The first thing I did once I bough my NAS200 was to remove the stock firmware and put a hacked firmware. Because one of the main concerns of NAS200 users was performance (or lack of) for the box. So now that I have my system doing something useful, I have made some (informal) measurements. I would like to hear for other people's comments as it will let me now if I am doing better or worse... My configuration, I boot my NAS200 from a USB thumb drive, (so the SATA drives can get a chance to spin down) and installed two identical Samsung 320GB drives. The configuration of my PC is not important as the NAS200 seems to be the main bottle neck. So some figures: 1) hdparm -t /dev/sda (or /dev/sdb) this measure the speed the NAS200 can read from its internal drives: 14.94MB/s - 15.34MB/s 2) Line speed for 100BaseT Ethernet is 10MB/s 3) Theoretical speed for TCP/IP transfers is 9MB/s (protocol overhead) 4) Raw network transmission: Write test: 7.4MB/s Code: NAS200> nc -l -p 1234 > /dev/null CLIENT> dd if=/dev/zero bs=1M count=120 | nc box01 1234 Read test: 4.9MB/s Code: NAS200> nc box01 1234 | dd of=/dev/zero bs=1M CLIENT> dd if=/dev/zero bs=1M | nc -l -p 1234 5) Writing/Reading to different paritions using NFS was done with: Code: Write> dd if=/dev/zero of=t1 bs=1M count=120 Read> dd if=t1 of=/dev/null bs=1M My results were: Code: Write Read USB Flash drive 803kB/s 855kB/s LV with 1 mirror 2.2MB/s 3.8MB/s LV with 2 stripes 2.5MB/s 3.9MB/s LV (default) 2.5MB/s 4.1MB/s MDADM Raid1 2.5MB/s 4.0MB/s So, as I was generating test files for benchmarking, I took a look a the output of the "top" command my NAS200 and I got this: Code: CPU: 1.3% usr 85.9% sys 0.0% nice 0.0% idle 0.5% io 1.7% irq 10.3% softirq Compare to my desktop "top" values Code: Cpu0 : 0.0%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 52.5%id, 46.5%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu1 : 0.7%us, 6.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 91.4%wa, 0.3%hi, 1.7%si, 0.0%st You will notice, that the NAS200 spents a lot of CPU time in sys and soft IRQ, as opposed to the desktop that spent most of the time in idle and wait (io) states. Looks like the CPU is the one shuffling all the data back and forth. So short of replacing the motherboard, looks like the only way to squeeze more performance out of the NAS200 is to try to reduce its functionality to the minimum possible. Another thing that puzzles me is the difference between raw TCP performance in write/read mode. I am able to send to the NAS200 at 7.4MB/s, but I can only read from it at 4.9MB/s. I don't understand why there is this difference? While the disc configuration, (RAID1, RAID0, non-raid) did have some impact on the performance, the difference was quite small. However, it almost looks like using RAID0 is pointless here. The CPU overhead is more than the disc I/O overhead. So people thinking RAID0 for performance would be sadly disappointed with the NAS200. I am pleased that I was able to read using NFS at a speed close to the raw TCP read speeds: 4.0MB/s. I am not sure why the write performance was only 2.0MB/s. I would have expected close to 4.0MB/s (if not more...) but I did not try tweaking my NFS client options. What numbers are you getting?