|
I doubt it will make much difference - all your NAS is doing is writing data to the discs and for this use case cited, things like the hard disc drive (which are mechanical devices,) disc controllers and the bus system have a greater effect on performance than the amount of RAM or the CPU speed.
Writing data to discs is a relatively trivial task for CPU and as long as you have enough RAM to buffer the data blocks, (which is pretty much anything these days,) massive RAM isn't required either. An exception would be if you send short, big "bursts" of data which can be cached in RAM whilst the data is backed off to disc, but for ongoing sustained data streams such as your use case, it's unlikely to work that way. CCTV is just going to be ticking away hour after hour sending a more or less constant throughput of data.
One would want to assess the volume (we call it the bandwidth) of sustained data transfer involved against the performance of the NAS and it's disc subsystem and check it can cope. (Not to mention the network infrastructure between the cameras and the NAS.) For example, if they were writing 100mbps data streams, that's pretty small beer for discs these days - but you'd want to ensure your LAN was gigabit (1000mbps) capable - especially the link between the NAS your router/swiches. Of course, lower bandwidth (say 50mbps, 20, 10 whatever) is even less demanding.
If you are planning for your NAS to run some kind of back end app to support your cameras, (for example some kind of transcoder,) such an app may have it's own requirements which you should check out, (transcoding will take as much CPU as you can give it,) but for basic data storage for such a small number of end stations, you shouldn't really need anything special. The jumping off point is to investigate the bandwidth of the data streams your cameras produce. |
|