Performance - Two Bay
For the two drive comparison, I chose the ASUSTOR AS5102T and QNAP TS-253 Pro. The benchmark summaries below show the AS6202T, AS5102T and the TS-253 Pro. File copy write and read performance was above 100MB/s for both RAID0 and RAID1 for all products.
For both RAID levels, the AS6202T had the fastest throughput for the NASPT HD Playback & Record tests. But for a NAS that claims high performance 4K playback as a feature, it trailed both of the other two NASes for NASPT 4x (four simultaneous streams) HD Playback by 10 - 15 MB/s. In addition, the AS5102T outperformed the AS6202T on every backup test for all file types. And the AS6202T turned in the slowest iSCSI Write and iSCSI Read results of all three NASes.
ASUSTOR AS6202T ASUSTOR AS5102T and QNAP TS-253 Pro Benchmark summary comparison
The NAS Ranker, filtered for RAID1 and Revision 5 testing shows that the ASUSTOR AS5102T was able to hold on to its #1 ranking followed by the ASUSTOR AS5002T ranked at #2. The AS6204T earned a #5 ranking. If you sort the RAID1 NASes by price, you'll see that it is the most expensive two-bay NAS. Since there was a tie for #4, that are five NASes that represent a better value than the AS6204T.
TOTAL NAS Rank for RAID1 test method Revision 5 NASes
The chart below shows the individual and category scores for the same three NASes used in the two-bay benchmark summaries above - the ASUSTOR 6202T, the #1 ranked AS5102T and #4 ranked QNAP TS-253 Pro. The total NAS score for the AS6202T was pulled down by relatively low category scores for Write Benchmarks, Video and iSCSI benchmarks.
Ranker Performance Summary comparison of the ASUSTOR AS6202T, ASUSTOR AS5102T and QNAP TS-253 Pro Turbo NAS
Performance - Four Bay
File copy Write and Read results were consistent across all RAID levels (RAID 0, 5, & 10) for all NASes with the exception of the relatively low performance of RAID 5 and RAID 10 File Copy Read performance on the AS6204T.
The AS6204T was again the slowest NAS of the three for the NASPT 4x HD Playback tests by 10-15 MB/s depending on which NAS and RAID level compared. The AS6204T also had slower eSATA backup performance for all three file types, compared to the AS5104T. (The QNAP TS-453 Pro does not have an eSATA port.)
For USB 3.0 backup the FAT and EXT3 results compared to the other two NASes were disappointing. The relatively poor iSCSI Write and Read performance noted on the AS6202T - especially iSCSI Write - was not seen on the AS6204T.
ASUSTOR AS6204T, ASUSTOR AS5104T and QNAP TS-453 Pro Benchmark summary comparison
I used the NAS Ranker to filter for RAID5 class products. Since there were quite a few products with better rankings than the ASUSTOR AS6204T's #9 ranking, I created a composite image showing the results in a two column format. (I also removed the QNAP TS-653 Pro and TS853 Pro, since they were six and eight drive versions of the TS-453 Pro.)
Once again, both ASUSTOR 5000 series siblings, the #6 ranked AS5104T and the #8 ranked AS5004T, as well as the #7 ranked QNAP TS-453Pro had better Total NAS rankings at a lower price than the AS6204T.
TOTAL NAS Rank for RAID5 test method Revision 5 NASes
Looking at the subcategories, the results were pretty much as expected. The AS5104T outperformed the AS6204T in every category except for Backup and iSCSI. Clearly, the issues that earned the AS6202T a #7 category ranking in the two drive version were not observed with the AS6204T which grabbed a #1 rank for iSCSI category.
Ranker Performance Summary comparison of the ASUSTOR AS6204T, ASUSTOR AS5104T and QNAP TS-453 Pro Turbo NAS
The major differences between the AS620XT and the AS510XT families are processor, amount of RAM and firmware version. Just looking at the hardware specs, you would think the newer Intel Celeron N3150 quad-core processor used in the AS620XT with 4 GB of DDR3 RAM would outperform the Intel J1900 quad-core processor with 2 GB of DDR3 RAM used in the AS510XT products. But our testing did not show this.
For two-bay NASes, the ASUSTOR AS5102T and the AS5002T held on to their #1 and #2 rankings, respectively, and there were a total of five two-bay NASes with lower prices but better Total NAS rankings.
For four-bay NASes, while there are a lot more products in our NAS Charts, the story is pretty much the same. The NAS Ranker showed the ASUSTOR AS5004T and AS5104T (and QNAP's TS453 Pro) had better Total NAS rankings than the AS6204T and were cheaper, too.
ASUSTOR's marketing materials tout that the AS620XT family has a hardware encryption engine that excels at reading and writing encrypted data. Unfortunately, our test methodology does not include testing encrypted reads and writes. However, ASUSTOR has posted some of their own performance results for AES 256-bit Windows Read/Write tests shown below:
Performance tests for AES 256 bit Windows Read/Write from ASUSTOR website
Looking at the chart below and based on price and performance for the tests we perform, the ASUSTOR AS510XT products still offer the better bang for the buck than the AS620XTs.