QNAP TS-464 vs TS-433: Intel vs ARM 4-Bay NAS Comparison (2026)

QNAP offers two 4-bay NAS options at different price points: the Intel-powered TS-464 and the ARM-based TS-433. While both provide excellent file storage and four drive bays, their capabilities diverge significantly when it comes to transcoding, Docker, and advanced features. This comprehensive comparison helps you determine which 4-bay NAS delivers the best value for your specific needs.

Quick Verdict

Choose the QNAP TS-464 if: You want Plex transcoding, serious Docker capability, virtual machines, M.2 SSD caching, or 2.5GbE networking. It’s the 4-bay NAS that handles everything a home power user needs.

Choose the QNAP TS-433 if: Your primary goal is high-capacity storage at a lower price, your Plex clients support direct play, and you don’t need hardware transcoding or advanced Docker workloads. It’s excellent value for straightforward NAS use.

Specifications Comparison

Price difference: The TS-464 costs $200 more (57% premium) than the TS-433. For that difference, you get Intel x86 architecture with Quick Sync, 2x the RAM with expansion capability, M.2 NVMe slots, dual 2.5GbE ports, and full transcoding support.

Processor Analysis: Intel N5105 vs ARM Cortex-A55

The CPU difference fundamentally shapes what each NAS can do. This isn’t just about speed — it’s about capability.

Intel Celeron N5105 (TS-464)

The N5105 is Intel’s 10nm Jasper Lake processor, balancing efficiency with genuine computing power:

• 4 cores, 4 threads — 2.0GHz base, 2.9GHz boost
• Intel UHD Graphics — Quick Sync hardware transcoding
• x86-64 architecture — universal Docker/app compatibility
• AES-NI — hardware encryption acceleration
• 10W TDP — efficient for capability offered

The N5105 handles simultaneous demanding tasks: multiple Plex transcodes, Docker containers, file transfers, and surveillance recording. It’s genuinely capable for a home NAS processor.

ARM Cortex-A55 Quad-Core (TS-433)

The Cortex-A55 prioritizes efficiency over raw performance:

• 4 cores — 2.0GHz, no turbo boost
• No integrated GPU — software-only video processing
• ARM 64-bit — limited Docker image availability
• Hardware encryption — decent encrypted performance
• Very low power — ~8W idle is excellent

The ARM processor excels at basic NAS tasks: serving files, managing backups, running light services. It struggles with CPU-intensive applications and lacks the graphics hardware for transcoding.

Performance Benchmark Comparison

The Intel N5105 delivers roughly 3x the performance of the ARM Cortex-A55 in most workloads. This translates to faster everything: app installations, photo indexing, backup operations, and system responsiveness.

Plex Media Server: The Critical Difference

For many users, Plex capability determines which NAS to buy. The gap between these two is substantial.

TS-464: Complete Transcoding Capability

Intel Quick Sync makes the TS-464 a proper Plex server:

The TS-464 handles household Plex demands: kids watching cartoons, parents streaming movies, remote access from phones, sharing with family. It just works.

TS-433: Direct Play Only

Without hardware transcoding, the TS-433’s Plex capability is limited:

TS-433 Plex verdict: Excellent for direct play to modern devices (Shield, Apple TV 4K, Fire Stick 4K Max, smart TVs). Not suitable for transcoding, remote streaming, or HDR tone mapping. If all your clients can direct play, it works great.

Plex Use Case Matrix

Memory and Expandability

TS-464: 8GB Expandable to 16GB

The TS-464 ships with 8GB DDR4 in one SO-DIMM slot, upgradeable to 16GB:

• 8GB default — handles most home workloads comfortably
• 16GB upgrade — recommended for many Docker containers or VMs
• Easy upgrade — single SO-DIMM replacement

8GB enables running 10+ Docker containers, a light VM, Plex with a large library, Surveillance Station with multiple cameras, and all standard NAS apps simultaneously.

