Besides the TS-932px being a year older, it would appear to perform better than the TS-653D. However the only tests I've seen didn't mention how the unit was populated so it could have had 9 drives in it....
rna_errros
Posted Sep 30, 2020, 9:03 PM UTC
TS-932PX has an ARM processor as opposed to the x86 that the 653D has. If you want to play around with virtualization then you need to grab an x86 box.
The TS-932X is old, the TS-932PX is brand new (difference is 1Gb vs 2.5Gb NICs).
As others mention the TS-653D has an Intel CPU, which will do you much better for things like Plex and Virtualisation - The only downsize, it has no built-in SSD (i.e. M.2 SATA or NVME), but you can pick up a hybrid QM2 card that has both 10Gb NIC and NVMe slots on...
I'd say the TS-653D will do you better in the long, and have more resale value if you ever want to get rid of it.
I really like the 4 2.5 slots in the 932 but I guess 653D is a way to go for now
TS-653D has a much better CPU. But it only has 2.5G ports built-in. TS-932PX has 10GbE. So for some sequential transfers, the 932PX might have more throughput. But for just about everything else, the 653D should be better on account of the better CPU. If you add a 10GbE card to the 653D I expect it even in sequential transfers to do about as well as the 932PX, and have significantly better IOPS.
If you want a plex server then 653D is hugely better. For a basic file server, there are some reasons to go either way. But in general, TS-653D should be better for most use cases.