Clear all

[Solved] RS1219+ VS DS1819+  



I am now looking at Buying a new Synology NAS I could go with an RS1219+ or a DS1819+ What would you go with and why? i will be maxing out the ram and buying 10GB FSP Cards for networking. I would prefer not to use QNAP since they do not support different sized drives. I Currently own an DS1819+ that I would transition to use for back up of the new NAS. I am Leaning toward an additional DS1819+ with The support for 32GB Ram and Higher Read/Write, and ability to add 2 expansion units if needed down the road. only sacrificing .3ghz and Rackmount. 

Your thoughts are appreciated. 

PS. I am aware of the power supply issue and always have a spare.

wow man, I'm wondering what kind of work you do to warrant that kind of powered NAS at home, if it's for the office than that's another story. What do you need those for? Especially if you already have a DS1819+.

Topic Tags
3 Answers

Gotcha, so you want to use the High Availability feature of Synology or just a Shared Folder Sync or Hyper backup? If you want the possibility to use High Availability, you need two identical unit. We had two DS1813+ which I had setup with Shared folder sync for data backup. At first it was local, but I moved it to my home to get a remote backup of our server when we got a big 1Gb/s fiber connection at work (I had already that connection at home). We changed the one at work for a DS1819+ at the end of last year and it's stable. We are not using it for video though and I've setup the link aggregation for all 4 ports so, it's not gigabit speed, but since none of our macs use 10 Gb, I don't think it matters. Anyway, I'd be curious as to what you decide to get in the end.

after conversing with Dave, I ordered a DS1819+ and 8x 8tb Drives with the 10gig FSP.


Daves Responce:

"Synology doesn’t make the nuances easy to choose between on units like this. 

But… the DS1819+ is a better unit. Yes, the CPU runs at a slower clock speed, but it’s not the same CPU. The DS has the C3538 whereas the RS has the C2538. Checking < >, we can see that the DS’s CPU is 17% faster, hence all the higher performance metrics. Plus the DS is quieter. I’d go that route."



I just don't get why Synology would Release two units at the same time, one having way better specs for 400 less, but not available in a rack mount. makes no sense to me. I understand that it costs more to do a rack mount, that's what the extra $400 price tag is. but to make it inferior to the Desktop model. 😑  


I am the Tech Director for A large church in CA, We record in 4K from our 8 camera system. So we need a good place to archive our services. Previously to me coming in they used bear hard drives! With no redundancy. And no cataloging. 


I think you'll be happy with the 1819+ @evthenerd - I've been running 2 in High Availability mode now for 6 months with an SMB client. They are a creative and marketing shop who work off the server despite my advice to work locally. I have both systems running with 16gb memory and bonded 2 ports to the network the other two bonded to it's sister. My only grievance is some of the gray areas like indexing services and the way Synology does a not so awesome job at explaining what helps what, specifically for a setup where there are 1000's of files large and small shared across 14 people/devices. I've had some complaints of search times and had to segment some archives out to simplify the loads. I'll be adding some SSD's as well in the next month or so for helping the caching and hoping that will speed up read write times. I was also looking at the 10gb FSP option and would be curious to hear how it's worked for you. Their setup is only CAT6 on a UniFi Network setup which I believe maxes out at 1gb per port or around depending on general load. From what I've read it seems like the addition of SSD's would be a better first step experiment. Curious what you and others may have found? 

Thanks and don't get caught 😉