Engineering ran a performance comparison between the UG-206 and UG-101 to see how much the newer hardware and SSD subsystem move the needle. The results below capture two distinct real-world file-transfer scenarios.
Test setup
Two data sets, both 20 GB total:
- Large-file set — 20 files of 1 GB each.
- Small-file set — 20,000 files of 1 MB each.
The split matters: as anyone who’s copied data around enough has noticed, transfer rates collapse with tens of thousands of small files compared to a handful of big ones.
Gateways tested:
- UG-101 — standard 1 TB HDD.
- UG-206 — dual 1 TB Samsung SSD in RAID 1.
Large-file scenario
| Gateway | Read (MB/s) | Write (MB/s) |
|---|---|---|
| UG-101 | 28 | 31 |
| UG-206 | 108 | 70 |
Gigabit Ethernet caps out around 120 MB/s, so the UG-206 read speed is essentially at the line limit. End-to-end the UG-206 is 2–4× the speed of the UG-101 on big files.
Small-file scenario
| Gateway | Read (MB/s) | Write (MB/s) |
|---|---|---|
| UG-101 | 15 | 24.5 |
| UG-206 | 50.5 | 37.2 |
The per-file overhead drags both gateways down, but the UG-206 still runs 1.5–3× faster than the UG-101 in this profile.
Takeaway
The UG-206 is a substantial step up in storage performance over the UG-101 — both on paper and in the field, where customers report noticeably higher day-to-day throughput. That’s not surprising given the much stronger processor and the SSD-RAID disk subsystem compared with the single-spinning-disk UG-101.
If a client’s daily workflow involves heavy NAS traffic — large CAD files, big media exports, or even just chatty small-file workloads like dev trees — moving them from a UG-101 to a UG-206 is the right answer.