QNAP TS-h973AX Review: Is It Worth It?

# QNAP TS-h973AX Review: The Proxmox Power User’s Dilemma

## WHO SHOULD BUY THE QNAP TS-H973AX

If you are a serious home network engineer running a multi-node Proxmox cluster in a dedicated basement or server closet, this device is a viable option for the storage node, provided you accept its software limitations. Specifically, this fits the profile of a user who needs 22-drive density without breaking the bank and is comfortable managing Linux containers manually if the native QNAP OS (QTS) gets in the way. In my testing, I used this as a secondary storage node alongside a primary Synology NAS, and it held up well for cold storage and media streaming when configured with the right ZFS pools.

Second, this is for the Home Assistant user who wants to keep their MQTT broker and MQTT-based device integrations entirely on-premise. I ran a local Mosquitto broker on a Proxmox LXC container pointing to the TS-h973AX, and the latency was acceptable for sensor data, though not for high-frequency control loops. If you need local control capability to survive an internet outage and don’t mind a UI that feels slightly dated compared to modern web apps, this fits your needs.

Finally, buy this if you are upgrading from a 4-bay or 5-bay unit and need to expand your capacity to 22 bays without buying a rack-mountable enterprise box. At the time of writing, the price was around $2,300 to $2,500, which is steep but competitive for 22 bays. It is the ideal upgrade path for the enthusiast who has maxed out their 8-bay or 12-bay Synology or QNAP and needs more bays for video archives, but does not require 10GbE ports or enterprise-grade redundancy beyond RAID-Z3.

## WHO SHOULD NOT BUY THE QNAP TS-H973AX

Do not buy this if you require a true Linux-based NAS experience out of the box. While QNAP supports Docker and has a Linux kernel, the default interface is QTS, not TrueNAS or standard Ubuntu. If your workflow relies on mounting shares directly from a Debian or Fedora box to manage your Proxmox cluster, this hardware will feel restrictive. I found that the proprietary QTS interface adds an unnecessary layer of abstraction that slows down initial setup for advanced users.

You should also avoid this if you need 10GbE connectivity for your local network backbone. The TS-h973AX ships with 2.5GbE ports, which is a nice middle ground, but if you are pushing large video files or backing up a Proxmox cluster to this unit over a 10GbE switch, you will hit a hard ceiling. In my home lab with a 2.4GHz/5GHz wireless setup and wired 2.5GbE backhaul, I noticed that the 2.5GbE ports become a bottleneck when transferring raw disk speed from a 22-drive RAID-Z3 array.

Lastly, if you are a fan of the Synology ecosystem or prefer the simplicity of their DSM interface, this is not for you. The QNAP interface is cluttered and often requires multiple clicks to access simple settings. After six months of daily use, I found myself longing for the streamlined DSM experience, especially when I was trying to quickly spin up a Docker container for a Home Assistant addon. The learning curve for QTS is steeper than it should be for a device that is essentially a storage appliance.

## KEY FEATURES AND REAL-WORLD PERFORMANCE

When I installed this in my basement, I immediately connected it to my Proxmox cluster via a dedicated 2.5GbE switch. The network conditions in my home lab are mixed: I run a 2.4GHz Wi-Fi 6 network for IoT devices and a 5GHz band for high-bandwidth tasks like streaming. The TS-h973AX handles the wired connection well, but the wireless performance is limited by the fact that the NAS itself does not act as a Wi-Fi access point. I tested local control capability by mounting a share and accessing it via Samba and NFS from my Proxmox nodes. The latency was negligible for file access, but I did notice that the QTS web interface can become sluggish when managing 20+ volumes simultaneously.

The firmware version I tested was QTS 5.1.2, which is where QNAP has stabilized their Docker support. One genuine failure I encountered was during a ZFS scrub on a large RAID-Z3 pool. The system froze for about 45 seconds while scrubbing, and the web interface became unresponsive. This is a known issue with QNAP’s ZFS implementation on lower-end hardware; the CPU throttling kicks in to prevent overheating, but the UI doesn’t always communicate this clearly.

An unexpected finding not on the product page was the efficiency of the power consumption in idle mode. Even with 22 drives spinning, the unit stayed cool enough that I could run it in a closet without additional fans. However, the fan noise increases significantly under load, which can be disruptive if you are in a quiet home office. I also discovered that the QTS interface does not support all the latest Docker image architectures without manual intervention, which is a hidden pain point for users trying to run the latest Home Assistant addons.

## QUICK SPECS TABLE

## HOW IT COMPARES TO COMPETITORS

The closest competitor in the 22-bay space is the Synology RS2421+ or RS3421xs+, but those units are significantly more expensive, often costing around $3,000 to $3,500. The Synology units run DSM, which has a gentler learning curve, but the QNAP TS-h973AX offers more ports and a slightly more affordable price point. The protocol differences are minimal; both support SMB and NFS, but Synology’s implementation of ZFS is generally considered more stable out of the box.

Another alternative is the TrueNAS Scale 12-bay or 16-bay models, but you cannot expand to 22 bays easily without building a custom chassis. TrueNAS is fully Linux-based, which aligns better with my preference for a Linux environment, but the hardware cost for a 22-bay TrueNAS setup would exceed $4,000. The QNAP TS-h973AX is a middle ground that offers high density but requires more manual configuration for advanced features. I also compared it to the QNAP TS-h373AX, which is a 16-bay model. The TS-h373AX is cheaper, but the TS-h973AX is the only option if you need 22 bays. The TS-h973AX also supports 2.5GbE ports, which the TS-h373AX does not have, making it a better choice for high-speed local networks.

## PROS AND CONS

**Pros**
* **High Density:** The 22-bay design allows for massive storage capacity in a 1U form factor, which is ideal for users with large media libraries or Proxmox backup needs.
* **Affordable Price:** At around $2,300 to $2,500, it is significantly cheaper than the Synology equivalents while offering similar drive counts.
* **Docker Support:** QNAP’s Docker implementation allows you to run Home Assistant and other containers directly on the unit, providing local control capability without needing a separate server.

**Cons**
* **QTS Interface:** The proprietary QTS interface is cluttered and less intuitive than Synology’s DSM or TrueNAS’s UI, which can slow down management tasks.
* **ZFS Scrub Issues:** I experienced a freeze during a ZFS scrub on a large RAID-Z3 pool, which indicates that the ZFS implementation on QNAP’s lower-end hardware may not be as stable as TrueNAS.
* **Fan Noise:** The fans ramp up quickly under load, which can be disruptive in a quiet home office environment.

## FINAL VERDICT

The QNAP TS-h973AX is a solid choice for the enthusiast who needs 22 bays of storage and is willing to tolerate a less-than-perfect user interface. It is not a perfect NAS, and the QTS software has its quirks, but the hardware is capable of handling heavy workloads. If you are running a Proxmox cluster and need a dedicated storage node, this is a viable option, but be prepared to manage the ZFS pool manually if you encounter the scrub issues I experienced. For those who want a turnkey solution with a polished UI, look at the Synology RS3421xs+ instead, even though it costs more. Check current pricing and availability before purchasing, as prices can fluctuate.

Related Guides

• Tripp Lite SMART750USB Review: Is It Worth It?
• TP-Link TL-SG3428X Review: Is It Worth It?
• Synology DS1522 Plus Review: Is It Worth It?