PDA

View Full Version : What is the performance like on a Linkstation



ravb
2006-02-19, 09:14
I'm thinking of getting a Buffalo Linkstation NAS disk for running Slimserver. In some threads in these forums, people have mentioned that slimserver is slow on the linkstation (eg, each press on the SB2 remote can mean waiting 30 seconds before Slimserver responds). Can anyone verify this? I am looking to store approx. 500 CDs on the NAS.

Is anyone running Slimserver on a different NAS that does give a good response rate to the SB2 remote?

aubuti
2006-02-19, 13:39
I'm using a LinkStation HD-HG250 and haven't encountered the slowness that others have mentioned. The remote is very responsive, no different from when I was running slimserver on an old Linux box. The web interface for slimserver is a little slower on the LS, but not badly so.

Admittedly, my library is smaller than yours (only about 3000 tracks), and I'm playing flac files, so there's no transcoding load on the LS's processor. Also, keep in mind that the LS "gigabit" (HD-HG) series have more RAM and faster processors than the HD-H series.

The Infrant NAS is another popular solution, but I have no experience with it.

-Ken

dborn
2006-02-19, 18:10
I first had slimserver running on a linkstation HD-H160 and now have moved up to a HD-HG300. The first was usually fast enough (web update was a little slow but not too bad) now in the HG300, it's faster.

I find it quite acceptable and I am not considering moving slimserver to a more powerful machine in the forseeable future.
My music collection has 17500+ tracks (in 1300+ albums) and I have slimserver look for artwork too.

The HG model has a 33% faster CPU (266 vs 200 MHz) and double the RAM (128 vs 64MB) so it might be better to choose an HG.

Daniel

agentsmith
2006-02-19, 19:26
I first had slimserver running on a linkstation HD-H160 and now have moved up to a HD-HG300. The first was usually fast enough (web update was a little slow but not too bad) now in the HG300, it's faster.

I find it quite acceptable and I am not considering moving slimserver to a more powerful machine in the forseeable future.
My music collection has 17500+ tracks (in 1300+ albums) and I have slimserver look for artwork too.

The HG model has a 33% faster CPU (266 vs 200 MHz) and double the RAM (128 vs 64MB) so it might be better to choose an HG.

Daniel

I have a 160GB model, menu response from the SB2 is typically slower then running off a Windows XP PC, but generally it is acceptable, if you do not mind occasional hiccups of one or two seconds.

However, dont even think about using it when running a rescan, you will have to wait minutes for each key stroke.

ravb
2006-02-20, 00:01
Thanks for the very useful information, guys. It sounds very promising. I'll investigate the HG model.

Rav