The catch
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
A four-drive RAID 5 or RAID 6 archive does not fit in two internal SATA bays.
Side by side
QNAP TS-264-8G-US vs Synology DS925+ Compared: The hard-drive array on Synology can grow past a two-disk mirror
Quick verdict
If a two-drive mirror fits your archive and a supported PCIe network upgrade is in your plans, pick the TS-264. If you need four internal hard drives, or a documented path to more SATA bays, pick the DS925+. Work out protected capacity and expansion hardware before you compare software features that both platforms may offer.
Before you buy
Why, and what it costs you
A protected archive can fill two bays before the network is a problem
Take equal 8TB drives as an example. A two-drive RAID 1 in TS-264 gives about 8TB before overhead, and four drives in DS925+ can give about 24TB in RAID 5 or 16TB in RAID 6.
Where this comes from
RAID 1 gives the capacity of one member. RAID 5 gives (4 minus 1) × 8TB, and RAID 6 gives (4 minus 2) × 8TB. Formatting and system space reduce all of these examples.
The catch
Synology DiskStation DS925+
Expanding with DX525 means buying an additional enclosure and drives.
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Why pick it
- Make a two-drive archive and keep PCIe networking as an option
- Run a modest hard-drive mirror next to two onboard M.2 slots
- The catch
- A four-drive RAID 5 or RAID 6 archive does not fit in two internal SATA bays.
The DS925+ appears here with the optional DX525 expansion unit. Drives and the DX525 are sold separately.
Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Why pick it
- Hold a larger protected archive on four drives
- Attach a supported DX525 expansion unit down the line
- The catch
- Expanding with DX525 means buying an additional enclosure and drives.
We may earn a commission from qualifying Amazon purchases. How we make money
What this page compares
TS-264 and DS925+ compared for a growing photo archive, separate SSD storage and the hardware a future 10GbE network would need.
If a two-drive mirror fits your archive and a supported PCIe network upgrade is in your plans, pick the TS-264. If you need four internal hard drives, or a documented path to more SATA bays, pick the DS925+. Work out protected capacity and expansion hardware before you compare software features that both platforms may offer.
Which one fits
Pick the situations that sound like you
Hold more than the capacity of one 8TB drive, with redundancy
RAID 5 on four equal 8TB drives gives about 24TB before overhead. A two-drive mirror gives about 8TB.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Caution
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Better fit
Fit a supported internal 10GbE adapter down the line
A documented PCIe network-card route exists on TS-264. DS925+ has no equivalent internal slot.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Better fit
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Not suitable
Go past four SATA bays with a documented model-specific unit
DX525 is explicitly supported by DS925+. Any QNAP enclosure needs compatibility and pool checks of its own.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Depends
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Better fit
Put two M.2 SSDs in next to the hard drives
Two onboard M.2 slots are on each, and drive and pool compatibility still has to be verified.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Similar
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Similar
In practice
Differences you will notice
A protected archive can fill two bays before the network is a problem
Take equal 8TB drives as an example. A two-drive RAID 1 in TS-264 gives about 8TB before overhead, and four drives in DS925+ can give about 24TB in RAID 5 or 16TB in RAID 6.
How we worked this out
RAID 1 gives the capacity of one member. RAID 5 gives (4 minus 1) × 8TB, and RAID 6 gives (4 minus 2) × 8TB. Formatting and system space reduce all of these examples.
A named expansion job makes future-proofing real
A compatible network card fits TS-264's PCIe slot, and DS925+ has a documented DX525 route to nine SATA bays. QNAP is the choice if the upgrade you plan is networking for a workstation.
How we worked this out
PCIe network adapters are documented by QNAP. Synology documents one DX525, which takes four internal plus five external bays to nine.
A mirrored SSD pool still calls for a separate backup
Each chassis has two onboard M.2 slots, so a supported two-SSD mirrored workspace takes both. After that pair, neither has a spare onboard M.2 slot.
How we worked this out
Subtract a two-drive mirror from two M.2 slots and zero spare onboard slots remain on either chassis. A mirror is not an independent backup.
Option A
QNAP, TS-264-8G-US
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
This two-bay NAS has two built-in NVMe slots, dual 2.5GbE and a PCIe slot that takes supported SSD or network expansion. The current 8G configuration selected here comes with 8 GB RAM.
