Main trade-off
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
Both SATA bays are occupied by a two-drive mirror.
Head-to-head
QNAP TS-264 vs TS-464: 464 adds HDD bays, the selected 8G networking is unchanged
The short answer
Choose TS-264 when a two-drive mirror meets the storage plan. Choose TS-464 when you need more SATA drives inside the same chassis. Their 8G configurations share two 2.5GbE ports, two M.2 slots and a PCIe expansion slot, so the extra bays are the main hardware reason to move up.
Before you choose
The reasoning and the trade-offs
Starting with two drives leaves a different next step
TS-464 leaves two SATA bays empty after a two-drive start. TS-264 leaves none.
What this is based on
Four minus two leaves two bays, while two minus two leaves zero. Migration remains subject to QTS storage rules.
Main trade-off
QNAP TS-464-8G-US
Extra bays do not add M.2 sockets.
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Choose it for
- Build a compact two-drive mirror
- Keep the same dual 2.5GbE port arrangement
- Main trade-off
- Both SATA bays are occupied by a two-drive mirror.
QNAP TS-464-8G-US
- Choose it for
- Leave room for additional SATA drives
- Use layouts requiring more than two SATA drives
- Main trade-off
- Extra bays do not add M.2 sockets.
About this comparison
Compare QNAP TS-264 and TS-464 for a two-drive mirror, spare SATA bays, onboard NVMe storage and a future 10GbE card.
Choose TS-264 when a two-drive mirror meets the storage plan. Choose TS-464 when you need more SATA drives inside the same chassis. Their 8G configurations share two 2.5GbE ports, two M.2 slots and a PCIe expansion slot, so the extra bays are the main hardware reason to move up.
Winner by situation
Start with what you need it to do
Start with two HDDs and add two later
TS-464 keeps two SATA positions available.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Caution
- QNAP TS-464-8G-US
- Better fit
Use two onboard NVMe drives
Both list two M.2 slots.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Similar
- QNAP TS-464-8G-US
- Similar
Require built-in 10GbE without buying a card
Both need optional network hardware.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Not suitable
- QNAP TS-464-8G-US
- Not suitable
Begin with 8 GB of installed memory
Both exact selected configurations include 8 GB.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Good
- QNAP TS-464-8G-US
- Good
Use four internal SATA drives with two-drive parity protection
QTS RAID 6 needs four disks. TS-264 has two internal SATA bays.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Not suitable
- QNAP TS-464-8G-US
- Better fit
What matters in practice
The differences that matter
Starting with two drives leaves a different next step
TS-464 leaves two SATA bays empty after a two-drive start. TS-264 leaves none.
How we reached this conclusion
Four minus two leaves two bays, while two minus two leaves zero. Migration remains subject to QTS storage rules.
The larger model does not make one cable faster
Both models provide a 2.5GbE link on each built-in socket.
How we reached this conclusion
Two physical ports do not automatically combine into one faster single-client transfer.
NVMe and networking compete differently with SATA growth
Both models retain two onboard M.2 slots and one PCIe slot regardless of SATA bay count.
How we reached this conclusion
The four-bay chassis doubles SATA positions without doubling the listed M.2 or expansion slots.
Choice A
QNAP, TS-264-8G-US
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
A two-bay NAS with two built-in NVMe slots, dual 2.5GbE and a PCIe slot for supported SSD or network expansion. The selected current 8G configuration supplies 8 GB RAM.
- Best matched use
- Build a compact two-drive mirror
Checked facts
- Internal SATA bays: 2
- Built-in Ethernet: Two 2.5GbE ports
- M.2 NVMe slots: 2
- PCIe expansion: One Gen3 x2 slot
Choice B
QNAP, TS-464-8G-US
QNAP TS-464-8G-US
The chassis has 4-bay storage. Its fastest documented network path is 2.5 Gbps.
- Best matched use
- Leave room for additional SATA drives
Checked facts
- Internal SATA bays: 4
- Built-in Ethernet: Two 2.5GbE ports
- M.2 NVMe slots: 2
- PCIe expansion: One Gen3 x2 slot
Meaningful differences
What changes the fit
| What changes | QNAP TS-264-8G-US | QNAP TS-464-8G-US | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Internal SATA bays | 2 | 4 | A two-drive start leaves different room for later drives. |
| Built-in Ethernet | Two 2.5GbE ports | Two 2.5GbE ports | The larger chassis does not raise a single port speed. |
| M.2 NVMe slots | 2 | 2 | Extra SATA bays do not add NVMe sockets. |
| PCIe expansion | One Gen3 x2 slot | One Gen3 x2 slot | Both require an optional compatible card for 10GbE. |
| Selected base memory | 8 GB | 8 GB | The compared 8G packages begin at the same capacity. |
| Internal SATA-only RAID 6 | Two SATA bays do not meet the four-disk minimum | Four SATA bays meet the minimum with four compatible drives | A two-HDD mirror cannot supply the same two-drive-failure protection as a four-drive RAID 6 array. |
What you give up
Every choice has a cost
If you choose QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- 10GbE adds a card and a compatible network path.
If you choose QNAP TS-464-8G-US
- 10GbE still requires a compatible expansion card.
Recommendation switch
The decision flips if...
I need more than two internal SATA drives
Choose QNAP TS-464-8G-US. TS-464 has four bays.
Two mirrored HDDs cover my plan
Choose QNAP TS-264-8G-US. TS-264 provides that configuration.
I require 10GbE in the original package
Choose neither. Both need a separately purchased compatible adapter.
What matters in practice
How to make the call
Starting with two drives leaves a different next step
Choose TS-464 if adding internal drives is already part of the plan. TS-264 can still serve a two-drive mirror, but expansion inside the original chassis then requires replacing existing drives. Empty bays alone do not guarantee a seamless RAID migration, so check the supported transition and keep a separate backup before changing the array.
The larger model does not make one cable faster
If the current complaint is a slow wired workstation, switching to four bays leaves the built-in port rating unchanged. Inspect the client adapter, switch and storage workload first. Link aggregation or multichannel requires the appropriate complete configuration, and neither is assumed here. Select the larger NAS for storage layout, then budget networking independently.
NVMe and networking compete differently with SATA growth
A plan for a mirrored NVMe pool and a compatible 10GbE card is possible on either hardware layout. TS-464 adds SATA room around that plan. Choose TS-264 when two HDDs are enough, rather than expecting the larger model to supply more M.2 slots or a built-in 10GbE connection. Verify the selected card and drive compatibility.
What this comparison cannot tell you
- No transfer benchmarks or matched reliability tests were performed.
What the facts say
What the comparison shows
Useful conclusions from the current NAS devices comparison, followed by the checked facts used to reach them.
See the checked facts and calculation notes
| Product | Needs matched | Checked facts | Source records |
|---|---|---|---|
| QNAP TS-264-8G-US |
|
|
|
| QNAP TS-464-8G-US |
|
|
|
Ready to choose?
Check the price. Read the owner reviews.
Open either model on Amazon to check the current price, customer reviews and delivery options.
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
Build a compact two-drive mirror
See price & reviews on AmazonQNAP TS-464-8G-US
Leave room for additional SATA drives
See price & reviews on AmazonLinks open in a new tab.