TS-433: 4GB Fixed

The TS-433’s 4GB RAM is soldered and cannot be upgraded:

• 4GB fixed — adequate for basic NAS use
• Limits Docker — 2-4 lightweight containers maximum
• No virtualization — insufficient for VMs
• Photo indexing — slower with large libraries

4GB is double what the 2-bay TS-233 offers, making the TS-433 more capable for light Docker workloads, but still limited compared to the TS-464’s 8GB (expandable to 16GB).

Storage Configuration

Both units offer four drive bays with identical raw capacity potential:

Capacity Configurations

M.2 NVMe Slots (TS-464 Only)

The TS-464 includes two M.2 2280 NVMe slots that the TS-433 lacks:

• SSD Read Cache: Accelerate frequently accessed files
• SSD Read-Write Cache: Boost both read and write operations (RAID 1 recommended)
• Qtier Auto-Tiering: Automatically migrate hot data to SSD tier
• Fast Storage Pool: Create all-SSD volume for VMs, Docker, databases

M.2 caching dramatically improves Plex library browsing (thumbnails load instantly), Docker container responsiveness, and random I/O workloads. It’s a significant advantage the TS-433 cannot match.

Best M.2 SSDs for TS-464

Network Performance

TS-464: Dual 2.5GbE

Two 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet ports provide flexibility and speed:

• Single connection: Up to 280 MB/s transfer speeds
• Link aggregation: Combine for redundancy or increased multi-user bandwidth
• Network separation: Isolate management traffic from data
• Failover: Automatic redundancy if one port fails

TS-433: Single 2.5GbE

The TS-433 has one 2.5GbE port — still faster than Gigabit, but no redundancy:

• 2.5Gbps throughput: Same speed per-port as TS-464
• No aggregation: Single connection only
• No failover: Single point of failure

For most home users, single 2.5GbE is sufficient. The second port matters for business use, multi-user scenarios, or network redundancy requirements.

Real-World Transfer Speeds

Sequential transfer speeds are similar. The TS-464 pulls ahead with SSD caching for random I/O and handles encryption faster due to the Intel processor.

Docker and Container Support

Container Station works on both, but capabilities differ significantly.

TS-464: Full Docker Capability

The x86 architecture and 8GB RAM make Docker excellent:

• Universal compatibility: 95%+ of Docker Hub images work
• Simultaneous containers: Run 15+ containers with default RAM
• Complex stacks: Home Assistant, media stack, monitoring tools
• Development: Run databases, build tools, testing environments

TS-433: Limited Docker

ARM architecture and 4GB RAM constrain Docker use:

• Limited images: Many popular containers lack ARM builds
• Fewer containers: 3-5 lightweight containers maximum
• Basic services: Pi-hole, lightweight web apps work well
• Struggles with: Heavy databases, complex automation, Nextcloud

Docker Application Compatibility

Virtualization Support

TS-464: Full Virtualization Station support. With 8GB RAM, you can run 1-2 light VMs (Linux, Windows) for testing, development, or specific applications. Upgrade to 16GB for more VM headroom.

TS-433: No virtualization support. The ARM processor architecture doesn’t support Virtualization Station, and 4GB RAM would be insufficient anyway.

TS-464 VM Recommendations

HDMI Output Comparison

Both units include HDMI, but with different capabilities:

The TS-464’s HDMI 2.0 with Intel graphics enables smooth 4K 60Hz playback with Kodi or HD Station. The TS-433’s HDMI 1.4b is limited to 4K 30Hz without HDR support.

Power Consumption

The TS-433 uses approximately 40% less power, saving roughly $8-10 annually. For most users, this is negligible compared to the capability difference, but matters for extreme efficiency priorities.

Surveillance Station

Both support QNAP’s surveillance system, but with different capacities:

For home surveillance (2-4 cameras), both work well. For larger installations or AI-powered features, the TS-464’s Intel processor handles the workload better.

