NSC-810 or 810A

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

Qoobs

New Member
Feb 19, 2018
6
0
1
43
Hi,

I am about to build my first NAS server, and I have been reading a lot about different enclosures,
motherboards, PSU, etc. To the point where it's getting overwhelming ;)

I need something that's not too tall, so all tower solutions are not acceptable.
I stumbled upon NSC-810, and it looks like it would mostly fit my needs.
But for some reason, it looks like people are mostly interested in NSC-810A.

I was looking at a configuration with i3-7ish CPU, 8 WD RED drives, NSC-810 enclosure and ASRock C236 board (which is a mini ITX board, so NSC-810 would work - and according to some comments it looks like NSC-810A would work too).

I was reading some topics about 810A and it looks like stacking the CPU above the drives and very close to the top of the enclosure may not be optimal. And it feels like it might have been a compromise to fit a larger,
micro ATX board. Plus it looks like there are issues with cable length.

So my question is, is there a compelling reason to go with 810A instead of 810,
if I am planning to get a mini ITX board anyway?

Also, if I end up getting NSC-810, it can be (unlike 810A) ordered with either 1U Flex 350W PSU (SeaSonic SS-350M1U), or 1U 400W PSU (ASPower U1A-C20400-D).

From what I've read, 350W for 8 drives might be a bit close. But SeaSonic is praised everywhere for its quality,
while I cannot find anything about the other PSU. It also looks like PSUs must be relatively short to fit in that enclosure, so finding other models that would fit might be challenging. For example, other SeaSonic 1U supplies I found are 235mm long, and I don't think they would fit.

EDIT:
I also looked at:
- Node 804 which looks nice, but takes up more space than I'd like (although it would fit).
- DS380B which looks really nice, but I've read there are some temperature issues. Plus I don't like the idea of putting so many hard drives on top of each other... I'm not an expert but it feels like the lower drives would increase the temperature of those at the top...?

I will be grateful for any suggestions (and hopefully I posted it in the right place) :)

Thanks!
 
Last edited:

EffrafaxOfWug

Radioactive Member
Feb 12, 2015
1,394
511
113
From what I've read, 350W for 8 drives might be a bit close.
It shouldn't be anywhere near; I use the 300W seasonic with the NSC-800 case and I've not observed peak power draw at startup (no staggered spinup) to exceed 100W. I think startup power for the reds is on the order of ~2W at 5V and ~12W at 12V.
 

DaSaint

Active Member
Oct 3, 2015
282
79
28
Colorado
"I was looking at a configuration with i3-7ish CPU, 8 WD RED drives, NSC-810 enclosure and ASRock C236 board (which is a mini ITX board, so NSC-810 would work - and according to some comments it looks like NSC-810A would work too)."


FYI i tried one of these once, and ASRock does NOT play nice from a support perspective if your OS isnt on their "Approved List" I built one of these out then sold it after they said they wouldn't support a Solaris based OS (wanted to do ZFS) that an i had massive issues with IPMI/KVM/BIOS updates from them that caused the unit to restart all the time. One other thing i recommend that wasnt in that chassis is finding a way to put some cooling on that motherboard at least over the Heatsink if it doesnt have one as these things do get toasty inside.

Just some recommendations based on some previously attempted tries..

Seasonic have great PSUs for silence i use a lot of Seasonic SS-400H1U in my server builds, i think you have chosen one out that does well with that.. and you shouldn't have any issues with that wattage...
 

PigLover

Moderator
Jan 26, 2011
3,184
1,545
113
If the choice is between the NSC810 and NSC810A, I'd reccomend the 810A. The 810 has very little air-volume around the MB, limited airflow and all kinds of cooling issues. The 810A has enough space around the board to get it cool.

I don't know who suggested that "stacking the CPU above the drives and very close to the top of the enclosure may not be optimal", but I'd suggest that is based on a misunderstanding of this case and the air-space volume available. In the 810 the top of the CPU cooler is just millimeters away from the edge of the case, there is nowhere for cool air to come from and limited space for hot air to flow out. I've done a lot of "silent PC" building in the past and I don't think there is any question that the 810A is a better arrangement for cooling without resorting to fast/noisy fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CreoleLakerFan

Qoobs

New Member
Feb 19, 2018
6
0
1
43
Thanks for all the responses!

Glad to hear 350W should be more than enough.

I assumed that there would be more space around the CPU in 810... My understanding is that the motherboard
is installed on the side, with CPU cooler facing inwards - towards the empty space behind the drives?

Here
someone considered opening the case right above the CPU to help with the cooling...

I was planning to put FreeNAS on it, and it looks like ASRock's "supported" OS list only includes Windows... That's a shame...
I like how it has 8 SATA ports built in. It even has a USB port right on the motherboard itself, to connect a USB boot device.

