I'm waiting on some hardware to arrive but basically I have an ASUS RT-N16 router running DD-WRT and I want to have mysql(for xbmc library), sickbeard, and transmission running on an Rpi as its primary duty. I'm going to have an Ouya running XBMC which will need to access the drive over the network. Is there a clear "better" choice between putting my USB harddrive on my router and having it do the NFS/NAS serving or putting the HD on the Rpi and having it do the NAS/NFS work? My intuition, which is often bad for these sorts of questions, says that it probably won't make a noticeable difference which box runs the NAS but figured I'd ask.

Here are some more details in case they make a difference.

I plan on running OpenVPN for all internet connections from the Rpi. I don't use the router as VPN client, only each device runs VPN if necessary.

2 Answers 2


From my own experience I'm getting 10 MB/sec write performance using my Pi as a NAS server using samba and a Toshiba 3 TB USB drive.

I had to reformat the drive as ext4 to get this performance. Using NTFS I could only get 3 MB/sec write performance to the same drive.

The Pi is running at 100% CPU utilization while getting 10 to 11 MB/sec write throughput. However, this is very close to the maximum throughput of the 100 mbit Ethernet on the Pi.

  • I can second this. If you use an NTFS formatted disk, be prepared to overclock your RasPi to get somwhere around 3.3MB/s transfer rates. NTFS mounted drives have a large overhead and combined with samba, push the pi's cpu hard.
    – Havnar
    Sep 4, 2014 at 9:40

I used to run Time Capsule (i.e. full system backups of Macs) on my RPi and it worked fantastically.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.