Like every other website on the planet, SmallNetBuilder uses cookies. Our cookies track login status, but we only allow admins to log in anyway, so those don't apply to you. Any other cookies you pick up during your visit come from advertisers, which we don't control.
If you continue to use the site, you agree to tolerate our use of cookies. Thank you!

Wi-Fi Router Charts

Click for Wi-Fi Router Charts

Mesh System Charts

Click for Wi-Fi Mesh System Charts


I tested the 320L with original (and latest) 1.0 firmware, using our NAS test process to run tests with RAID 0 and 1 volumes.

Windows File Copy tests in the Benchmark Summary below show read throughput 40% higher than write for RAID 0 (43 vs. 30 MB/s) and 60% higher for RAID 1 (38 vs. 24 MB/s).

Intel NASPT File Copy writes were 40% higher than Windows File Copy for RAID 0 (42 vs. 30 MB/s) and 54% higher for RAID 1 (37 vs. 24 MB/s).

Benchmark Summary

Benchmark Summary

There are no iSCSI results because the product doesn't support it.

Attached backup tests run via the single USB 2.0 port were pretty unimpressive. A FAT32 formatted volume yielded 15 MB/s and NTFS was much slower at 6 MB/s. Although network backup via rsync is supported, it poked along at 16 MB/s.

Performance - Comparative

To put the DNS-320L's performance in perspective, I ran a set of custom RAID 1 performance charts using the NAS Finder, filtered for Marvell Kirkwood-based, two-bay products. The first results show the Windows File copy benchmarks. Most of the products shown use 1.6 GHz 88F6282 Kirkwoods. But the QNAP TS-212 and D-Link DNS-325 use 1.2 GHz 88F6281 SoCs and still manage much better throughput than the 320L.

RAID 1 Windows File Copy Performance Comparison

RAID 1 Windows File Copy Performance Comparison

The plot below shows the Intel NASPT File Copy results, which seem a bit kinder to the 320L. Still, it is clear that the 320L's strong suit is not performance. In real life use, I'd expect 25 - 30 MB/s RAID 1 writes during large file transfers and about 40 MB/s reads.

RAID 1 Intel NASPT  File Copy Performance Comparison

RAID 1 Intel NASPT File Copy Performance Comparison

Use the NAS Charts to further explore and compare the DNS-320L's performance

Closing Thoughts

It's not that the DNS-320L is a bad NAS. But there are better options out there. For a bit more money, ZyXEL's NSA325 will get you as many features as you'd like, better performance and USB 3.0 port for much faster backups.

If you want a NAS that simply and easily lets you access files both at home and away, look toward WD's My Book Live single drive or Duo or any of Pogoplug's simple USB-based boxes.

Support Us!

If you like what we do and want to thank us, just buy something on Amazon. We'll get a small commission on anything you buy. Thanks!

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2