC, a Crucial X9 2 TB. When connected to my Mac Studio, it benchmarks at 800-900 MBps. When connected to the PC, because it's an older motherboard, it gives me what I mentioned in my first post, around 230 MBps. When connected to this router, it gives me like 120 MBps, pretty much hard drive speeds.

So this router is downright terrible. I already ordered an Asus RT-AX86U Pro, and if that one doesn't work, then screw it and I'll keep going with my Motorola.

Also consider you could get a basic openwrt device with USB, turn all routing off, and keep everything else the same. When you later switch ISPs you could turn routing back on and it could be both router and nas.

While I generally support open source stuff, this is not one thing where I want that. Seems really unsafe to have a router with firmware from lots of different people around the world. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just want something that works as easily as possible.

 

[erihp]

Are you sure about that? I ended up buying a TP-Link Tri-Band BE9300 WiFi 7 Router Archer BE550 and it sucks. Wi-Fi coverage is much worse than my old Motorola MG7550, which is not even a router, but a cable modem router. And while the Wi-Fi coverage downstairs is not stellar, it's way better than this one.

And the USB 3 drive option? It's slow as hell. I connected to it the same external SSD that I had bought for my PC, a Crucial X9 2 TB. When connected to my Mac Studio, it benchmarks at 800-900 MBps. When connected to the PC, because it's an older motherboard, it gives me what I mentioned in my first post, around 230 MBps. When connected to this router, it gives me like 120 MBps, pretty much hard drive speeds.

So this router is downright terrible. I already ordered an Asus RT-AX86U Pro, and if that one doesn't work, then screw it and I'll keep going with my Motorola.


While I generally support open source stuff, this is not one thing where I want that. Seems really unsafe to have a router with firmware from lots of different people around the world. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just want something that works as easily as possible.

if i recall, you specifically said 'cheapest option'.

openwrt is so much better in all ways to whatever stock firmware gamer router you can buy at best buy. the thousands of contributors and linux kernel are what make it great.

im sure you will find a plug and play device that works for you. just saying an old pc or pi would work too. if you also want PERFORMANCE then that is something different than what you said in your first post.


sounds like you want fast, cheap, -and- easy. dont we all. good luck with that!

 

[sebalvarez]

if i recall, you specifically said 'cheapest option'.

Yes, cheapest option that has NAS. Since then, I learned that no router with a USB 3 port can be really called a NAS device, you need an actual NAS device for that. And I wonder if that's the reason why these things are so slow for the SSD that I plugged in, and another thumb drive that is not as fast as an SSD, but still very fast, and is also crippled to 130 MBps or so.

im sure you will find a plug and play device that works for you. just saying an old pc or pi would work too. if you also want PERFORMANCE then that is something different than what you said in your first post.

I said that when the Crucial SSD is connected to my old PC, and I access it via SMB through the LAN, from the Mac to the PC, it was going down to around 230 MBps, which is about 100 MBps faster than the hard drive I have inside my PC as secondary drive. So it's understood that I wanted something faster than that, otherwise why would I spend any money on a router with a USB 3 port?

I mean, this drive, when connected to my Mac Studio, goes up to around 900 MBps, so I assumed that the reason it only benchmarks 270 MBps in the old PC is because it's an old PC. Although the PC actually has USB 3.0 ports, which I think are supposed to go higher than 270 MBps, so I'm not totally what's going on there.

Because of that, I assumed that if I got a router that has a USB 3.2 port and 4 2.5 Gbps ethernet ports, that plugging in a fast SSD like this would at least give me 2.5 Gbps, or 312.5 MBps. My Mac Studio has a 10 Gbps ethernet port, and the TP-Link web interface shows me that it is in fact connected at 2.5 Gbps.

sounds like you want fast, cheap, -and- easy. dont we all. good luck with that!

Not exactly cheap, I want the cheapest that gets me what I need, otherwise it's pointless to spend any money when the router I have gives me better speeds than any of these two. Now, if the way to get decent speeds is to spend $500, I can't justify that.

 

[MacLawyer]

Maybe a WD MyCloud NAS? Affordable and works with PC and Mac. Much cheaper than Synology and the like but also with less bells and whistles. But for your purposes it should fit the bill.

Amazon, WD MyCloud

The price is without disks. I am using one for around 5 years now. Still works great. I have put 2 hard disks in it (4 TB each).

I've got Eero wireless routers. Each router has an ethernet port. Do I just connect this device to one of the ports and install the NAS software?

 

[erihp]

I've got Eero wireless routers. Each router has an ethernet port. Do I just connect this device to one of the ports and install the NAS software?

yes
but ideally you connect to ports on the wired side of the network. You wouldnt want to plug the NAS in behind a device with a wireless/mesh backhaul.

