QNAP TS-464 NAS Review UK (2026) – Tested

Here’s the problem: you need reliable network storage that won’t choke when multiple users are accessing files, streaming media, or running Docker containers. The budget options can’t keep up. The enterprise stuff costs a fortune. So where does the QNAP TS-464 actually sit after a month of proper testing? I’ve pushed it through everything from 4K Plex transcoding to multi-gigabit file transfers, and the results might surprise you.

The M.2 slots are a bit more interesting than they first appear. Sure, you can use them for read/write caching (which I did, and it made a noticeable difference with my photo library). But you can also create an SSD-only storage pool for applications that need low latency. Or – and this is clever – you can install an Edge TPU module for AI-powered photo recognition.

PCIe expansion is where things get flexible. The slot is only Gen 3 x2, so it’s not going to saturate a 10GbE connection under all conditions, but it’s still useful. I tested with QNAP’s QM2 card (which adds more M.2 slots) and it worked perfectly. You could also add a proper 10GbE card if your network supports it, though you’ll want to check compatibility first.

Performance is where the TS-464 properly shines. With four 8TB WD Red Plus drives in RAID 5 and the network properly configured, I was consistently hitting 280MB/s+ on large sequential reads. That’s actually maxing out the bonded 2.5GbE connection, which means the bottleneck is your network, not the NAS. Good problem to have.

Random I/O is a different story without the M.2 cache. Spinning drives are what they are – you’re looking at around 120-150 IOPS for random 4K operations. But add those NVMe cache drives? It jumps to over 8,000 IOPS for cached data. The difference is night and day if you’re running VMs or databases.

Plex performance deserves its own mention. The Intel Celeron N5105 includes Quick Sync Video, and it absolutely handles hardware transcoding like a champ. I threw three simultaneous 4K HEVC streams at it (all transcoding to 1080p for remote clients), and CPU usage sat around 40%. That’s properly impressive for a NAS CPU.

The drive trays are proper metal, though, and they lock in with a satisfying click. No tools required, which is how it should be. I’ve installed and removed drives a dozen times during testing, and the mechanism still feels solid. The trays themselves have decent damping to reduce vibration noise.

Cooling is actually well thought out. Two 90mm fans at the rear handle airflow, and they’re temperature-controlled. At idle with drives spun down, they’re barely audible. Under sustained load (like during a RAID rebuild), they ramp up to around 35dB, which is noticeable but not annoying. My drive temperatures stayed under 40°C even during a full RAID 5 rebuild in a 22°C room.

One minor annoyance: the power button is on the front, and it’s pretty sensitive. I’ve accidentally brushed it a couple of times while plugging in USB drives. Not a huge deal, but worth mentioning.

The initial setup wizard is reasonably straightforward. It walks you through creating a storage pool, setting up RAID, and creating your first volume. But once you’re past that, you’re faced with an interface that presents about fifty different options and apps right from the start. There’s no gentle learning curve here.

That said, once you learn your way around, QTS is genuinely powerful. The App Center has hundreds of applications – everything from Plex and Docker to surveillance systems and download managers. I particularly like Container Station (QNAP’s Docker implementation), which gives you proper control over containers without needing to SSH in and use command line.

The mobile apps are functional but similarly cluttered. Qfile (for file access) works well enough, though the interface could use a refresh. Qphoto is decent for photo backup, but it’s not as polished as Synology Photos or even Google Photos. Qmanager (for system administration) is genuinely useful when you’re away from your desk.

One thing QNAP does better than Synology: they’re more open to tinkering. You get root access if you want it, the Linux underpinnings are more accessible, and there are fewer restrictions on what you can install. But this is a double-edged sword – more power means more ways to break things.

Where Synology wins hands down is software. DSM is simply more polished, more intuitive, and more beginner-friendly than QTS. If you’re a first-time NAS buyer, the Synology will be far less frustrating to learn. But you’ll pay for that polish – the DS923+ typically costs about the same as the TS-464 despite having slower networking.

The UGREEN DXP6800 Pro is the budget alternative with similar specs – dual 2.5GbE, M.2 slots, similar CPU. It’s cheaper, but UGOS (UGREEN’s operating system) is nowhere near as mature as QTS or DSM. You’re trading software capability for cost savings. Worth considering if you mainly need file storage and Plex, but not if you want Docker or VMs.

So is it worth the premium asking price? That depends entirely on what you need. If you’re after simple file storage and media streaming, absolutely not – you’d be paying for features you won’t use. Something like the Synology DS224+ or even a budget UGREEN model would serve you better.

But if you’re running a home lab, need multi-gig networking, want to expand with PCIe cards, or plan to run multiple VMs and Docker containers, the TS-464 starts to make sense. The dual 2.5GbE ports alone would cost you £100+ as an add-in card for most other NAS units. The PCIe slot gives you upgrade options. The M.2 caching genuinely improves performance for demanding workloads.

The value proposition improves if you already have 2.5GbE infrastructure in place. If you’re still on gigabit networking, you won’t see the benefit of those faster ports, and you’d be better off with a cheaper NAS and investing the savings in network upgrades.