Main trade-off
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
Two internal SATA bays cannot hold a four-drive RAID 5 or RAID 6 archive.
Head-to-head
QNAP TS-264-8G-US vs Synology DS925+: Synology grows the hard-drive array beyond a two-disk mirror
The short answer
Choose TS-264 when a two-drive mirror fits your archive and a supported PCIe network upgrade is part of the plan. Choose DS925+ when you need four internal hard drives or a documented path to more SATA bays. Decide on protected capacity and expansion hardware before comparing software features that both platforms may offer.
Before you choose
The reasoning and the trade-offs
A protected archive can outgrow two bays before the network
Using equal 8TB drives as an example, a two-drive RAID 1 in TS-264 provides about 8TB before overhead. Four drives in DS925+ can provide about 24TB in RAID 5 or 16TB in RAID 6.
What this is based on
RAID 1 uses one member's capacity. RAID 5 uses (4 minus 1) × 8TB. RAID 6 uses (4 minus 2) × 8TB. Formatting and system space reduce these examples.
Main trade-off
Synology DiskStation DS925+
DX525 expansion is an additional enclosure and drive purchase.
QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Choose it for
- Build a two-drive archive with optional PCIe networking
- Keep two onboard M.2 slots beside a modest hard-drive mirror
- Main trade-off
- Two internal SATA bays cannot hold a four-drive RAID 5 or RAID 6 archive.
DS925+ shown with optional DX525 expansion unit. DX525 and drives are sold separately.
Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Choose it for
- Use four drives for a larger protected archive
- Add a supported DX525 expansion unit later
- Main trade-off
- DX525 expansion is an additional enclosure and drive purchase.
About this comparison
Compare TS-264 and DS925+ for a growing photo archive, separate SSD storage and the hardware needed for a future 10GbE network.
Choose TS-264 when a two-drive mirror fits your archive and a supported PCIe network upgrade is part of the plan. Choose DS925+ when you need four internal hard drives or a documented path to more SATA bays. Decide on protected capacity and expansion hardware before comparing software features that both platforms may offer.
Winner by situation
Start with what you need it to do
Store more than one 8TB drive's capacity with redundancy
Four equal 8TB drives can provide about 24TB in RAID 5 before overhead. A two-drive mirror provides about 8TB.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Caution
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Better fit
Add a supported internal 10GbE adapter later
TS-264 has a documented PCIe network-card route. DS925+ has no equivalent internal slot.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Better fit
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Not suitable
Grow beyond four SATA bays using a documented model-specific unit
DS925+ explicitly supports DX525. Any QNAP enclosure needs its own compatibility and pool checks.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Depends
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Better fit
Install two M.2 SSDs alongside hard drives
Both have two onboard M.2 slots, with drive and pool compatibility to verify.
- QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- Similar
- Synology DiskStation DS925+
- Similar
What matters in practice
The differences that matter
A protected archive can outgrow two bays before the network
Using equal 8TB drives as an example, a two-drive RAID 1 in TS-264 provides about 8TB before overhead. Four drives in DS925+ can provide about 24TB in RAID 5 or 16TB in RAID 6.
How we reached this conclusion
RAID 1 uses one member's capacity. RAID 5 uses (4 minus 1) × 8TB. RAID 6 uses (4 minus 2) × 8TB. Formatting and system space reduce these examples.
Future-proofing needs a named expansion job
TS-264's PCIe slot can take a compatible network card, while DS925+ has a documented DX525 route to nine SATA bays. Choose QNAP if your planned upgrade is networking for a workstation.
How we reached this conclusion
QNAP documents PCIe network adapters. Synology documents one DX525, bringing four internal plus five external bays to nine.
Mirrored SSD storage still needs a separate backup
Both chassis have two onboard M.2 slots, so a supported two-SSD mirrored workspace uses both of those slots. Neither gives a spare onboard M.2 slot after that pair.