What motherboard with a way of connecting 8 SATA3 drives would you recommend?
I was trying to avoid having to buy an additional card with more ports on it...

I found ASUS P10S-M WS which is not too expensive, but it looks like all SATA ports are facing to the side,
which most likely means they would not be accessible in 810A case :(

EDIT: I found something that looks like it could work: MBD-X11SAE-M-O.
And it's actually a bit cheaper than ASRock :)
Would that be a better idea (with 810A chassis) than 810/810A with the ASRock?
 
Last edited:

PigLover

Moderator
Jan 26, 2011
3,184
1,545
113
X11SAE is a full ATX MB. It won't fit.

Just because ASRock doesn't list FreeNAS as "supported" doesn't mean it doesn't work. As an end-user consumer you aren't going to get much in the way of "support" from ASRock anyway. It will run just fine on that board.

My choice would be the mATX X11SSH-f (or -tf if you want 10Gbe-base-t) with an E3-12xx v5/v6 CPU and ECC ram. But there is nothing wrong with your current choices.
 

Qoobs

New Member
Feb 19, 2018
6
0
1
43
X11SAE is a full ATX MB. It won't fit.
Yes, however, X11SAE-M is a micro ATX version.

Thanks for the suggestions! And it looks like there are even more options (X11SSM, X11SSH) which all should fit the bill, and look like they're more "servery"...

Now the question is, if I end up getting 810A, are there any trade-offs between mini ITX and micro ATX that I should be aware of? Other than limited number of RAM slots and add-on cards... I mostly mean size-wise... would more packed mini ITX be more susceptible to overheating? Or maybe more space around it would actually help?
 
Last edited:

TLN

Active Member
Feb 26, 2016
523
84
28
34
I have Asrock EPC612D4U-2T8R (2x10G + 8xSAS/SATA) laying around. Plus E5-2618Lv3 (8 cores), if you 're interested. Was thinking about same case - 810A for this build, but never happened.
 

Qoobs

New Member
Feb 19, 2018
6
0
1
43
Thank you, but one of my use-cases is Plex server transcoding, which means less but faster cores is a better idea (they recommend 2000 single-core passmark score for 1080p transcoding).
Also, it looks like EPC612D4U-2T8R has SATA ports facing sideways, which might make it very hard/impossible to access given the tight squeeze with 810A...
 

TLN

Active Member
Feb 26, 2016
523
84
28
34
I was thinking about SAS ports and breakout cables. Two bigger cables looks way better to me, rather then bunch of SATA cables.
2618Lv3 have 3.4 Ghz, and seems to be aroud 1950 for single core. I've tried enabling "all core turbo" on mine and it worked perfectly fine.
 

IamSpartacus

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2016
2,515
650
113
Thank you, but one of my use-cases is Plex server transcoding, which means less but faster cores is a better idea (they recommend 2000 single-core passmark score for 1080p transcoding).
Also, it looks like EPC612D4U-2T8R has SATA ports facing sideways, which might make it very hard/impossible to access given the tight squeeze with 810A...
Where have you seen the "single core" recommendation for Plex? I've never seen anything more than a recommendation of a CPU passmark of 2000 per 1080p transcode. And even that number is a very basic starting point because 1080p transcodes can vary GREATLy depending on the original bitrate and the bitrate it's been transcoded down to.

For example, my Xeon D-1541 has a CPU passmark of over 11k but only a 1400. My server gets hit pretty hard with transcodes every night and it's never been an issue. And Plex will use at least 12 of my available 16 threads for transcoding purposes so fewer faster threads will not always beat out more slower threads.
 

Qoobs

New Member
Feb 19, 2018
6
0
1
43
I have seen people recommending less faster cores over more but slower cores,
because transcoding is limited to a single core per stream. And I knew about the 2000 passmark recommendation,
so I thought that was the rule. However, as I'm searching right now, it looks like it also depends on the codec used. And that most codecs (or all except for VC-1) can actually be transcoded using multithreading, so that may not be an issue after all.
 

IamSpartacus

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2016
2,515
650
113
I have seen people recommending less faster cores over more but slower cores,
because transcoding is limited to a single core per stream. And I knew about the 2000 passmark recommendation,
so I thought that was the rule. However, as I'm searching right now, it looks like it also depends on the codec used. And that most codecs (or all except for VC-1) can actually be transcoded using multithreading, so that may not be an issue after all.
Yea I've never seen any of my transcodes be limited to a single thread. Plex used ffmpeg for transcoding which is definitely multithreaded. I've tested up to 11 trancodes (of varios degrees) at once and my D-1541 handled it.