NAS APUs
NAS APUs
Hi there. I’m evaluating Intel APUs for a NAS setup I’m planning to build. I’m interested in a few models and want to know which fits my needs best. I’ll be using the system for archiving work files and personal projects, plus running a Plex media server. ECC isn’t essential right now, but I might want to consider it since the archive folder will hold important data. I’m open to skipping ECC if it doesn’t add value for this purpose—I’m still getting familiar with servers.
The first option is an i3-9300T, which supports ECC, but I’m unsure which chipset to pair it with to get the most benefit. The second is an i3-10300T, a 10th generation chip without ECC, but it offers more cores. The third is an i5-10600T, also without ECC and with extra cores.
I’ll be using Intel Quick Sync for video transcoding to Plex and I’m mindful of power usage. My main priorities are performance and efficiency. Which APU would best meet those goals?
How many plex streams can you handle at once? The i3 can manage more than enough streams for most home users. I’ll use the standard non-task skus—power savings are minimal, especially during idle when the system is mostly off. I’d likely set it to 9100. For ECC support, you’ll need a c242 or c246 chipset board; unbuffered ECC won’t work with register RAM. A board like this works well (see link). There are many variations depending on your needs and form factor, plus other features.
You're planning a single or dual stream setup with Unraid, considering a parity rebuild. The T-series is chosen for its lower TDP, which should let you run a passive cooler and utilize case airflow effectively. You're also opting for a 3U rack mount, which you've secured for free.
The parity and nas sections require minimal CPU usage. You'll be mostly constrained by disk or network speed. The CPU won't restrict performance for pairing tasks. These components only reduce DPDR, not idle power use, which is what matters here—this chip will stay idle most of the time. You can further reduce DPDR later if desired, though it probably isn't necessary. A single stream or two shouldn't need fast synchronization; modern CPUs handle these efficiently. For slight savings, consider an older system available on eBay, such as an E3 v3 model.
Quick Sync will need extra effort in my configuration. I can save a copy of a borrowed video from the public library and convert it to h.264, which is ideal for Intel Quick Sync. To reduce the TDP, I was thinking about disabling turbo boost and running at base speeds. I’ve been warned against undervolting because of security concerns with Intel chips, and I don’t want a noisy fan. I just watched a short video today about a thermal siphon cooler that seems promising.
Don't stress too much about the temperature; the chips stay cool enough. You can switch to the built-in cooler in the BIOS. It should run quietly thanks to the low-power components. With CPU encoding, video conversion to H.264 happens fast. Just keep in mind that quicksync usually sacrifices quality.
Okay, so what affect the the performance of software encoding the most, cores or clock speeds? I'll be replacing the stock fan no matter what, I've gone to great lengths looking at silent and efficient options of creating sufficient airflow to cool the hard drives, and I want to utilise the airflow for the apu as well, because I only have space in my living room. With a few modifications to the case and to my furniture, it'll fit instead of one of the drawers.
The stock cooler remains quiet while those chips are running, so you likely don’t need to swap it out—try the stock cooler first. It consumes minimal power. Normally, h264 encoders handle core count well, up to a certain point. I believe the i3 9100 is the top choice in this situation.