If the eeros backhaul is wired, then youre ok.

 

[erihp]

Yes, cheapest option that has NAS. Since then, I learned that no router with a USB 3 port can be really called a NAS device, you need an actual NAS device for that. And I wonder if that's the reason why these things are so slow for the SSD that I plugged in, and another thumb drive that is not as fast as an SSD, but still very fast, and is also crippled to 130 MBps or so.



I said that when the Crucial SSD is connected to my old PC, and I access it via SMB through the LAN, from the Mac to the PC, it was going down to around 230 MBps, which is about 100 MBps faster than the hard drive I have inside my PC as secondary drive. So it's understood that I wanted something faster than that, otherwise why would I spend any money on a router with a USB 3 port?

I mean, this drive, when connected to my Mac Studio, goes up to around 900 MBps, so I assumed that the reason it only benchmarks 270 MBps in the old PC is because it's an old PC. Although the PC actually has USB 3.0 ports, which I think are supposed to go higher than 270 MBps, so I'm not totally what's going on there.

Because of that, I assumed that if I got a router that has a USB 3.2 port and 4 2.5 Gbps ethernet ports, that plugging in a fast SSD like this would at least give me 2.5 Gbps, or 312.5 MBps. My Mac Studio has a 10 Gbps ethernet port, and the TP-Link web interface shows me that it is in fact connected at 2.5 Gbps.



Not exactly cheap, I want the cheapest that gets me what I need, otherwise it's pointless to spend any money when the router I have gives me better speeds than any of these two. Now, if the way to get decent speeds is to spend $500, I can't justify that.

i would wager that some of your issues come down to the clients and the protocols in use. (and embedded hardware not being able to fully utilize a high end ssd).

SMB can have bottlenecks when it comes to throughput, its not surprising you dont get full speed to the SSD over SMB. Theres all sort of overhead in the differences between Direct attached storage and Network attached storage.

270MB/sec (or even 100MB/sec) is plenty fast for a 'cheap' NAS doing NAS things.

you could always keep the ssd connected to your mac and share it out to your clients from there.

Not ideal if you turn the Mac off, but this would give you the speed you say you need.

 

[sebalvarez]

I went to the UPS Store to return some Amazon stuff but I didn't return these routers. I have a feeling that something's not right here. Why would a cable modem router from 2016 have much better Wi-Fi than two dedicated Wi-Fi routers from this year, or maybe last year?

And when it comes to the ethernet part, why would the SSD not reach at least the 2.5 Gbps that the port allows for? Anyone has any suggestions?

 

[sebalvarez]

you could always keep the ssd connected to your mac and share it out to your clients from there.

Not ideal if you turn the Mac off, but this would give you the speed you say you need.

That would be great, and I've tried it, but here's the problem. Sharing from Windows to macOS has always been a breeze in the park. Always works, Cmd+K, press enter, and the new window appears with my PC drive. Or I press Cmd+K and I have to select another share, but usually I only have one share. Even better, every time I connect, the shares can stay mounted for hours or days.

But macOS to Windows? It's always been a royal pain in the ass. But the other day I finally managed to do it... kind of. At first, I couldn't believe my eyes. I was finally seeing my Mac drives on my PC as server shares. However, after several minutes, the connection gets flaky and eventually it disconnects. If I reboot the PC, the shares I mounted on it have a question mark, and double clicking on them gives me an error.

I don't know why sharing with Samba from macOS is always so difficult. When I want to share from my PC to Kodi on my Nvidia Shield TV cylinder, no big deal, I just set the shares and then in the device setting I connect to them, launch Kodi, and there they are. But with macOS, no luck. Only if I launch Kodi in the Mac as well, then Kodi in the cigar sees it with UPnP, but no matter what I do, how many instructions I follow in the Kodi Wiki and else online, never sees the SMB server in the Mac, but always does on the PC.

 

[MacLawyer]

yes
but ideally you connect to ports on the wired side of the network. You wouldnt want to plug the NAS in behind a device with a wireless/mesh backhaul.

If the eeros backhaul is wired, then youre ok.

Are you saying plug it directly into the Comcast box? Thanks!

 

[erihp]

Are you saying plug it directly into the Comcast box? Thanks!

Yes, the LAN port on your router is the best place for your NAS on most, basic networks.

if you have a gigabit switch behind the comcast box, it would go there instead. that way your LAN clients capable of gigabit will talk to the NAS at gigabit speed

if you dont have a gigabit switch (and the comcast LAN ports are 10/100), get one! even a cheap one will improve throughput (especially concurrent traffic) on your LAN considerably!