How we reached this conclusion
Two M.2 slots minus a two-drive mirror leaves zero spare onboard slots on either chassis. A mirror does not provide an independent backup.
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 two-drive archive with optional PCIe networking
Checked facts
- Internal SATA bays: Two
- Included network ports: Two 2.5GbE
- M.2 slots: Two NVMe slots
- Expansion route: PCIe slot supports compatible network and storage cards
Choice B
DS925+ shown with optional DX525 expansion unit. DX525 and drives are sold separately.
Synology, DS925+
Synology DiskStation DS925+
The chassis has 4-bay storage. Its fastest documented network path is 2.5 Gbps.
- Best matched use
- Use four drives for a larger protected archive
Checked facts
- Internal SATA bays: Four
- Included network ports: Two 2.5GbE
- M.2 slots: Two NVMe slots
- Expansion route: DX525 can expand SATA bay count to nine
Meaningful differences
What changes the fit
| What changes | QNAP TS-264-8G-US | Synology DiskStation DS925+ | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Internal SATA bays | Two | Four | Two-drive mirroring and four-drive parity offer different protected capacities. |
| Included network ports | Two 2.5GbE | Two 2.5GbE | Neither includes a 10GbE link out of the box. |
| M.2 slots | Two NVMe slots | Two NVMe slots | An SSD pool is separate from counting SATA archive bays. |
| Expansion route | PCIe slot supports compatible network and storage cards | DX525 can expand SATA bay count to nine | Network expansion and drive-bay expansion solve different problems. |
| Four-drive RAID layouts internally | Not possible with two internal SATA bays | RAID 5, RAID 6 and RAID 10 supported | The required drive count must physically fit the chassis. |
What you give up
Every choice has a cost
If you choose QNAP TS-264-8G-US
- A future network card is an additional purchase.
If you choose Synology DiskStation DS925+
- The included Ethernet links remain 2.5GbE when storage is expanded.
Recommendation switch
The decision flips if...
My protected archive needs four internal hard drives
Choose Synology DiskStation DS925+. DS925+ provides four SATA bays and supports parity layouts.
My priority is a supported PCIe network-card upgrade
Choose QNAP TS-264-8G-US. TS-264 provides the required expansion slot.
What matters in practice
How to make the call
A protected archive can outgrow two bays before the network
Using equal 8TB drives as an example, a two-drive RAID 1 in TS-264 provides about 8TB before overhead. Four drives in DS925+ can provide about 24TB in RAID 5 or 16TB in RAID 6. Choose DS925+ when the archive and its expected growth exceed one drive's mirrored capacity. Choose TS-264 if that smaller mirror is enough and keeping the initial drive purchase to two matters.
Future-proofing needs a named expansion job
TS-264's PCIe slot can take a compatible network card, while DS925+ has a documented DX525 route to nine SATA bays. Choose QNAP if your planned upgrade is networking for a workstation. Choose Synology if the problem is running out of drive bays. Neither accessory is included, and adding storage bays does not upgrade the included Ethernet links. Keep the backup budget separate from both expansion plans.
Mirrored SSD storage still needs a separate backup
Both chassis have two onboard M.2 slots, so a supported two-SSD mirrored workspace uses both of those slots. Neither gives a spare onboard M.2 slot after that pair. Choose based on the SATA archive and expansion requirements rather than assuming the four-bay Synology also adds more SSD sockets. Exact approved SSDs and pool support need checking before buying drives.
What this comparison cannot tell you
- Capacity examples assume equal 8TB drives and exclude formatting and system overhead. RAID protects against selected drive failures, not deletion, theft or every failure.
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 |
|
| |
| Synology DiskStation DS925+ |
|
|
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 two-drive archive with optional PCIe networking
See price & reviews on AmazonDS925+ shown with optional DX525 expansion unit. DX525 and drives are sold separately.
Synology DiskStation DS925+
Use four drives for a larger protected archive
See price & reviews on AmazonLinks open in a new tab.