Caractéristiques des Synology FS3420 et FS3600 côte à côte, d'après les fiches techniques officielles. Les différences sont surlignées.
| FS3420 | FS3600 | |
| CPU | Intel Xeon D-1739 | Intel Xeon D-1567 |
| Cœurs / threads | 8 cores / 16 threads | 12 cores / 24 threads |
| RAM (base) | 32 GB DDR4 ECC RDIMM | 16 GB DDR4 ECC RDIMM |
| RAM (max.) | 192 GB | 128 GB |
| Baies | 24 × 2.5-inch SATA SSD | 24 |
| Extensible à | 0 | 72 |
| Emplacements M.2 | 0 | 0 |
| Réseau | 2 × 10GbE RJ-45 | 4×1GbE RJ-45, 2×10GbE RJ-45 |
| 10GbE | yes | yes |
| Capacité brute max. | 1 PB | 92.16 TB |
| Remplacement à chaud | yes | yes |
| Format | 2U rackmount | 2U rackmount |
| Sortie | 2026 | 2017 |
| Consommation | 122.0 W / unknown | 258.23 W / 127.99 W |
| DSM à la sortie | — | 6.1 |
Choose the FS3600 if you need a stronger CPU, much higher RAM ceiling, more drive bays/expansion, and built-in 10GbE; it’s the more scalable platform for heavier workloads. Choose the FS3420 if you want a smaller, simpler box with lower upfront cost and don’t need as much growth headroom. Neither model is a good fit if you specifically need M.2 cache slots, since that’s not a decisive advantage here.