 

[erihp]

That would be great, and I've tried it, but here's the problem. Sharing from Windows to macOS has always been a breeze in the park. Always works, Cmd+K, press enter, and the new window appears with my PC drive. Or I press Cmd+K and I have to select another share, but usually I only have one share. Even better, every time I connect, the shares can stay mounted for hours or days.

But macOS to Windows? It's always been a royal pain in the ass. But the other day I finally managed to do it... kind of. At first, I couldn't believe my eyes. I was finally seeing my Mac drives on my PC as server shares. However, after several minutes, the connection gets flaky and eventually it disconnects. If I reboot the PC, the shares I mounted on it have a question mark, and double clicking on them gives me an error.

I don't know why sharing with Samba from macOS is always so difficult. When I want to share from my PC to Kodi on my Nvidia Shield TV cylinder, no big deal, I just set the shares and then in the device setting I connect to them, launch Kodi, and there they are. But with macOS, no luck. Only if I launch Kodi in the Mac as well, then Kodi in the cigar sees it with UPnP, but no matter what I do, how many instructions I follow in the Kodi Wiki and else online, never sees the SMB server in the Mac, but always does on the PC.

SMB is to blame for many things

 

[erihp]

I went to the UPS Store to return some Amazon stuff but I didn't return these routers. I have a feeling that something's not right here. Why would a cable modem router from 2016 have much better Wi-Fi than two dedicated Wi-Fi routers from this year, or maybe last year?

And when it comes to the ethernet part, why would the SSD not reach at least the 2.5 Gbps that the port allows for? Anyone has any suggestions?

The firmware is ****?

You could be limited by the cpu or available bandwidth on the buses to push that kind of speed to both the attached disk AND the network chipsets. A 'regular' PC often has multiple high speed multi lane buses. A low cost ARM? Not so much.

How old are you??
900MB/sec is FAST. The computer youre using to achieve those speeds, also very fast, with plenty of bus, cpu, and memory overheads. Plus the OS cheats where it can when copying from removable media.

SMB is a huge bottleneck. You should see different results with different protocols. you cant compare local file xfer to SMB.

You cant just go in the stickers in the box. You'll NEVER achieve 2.5Ggbps in normal circumstances/use cases. there is overhead to deal with every step of the way. You may get close with ram -> 2.5ethernet -> <-2.5 on host 2 <- ram via a multi-session/connection raw packet transfer, but you should expect just because your drive says 'up to', and the port says 'up to' youll actually get that speed in any but the most specific circumstances.

Again, you dont want the 'cheapest' option. you want the fastest. and for 900MB/sec, it wont be cheap. I think you can do it for $500, but sounds like your budget only allows for, somethjbg like half that? a $250 NAS should get your halfway there. Look at HP Microservers. Then consider a RAID1 mirror, you dont wanna lose your data do you?

... get your wallet out.

 

[sebalvarez]

The firmware is ****?

Whatever it was as of two days when I connected it and let it update.

How old are you??

That's not nice. How old are you??

SMB is a huge bottleneck. You should see different results with different protocols. you cant compare local file xfer to SMB.

Well, then the router thing is obviously not what I need. I didn't think it would give me the same speed as when connected to my Mac Studio, but, like i said, I thought at least it would give me close to the 2.5 Gbps/312.5 MBps that the router claims to have, and that my Mac can accommodate. The router has basically three ways to share files, Media Server AKA UPnP, SMB, and FTP. Seems to be the norm, as the Asus one has the same things.

So if having a drive that can be read by both machines at least at 300 MBps is a costly solution, then end of story, I'll keep things the way they are and save myself some money.

 

[erihp]

Whatever it was as of two days when I connected it and let it update.


That's not nice. How old are you??


Well, then the router thing is obviously not what I need. I didn't think it would give me the same speed as when connected to my Mac Studio, but, like i said, I thought at least it would give me close to the 2.5 Gbps/312.5 MBps that the router claims to have, and that my Mac can accommodate. The router has basically three ways to share files, Media Server AKA UPnP, SMB, and FTP. Seems to be the norm, as the Asus one has the same things.

So if having a drive that can be read by both machines at least at 300 MBps is a costly solution, then end of story, I'll keep things the way they are and save myself some money.

I suggested an HP micro server. Look on ebay. Learn basic linux/docker deployment of the services you require and itll just hum along.

This is basically the openwrt linux router approach, just with faster hardware.

 

[mrkapqa]

if you plan using HDD, 6-tray NAS would consider sweetspot if you are having 2.5 GBE Ethernet or faster<
but those come not exactly cheap.
had my first NAS bought some year ago, and wish would have bought 6 bay instead of 4 bay, as could better saturate.