Total Cost Analysis

Entry Build (24TB RAID 5)

Mid-Range Build (36TB RAID 5)

TS-464 Performance Build (with SSD Cache)

The $200 NAS price difference remains constant regardless of drive configuration. As your drive investment increases, the NAS price becomes a smaller percentage of total cost.

Use Case Recommendations

Choose QNAP TS-464 For:

• Plex power users: Transcoding, remote access, HDR tone mapping, family sharing
• Docker/container enthusiasts: Running complex stacks with many containers
• Home lab: VMs, development, testing environments
• Performance priority: Fast random I/O with SSD caching
• Multi-user households: Simultaneous access without slowdowns
• HTPC use: 4K 60Hz HDMI output with Kodi
• Surveillance: More cameras, AI processing
• Future-proofing: Expandable RAM, M.2 slots for growth

Choose QNAP TS-433 For:

• High-capacity storage: Maximum TB per dollar spent on the NAS itself
• Plex direct play: Local streaming to capable devices works great
• Budget-conscious: $200 savings matters for your situation
• Power efficiency: Lower electricity bills over time
• Straightforward use: File storage, backup, basic apps
• Network backup target: Receives backups from other devices
• Simple media server: Direct play to modern smart TVs

Migration and Upgrade Paths

Starting with TS-433: If you outgrow it, you’ll need a new NAS entirely. The TS-433 can become a backup target, cold storage, or remote backup destination. Drives migrate easily to a new unit.

Starting with TS-464: You can expand within the unit: add RAM (8→16GB), install M.2 SSDs for caching, add more Docker containers, run VMs. It grows with your needs for years without replacement.

The calculation: TS-433 now ($349) + TS-864 later when you need more ($649) = $998. TS-464 now ($549) handles most home users indefinitely.

Photo Management with QuMagie

Both NAS units support QuMagie for AI-powered photo management, but performance differs significantly:

For serious photo management with AI features, the TS-464’s faster CPU makes QuMagie significantly more responsive and reliable.

Backup Solutions

Both support HBS 3 (Hybrid Backup Sync) with identical features:

• Local backup: External USB drives, another NAS
• Cloud backup: AWS S3, Azure, Google Cloud, Backblaze B2, Wasabi
• QuDedup: Server-side deduplication for efficient storage
• Encryption: AES-256 encryption at rest and in transit

The TS-464’s faster CPU and dual 2.5GbE enable significantly faster backup operations, especially for large initial backups or restores. Cloud backup speed depends primarily on your internet connection, making the local performance advantage less relevant for offsite backup.

Frequently Asked Questions

Final Verdict

QNAP TS-464: The better 4-bay NAS for anyone who wants to do more than basic file storage. Hardware transcoding, proper Docker support, M.2 caching, virtualization, and expandable RAM make it genuinely capable. The $200 premium is well-justified by the feature gap.

QNAP TS-433: A solid budget 4-bay NAS for pure storage workloads. If you need maximum drive capacity at minimum cost, understand direct-play-only Plex limitations, and won’t run demanding applications, it delivers good value. Don’t expect to grow into advanced features.

Our recommendation: For most users building a 4-bay NAS, spend the extra $200 on the TS-464. The capability gap is substantial, and the additional features will prove useful over the NAS’s 5-7 year lifespan. The TS-433 makes sense only for users with specific budget constraints who truly need nothing beyond basic storage and direct-play media.

Where to Buy

Related Comparisons

• QNAP TS-464 Review — Full review
• TS-264 vs TS-233 — 2-bay Intel vs ARM comparison
• TS-464 vs Synology DS423+ — Cross-brand comparison
• 2-Bay vs 4-Bay NAS — Bay count decision guide
• Best QNAP NAS 2026 — Complete buying guide
• QNAP Compatible Hard Drives — Drive recommendations

Last Updated: February 2026