1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hardware Asus TS Mini Windows Home Server Review

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Claave, 19 Feb 2010.

  1. Claave

    Claave You Rebel scum

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2008
    Posts:
    691
    Likes Received:
    12
  2. OWNED66

    OWNED66 New Member

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2007
    Posts:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    this sucks
    but the case looks nice
     
  3. Digi

    Digi The not-so-funny Cockney

    Joined:
    23 Nov 2009
    Posts:
    1,592
    Likes Received:
    220
    The case does indeed look quite fancy though. Shame about performance. I am surprised you are required to connect via RDP to setup printers though seems like a bit of an oversight.
     
  4. amacieli

    amacieli New Member

    Joined:
    14 Feb 2008
    Posts:
    93
    Likes Received:
    1
    Not sure about you guys, but my WHS shares its local printer just fine - maybe I didn't understand Alan's comment about printer sharing...
     
  5. Denis_iii

    Denis_iii New Member

    Joined:
    1 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    1,224
    Likes Received:
    14
    :( i was looking forward to this ASUS home server but after reading its a definate no no. WHS looks nice though.
    fingers crossed Microsoft will soon give WHS the treatment its given Win7/Win mobile 7/Zune and Xbox + add RAID support then would be a beauty though I'd rather have hardware RAID.
     
  6. Shagbag

    Shagbag All glory to the Hypnotoad!

    Joined:
    9 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    320
    Likes Received:
    4
    Does it come with IIS?
     
  7. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    Although I've not specifically checked, Google does tell me WHS does come with IIS. This Asus uses a standard install of WHS too.
     
  8. Burnout21

    Burnout21 Is the daddy!

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    8,614
    Likes Received:
    197
    that is piss poor transfer speed in both directions. I would expect write speeds close to 50MB/s or higher to be exceptionable.
     
  9. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,819
    Likes Received:
    462
    Woeful transfer speeds, and no RAID, and £400 for the privilege. Probably a good idea for technophobic purchasers, but I doubt anyone on here would want this.

    It is way too slow to use as a back up device, and while it will stream OK.... so will most NAS boxes costing much less.

    It does look nice though.
     
  10. Fod

    Fod what is the cheesecake?

    Joined:
    26 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    5,802
    Likes Received:
    133
    man.... I built a WHS with three times more storage than this, and much higher performance, for £130 less. From scratch I might add. It helped that I got a WHS license for dirt cheap off a friend with access to the MS employee store at the time.
     
  11. leviathan18

    leviathan18 New Member

    Joined:
    17 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    237
    Likes Received:
    0
    i dont know why asus would use the atom if they have the holly grail of CULV with their UL laptop line

    just use the same laptop HW and built it inside that case and you will have a much better performance with almost the same thermal requirements
     
  12. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    Atom is much, much cheaper.
     
  13. Mathemabeat

    Mathemabeat New Member

    Joined:
    19 Feb 2010
    Posts:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Something is very, very wrong with the benchmarks of this machine.

    Either the gigabit ethernet drivers are wacked up and need updated or possibly the chipset drivers are not installed. Perhaps some other problem on the reviewers network is causing this.

    Several other vendors WHS machines with similiar specs (the HP MediaSmart LX195 comes to mind) post file transfers that blow this machine out of the water. There is no good reason that this hardware isn't capable of at least 50 plus megabytes in each direction.

    What chipset is the onbboard NIC? Realtek?


    My own homebuilt WHS box using the Intel 945GCLF2 motherboard (Atom 330) with onboard Realtek gigE NIC is cabable of over 80 megabytes either direction on the network. Most of the time even under hard network transfers the cpu is only hovering in the 25 to 30% utilization range. So it ain't the cpu thats limiting it.



    Seriously, if the reviewer still has the machine in his possession, please check and see if updated chipset and/or NIC drivers resolve this. I know you were evaluating its "out of box" experience, but perhaps an additional page detailing a fix for its network slowness (if you find one) can be added.
     
  14. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    I have a custom WHS install at home and think of WHS as Windows Server 2003 for super cheap. It doesn't come with quite all the goodies that Server 03 comes with, but it'll act like a server just fine. I use mine for backups/media/printer sharing and as my development server on IIS + MSSQL.

    Shame about the Asus, it did look rather nice.

    On the topic about WHS though, I quite like it, though the backups can be annoying as it take a bit of processing power from the computer being backed up.

    The other thing that bothers me is the use of dynamic disks.

    There's a neat add-on for WHS though, which supports on-the-fly converting of files to stream to xbpx/ps3, does require a decent CPU/RAM though for it to handle anything above DVD-quality movies..
     
  15. thewelshbrummie

    thewelshbrummie Member

    Joined:
    29 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    356
    Likes Received:
    24
    Give it a year and Microsoft should have Home Server V2 ready to go, based on Windows Server 2008...

    I'd like to see Bit-Tech review the HP EX 490 that's available in both the UK and US - ignoring the Pentium based EX495 (which isn't available in the UK) HP have the EX490 available for £429 - if we compare like for like in terms of HDD storage then £429 for the 2.2GHz Celeron 900 CPU , added Apple Mac support/iTunes server and HDD bays that are easy to access are to me worth the extra £80 over the £349 of the Asus.
     
  16. SchizoFrog

    SchizoFrog New Member

    Joined:
    5 May 2009
    Posts:
    1,574
    Likes Received:
    8
    For tghis sort of money I would HAVE to build my own system. Atoms and celerons may do a job for the current market but even then we already know they suck for the cost. For very litle extra surely it wou be better to build using a 775 skt and go for the E6500?
     
  17. iwod

    iwod New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jul 2007
    Posts:
    86
    Likes Received:
    0
    How is Qnap and Synology hard to config? They just provide TONS more features, for what ASUS WHS Mini is doing, Configuration steps are roughly the same.
     
  18. tonyd223

    tonyd223 king of nothing

    Joined:
    12 Nov 2009
    Posts:
    388
    Likes Received:
    2
    Good review - poor box. So why don't you build a cheap Linux based alternative? Why don't I? I've got an old Athlon XP 2600+ and motherboard just gathering dust, too many old IDE hard drives and DDR memory, probably an old case... just need a cheap PSU and I'm away...

    I know the power consumption and noise will be silly, but if the total build cost is say £60 for the psu, then I could have it on for a full year and still be better off...

    Reuse - rebuild - recycle as Bob the Builder would say
     
  19. BlackRaven

    BlackRaven Freaking printers!

    Joined:
    20 Feb 2010
    Posts:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nice work as usual. A bit of a dissappointment this box. I'm looking at upgrading my hw and might consider building a "home server" from this old junk.
     
  20. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    Linux is a pain? :p If you just want something plug-in-and-play then WHS works.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page