As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (Also includes AliExpress affiliate links.)
QNAP TS-332X vs QNAP TS-431KX
The quick verdict
- Leads on more specsQNAP TS-332X4 of 6 differing specs (base RAM 4 GB, max RAM 16 GB)
- Best forTS-332X for creators moving large video files fastTS-431KX for small offices sharing files
Rankings and scores come from the specs alone and are not affected by affiliate commissions.
Spec ruler
In short
Bottom line. Of the 6 specs that differ, the QNAP TS-332X leads on 4 (base RAM, max RAM, weight, and 1 more) and the QNAP TS-431KX on 1 (drive bays); 1 is within 2%. On our small-office file server index, the TS-431KX scores 60/100 against 57/100.
Using the 12 specs published on QNAP's official hardware specification pages, here is how the QNAP TS-332X and QNAP TS-431KX compare. Drive bays: the TS-431KX at 4 bays versus 3 bays for the TS-332X, 1 bay more (1.3x). Among 219 QNAP models, the TS-431KX ranks in the bottom 35% and the TS-332X in the bottom 12%. The TS-332X leads on base RAM, 4 GB to 2 GB, 2.0x. Among 219 QNAP models, the TS-332X ranks in the bottom 47% and the TS-431KX in the bottom 14%. On max RAM, the TS-332X posts 16 GB and the TS-431KX 8 GB, a gap of 8 GB. Among 219 QNAP models, the TS-332X ranks in the bottom 48% and the TS-431KX in the bottom 25%. Weight: the TS-332X at 1.64 kg versus 3.47 kg for the TS-431KX, 1.83 kg lower (2.1x). Among 212 QNAP models, the TS-332X ranks in the top 8% and the TS-431KX in the top 23%.
Key differences 3
WeightTS-332X leads
- TS-332X 1.64 kg vs the TS-431KX at 3.47 kg
- the TS-332X: 1.83 kg lighter
- among 212 QNAP models: TS-332X in the top 8%, TS-431KX in the top 23%
1.83 kg lighter (about 1 1.5 L bottles)
Base RAMTS-332X leads
- TS-332X 4 GB vs the TS-431KX at 2 GB
- the TS-332X has 2.0x the base RAM
- among 219 QNAP models: TS-332X in the bottom 47%, TS-431KX in the bottom 14%
4 GB out of the box for several apps
Max RAMTS-332X leads
- TS-332X 16 GB vs the TS-431KX at 8 GB
- the TS-332X has 2.0x the max RAM
- among 219 QNAP models: TS-332X in the bottom 48%, TS-431KX in the bottom 25%
Upgradable to 16 GB later
Key specs at a glance
| Spec | TS-332X | TS-431KX |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 1.64 kgWINtop 8% | 3.47 kgtop 23% |
| Base RAM | 4 GBWINbottom 47% | 2 GBbottom 14% |
| Max RAM | 16 GBWINbottom 48% | 8 GBbottom 25% |
| Drive bays | 3bottom 12% | 4WINbottom 35% |
| Volume | 5.54 LWINtop 15% | 5.83 Ltop 17% |
Show every spec
| Spec | TS-332X | TS-431KX |
|---|---|---|
| Drive bays | 3bottom 12% | 4WINbottom 35% |
| CPU cores | 4top 22% | 4top 22% |
| Boost clock | 1.7 GHzbottom 19% | 1.7 GHzbottom 19% |
| Base RAM | 4 GBWINbottom 47% | 2 GBbottom 14% |
| Max RAM | 16 GBWINbottom 48% | 8 GBbottom 25% |
| Max LAN speed | 10 Gbpstop 2% | 10 Gbpstop 2% |
| LAN ports | 3bottom 48% | 3bottom 48% |
| M.2 slots | 3top 3% | – |
| USB ports | 3bottom 27% | 3bottom 27% |
| Weight | 1.64 kgWINtop 8% | 3.47 kgtop 23% |
| Volume | 5.54 LWINtop 15% | 5.83 Ltop 17% |
| Operating power | 26.2 Wtop 15% | 26.7 Wtop 16% |
| Warranty | 2 yrbottom 35% | 2 yrbottom 35% |
| Metric (0–100) | TS-332X | TS-431KX |
|---|---|---|
| Performance percentile | 56.8WIN | 33.3 |
| Lightness percentile | 92.4WIN | 77.5 |
| Compactness percentile | 85.2WIN | 82.2 |
| Small office fit | 57 | 60WIN |
| 10GbE video editing fit | 80WIN | 52 |
| Low-power compact 24/7 fit | 68WIN | 67 |
The details
How to choose
- Weight matters most → the TS-332X (1.64 kg vs 3.47 kg)
- Drive bays matters most → the TS-431KX (4 bays vs 3 bays)
More TS-332X leads
- Volume: 5.54 L vs 5.83 L
More TS-431KX leads
- Drive bays: 4 bays vs 3 bays
Combined metrics
- Total built-in LAN bandwidth (sum of port speeds): 12 Gbps on both
- Operating power per bay: TS-431KX 6.68 W vs 8.74 W
Combined metrics
- Weight per bay: TS-332X 0.55 kg vs 0.87 kg
- Memory headroom (max minus base): TS-332X 12 GB vs 6 GB
Within 2%
- Operating power: TS-332X 26.2 W, TS-431KX 26.7 W
Same on both
- CPU cores 4, boost clock 1.7 GHz, max LAN speed 10 Gbps
- LAN ports 3, USB ports 3, warranty 2 years
Use-case scores
- Small-office file server: TS-431KX 60 vs 57
- 10GbE video editing: TS-332X 80 vs 52
- Low-power compact 24/7 use: TS-332X 68 vs 67
Variant TS-431X2
- matches the TS-431KX on drive bays, CPU cores, boost clock, and 6 more but differs on weight (2.01 kg vs 3.47 kg), volume (5.92 L vs 5.83 L), and operating power (26.2 W vs 26.7 W).
- Where values differ, this comparison does not carry over to the TS-431X2.
Use-case scores are Specotomy's own index, computed by fixed rules from official manufacturer specs; they are not manufacturer scores.
FAQ
- Which takes more RAM, the QNAP TS-332X or the QNAP TS-431KX?
- The TS-332X, with 16 GB against 8 GB for the TS-431KX.
- Which has more drive bays, the QNAP TS-332X or the QNAP TS-431KX?
- The TS-431KX, with 4 bays against 3 bays for the TS-332X.
- Which is lighter, the QNAP TS-332X or the QNAP TS-431KX?
- The TS-332X, with 1.64 kg against 3.47 kg for the TS-431KX.
- Which use cases suit the QNAP TS-332X and the QNAP TS-431KX?
- A small-office file server: the TS-431KX. 10GbE video editing: the TS-332X. Low-power compact 24/7 use: the TS-332X. (based on our own use-case index)