Like every other website on the planet, SmallNetBuilder uses cookies. Our cookies track login status, but we only allow admins to log in anyway, so those don't apply to you. Any other cookies you pick up during your visit come from advertisers, which we don't control.
If you continue to use the site, you agree to tolerate our use of cookies. Thank you!

Router Charts

Click for Router Charts

Router Ranker

Click for Router Ranker

NAS Charts

Click for NAS Charts

NAS Ranker

Click for NAS Ranker

More Tools

Click for More Tools

NAS Reviews


I measured read and write file system performance for the device using the iozone tool as described here. All tests were run under Windows XP SP2 on a Dell Inspiron 1000 laptop with 384 MB of RAM installed.

NOTE!NOTE! How fast a computer can read or write data to a drive depends on many factors specific to the system running the test, so this test may not represent actual performance you'd see on your own system. The maximum theoretical data transfer rate one would expect to see on a 100Mbit network is around 12,000 kBps, so any values that exceed that number appear as a result of caching behavior, not network speed.

Read Test Results
Figure 8: Read test results for the TS-U200
(click on image for larger version)

Figure 8 shows the results of the read test, while Figure 9 shows the write test. Peak (cached) write performance is in line with other consumer NAS devices I've tested, but peak read is on the low end.

Write Test Results
Figure 9: Write test results for the TS-U200
(click on image for larger version)

To put these results in perspective, I also ran the same iozone tests against a number of similar devices, including:

The comparative results shown in Figures 10 and 11 are taken with a 128MByte file size, which is large enough to bypass OS caching effects and show the hardware-limited performance of NAS devices.

Comparative Read Test Results
Figure 10: Comparative read test results
(click on image for larger version)

You can see that the TS-U200 falls at the bottom of the pack. In fact, the next slowest device is more than twice as fast as the TS-U200. For comparison, the NSLU2 - which also uses an external USB 2.0 drive - clocks in four times faster when writing.

Since the TS-U200 did so poorly in these tests, I ran them twice to make sure something hadn't gone wrong, but it didn't help. I even took the same USB enclosure and drive, plugged it into the USB port of a Maxtor Shared Storage NAS [reviewed here] and ran an iozone test, with significantly better results. So it appears that TRENDnet clearly has plenty of room to improve the TS-U200's performance!

Comparative Write Test Results
Figure 11: Comparative write test results
(click on image for larger version)

More NAS

Wi-Fi System Tools
Check out our Wi-Fi System Charts, Ranker and Finder!

Support Us!

If you like what we do and want to thank us, just buy something on Amazon. We'll get a small commission on anything you buy. Thanks!

Over In The Forums

I have an Ax88U and I am moving into a appartment that only has wireless internet with a password.How would I connect my Ax88U to their WiFi and share...
Will Diversion work on guest networks? I have created segregated Lans using YazFi. I have Rokus on its own network for privacy, but would like to use ...
For a few firmware version now. I noticed that my Guest WiFi would just completely drop out. As in going into CLI and looking at the interface, it co...
With version 384.10_2:If the nat hardware acceleration turns on and IPv6 is set to Passthough, the system log was flood with :"kerne...
2 68Us running mesh at firmware _45713 (problem also at previous version)iPads & iPhones at IOS 12.2ASUS IOS Router app (most current) All ...

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3