- Best for
- Make a two-drive archive and keep PCIe networking as an option
Facts we checked
- SATA bays inside: Two
- Network ports supplied: Two 2.5GbE
- Slots for M.2: Two, both NVMe
- Way to expand: A PCIe slot takes compatible network and storage cards
Option B
The DS925+ appears here with the optional DX525 expansion unit. Drives and the DX525 are sold separately.
Synology, DS925+
Synology DiskStation DS925+
This is a 4-bay chassis, and 2.5 Gbps is the fastest network path documented for it.
- Best for
- Hold a larger protected archive on four drives
Facts we checked
- SATA bays inside: Four
- Network ports supplied: Two 2.5GbE
- Slots for M.2: Two, both NVMe
- Way to expand: A DX525 can raise the SATA bay count to nine
Spec by spec
Where they really differ
| Spec | QNAP TS-264-8G-US | Synology DiskStation DS925+ | In practice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Internal SATA bays | Two | Four | Protected capacity differs between two-drive mirroring and four-drive parity. |
| Included network ports | Two 2.5GbE | Two 2.5GbE | A 10GbE link is not included out of the box with either. |
| M.2 slots | Two NVMe slots | Two NVMe slots | SATA archive bays are counted apart from an SSD pool. |
| Expansion route | PCIe slot supports compatible network and storage cards | DX525 can expand SATA bay count to nine | Expanding the network and expanding drive bays address different problems. |
| Four-drive RAID layouts internally | Not possible with two internal SATA bays | RAID 5, RAID 6 and RAID 10 supported | The chassis has to physically hold the drive count you need. |
Trade-offs
What each pick costs you
With QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- A network card for the future means an additional purchase.
With Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Expanding storage leaves the included Ethernet links at 2.5GbE.
Change of plan
When the answer changes
Four internal hard drives are what my protected archive needs
Go with Synology DiskStation DS925+. Four SATA bays come with DS925+, along with support for parity layouts.
A supported PCIe network-card upgrade is my priority
Go with QNAP TS-264-8G-US. The required expansion slot is on TS-264.
Decision guide
How to decide
A protected archive can fill two bays before the network is a problem
Take equal 8TB drives as an example. A two-drive RAID 1 in the TS-264 gives about 8TB before overhead, while four drives in the DS925+ can give about 24TB in RAID 5 or 16TB in RAID 6. If the archive and its expected growth exceed one drive's mirrored capacity, choose the DS925+. If that smaller mirror is enough and keeping the initial drive purchase to two matters, choose the TS-264.
A named expansion job makes future-proofing real
A compatible network card fits the PCIe slot of the TS-264, and the DS925+ has a documented DX525 route to nine SATA bays. If your planned upgrade is networking for a workstation, choose QNAP. If the problem is running out of drive bays, choose Synology. Neither accessory is included, and extra storage bays do nothing for the included Ethernet links. Keep the backup budget apart from both expansion plans.
A mirrored SSD pool still calls for a separate backup
Two onboard M.2 slots come on both chassis, so a supported two-SSD mirrored workspace takes up both. After that pair, neither has a spare onboard M.2 slot. Base the choice on the SATA archive and expansion requirements, not on an assumption that the four-bay Synology adds more SSD sockets. Check the exact approved SSDs and pool support before buying drives.
What this page can’t tell you
- Capacity examples assume equal 8TB drives and leave out formatting and system overhead. RAID covers selected drive failures, but not deletion, theft or every failure.
By the numbers
What the data shows
What we found across the NAS devices we compare, plus the checked facts behind each finding.
Show the facts and the math
| Product | Needs it meets | Facts we checked | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| QNAP TS-264-8G-US |
|
| |
| Synology DiskStation DS925+ |
|
|
Ready to buy
See today’s price and what owners say
Open either model on Amazon for the current price, customer reviews and delivery options.
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
Make a two-drive archive and keep PCIe networking as an option
See price & reviews on AmazonThe DS925+ appears here with the optional DX525 expansion unit. Drives and the DX525 are sold separately.
Synology DiskStation DS925+
Hold a larger protected archive on four drives
See price & reviews on AmazonEach link opens in a new tab.
We may earn a commission from qualifying Amazon purchases. How we make money