Help me put together a server...

[AMDPwred]

One of my friends came to me the other day asking my advice for a server. He wants me to build it since he knows nothing about hardware. His company needs a new one bad, currently they are on a Pentium Pro 180mhz PC. It will only need to have around 25 people on at one time. I was thinking...

Updated

Antec SX1040 + Biggest PS I can find
Tyan Thunder K7 ($359.00)
2GB DDR RAM
AMD MP 1ghz
Video Card
(3) WD 100GB HHD (EIDE) ($207.00 each)
3COM NIC

Do you guys think this would work fine? I'm guessing since they are "ok" on the 180mhz that they don't need a dual system really. This is mostly used for a file/printer server. What are you opinions?

 

[AMDPwred]

Anyone?

 

[GT1999]

A true server has:

• 
  Rackmount chassis (1U, 2U, or 4U would be best)
  Motherboard with onboard video & dual NICs
  Dual Processors with SMP kernal loaded on the OS of your choice
  Lots of RAM (Your 2GB should be plenty)
  Preferably a SCSI HDD (or two, and use RAID 1, or move onto RAID 5)

However, this doesn't really look like it's that important of a server from what you're saying. I'd still recommend the dual processors + high amount of RAM, though -- it's almost a necessity for servers IMHO. Since it's a file server, SCSI would probably be best, with a nice tape backup system.

 

[DN]

Okidoki..

I'll start off by saying that I personally wouldn't go for an AMD based machine as a "business server", but I'll leave it at that.. As for the EIDE's, I suggest going SCSI instead as there's more room for expansion and better overall "server i/o".. The NIC should be decent, something like the latest 3COM 10/100, go to their site for model no.. The motherboard will depend on the brand of CPU, but I'd go for the "main" brand name mb's such as Asus or Abit..

Hope this helps..

 

[GT1999]

I agree with DN. I'm as much of an AMD fan as anyone here, I always buy AMD, but for a server class system that needs to just sit there and reliability is extremely important, a dual P3/P4 system would be best. Yes, TBirds are indeed fast, cheap, and are very stable and reliable. However as an example, say the fan on one of the Dual Athlons (if you choose this setup) would die, you can say goodbye to the processor, and you'll have server downtime. For some people, they might just brush that off and the extra cost for a P3/P4 setup wouldn't be worth it, and to others that is extremely important. Server downtime = money in business situations, and sometimes even complete failure of the business for a period of time.

But it comes down to your choice. Whatever you go with I'm sure it'll be great.

 

[AMDPwred]

A bit of downtime isn't anything for these guys. They are on a 180mhz machiene now

So, I'm thinking...

Antec SX1040
Tyan Dual Board
(2) AMD MP 1ghz (maybe?)
2GB ECC DDR
(3) 80GB HHD EIDE (the extra performace of SCSI isn't worth the money to them)
3COM NIC
Tape Backup (Any recommendations?)

 

[ucla88]

i agree with the intel route for a server, especially one that won't be taxed heavily. you're better of with a stable intel based mb (hey, my next dual system will be amd, don't get me wrong, but i've got two dual intels right now-anyway, that's another topic). you probably don't need dual, although it's nice if you have it. you didn't say what your budget was. if you're not going to be extravagent, i would consider an mb with integrated scsi, nic, and maybe video.

you know, a while back it seemed like everyone around here bought a gateway 6400 when they were having a great deal (gateway got hammered)

anyway, i think many people who bought one of these realized that they didn't really need a server and are selling them.

see the fs/ft forum. if you can get one of these for ~500-600 then it's not worth building one. one of these 6400's would be perfect for what you plan to do.

of course it's not a rackmount, but who cares unless you plan to buy a rack and stack ten of them in a server closet.

 

[AMDPwred]

The budget is around $12,000 but they don't want to spend more than they need. I didn't think they needed anything that expensive so suggested a dual AMD/Intel or even a single chip with about 2GB RAM and 300GB of hard drive space. So I'm guessing I could build a nice server (really a beast of a PC to act as a server) for around $3000.

 

[ucla88]

it seems you've got an ample budget
how much storage do you need?
you didn't say whether you needed to upgrade the network setup as well?

with your budget i would seriously entertain scsi and raid 1 or 5. not so much from a performance standpoint, but from a reliability one. plus, the backup issue is much less important if have a raid solution.

 

[GT1999]

AMDPwrd- It's not really the performance of SCSI that makes it the better choice, it's the redundancy, hardware RAID support being the best, and of course the more important aspect of SCSI is it's reliability. SCSI drives last longer to put it simply.

With a $12,000 budget I'd highly consider at least SCSI ... as for the AMD processor, pfftt, I'm not going to argue with you but I wouldn't for a server

 

[Diffusion]

Lily at Comdisco has some rackmount Sun Netra T1125's with 2 300mhz UltraSPARC II processors (2mb Cache each), 256mb of RAM, a 9gb SCSI disk drive, and a 12-24gb Tape drive availible for 600$, why not pick up one of those and load it out with 18 or 36gb SCSI drives? It would be more reliable, more scalable, and probably cheaper then a x86 machine. If you dont want a rackmount system (which seems crazy to me, any place that has a decent number of servers that are not rackmounted tends to be a mess), they also have similarly equiped Ultra 60's for a little under 900$.

Netra T1125 (from Sun)
Ultra 60 (from Sun)

 

[AMDPwred]

<< as for the AMD processor, pfftt, I'm not going to argue with you but I wouldn't for a server >>



I don't see why not. Most people are using them in workstations/home PCs now. Why shouldn't it be used in this?

 

[AMDPwred]

Oh and I'll take a look at SCSI, I don't really know much about it. I saw the Tyan comes with built in SCSI. What is SCSI all about (other than price )?

 

[wfbberzerker]

why dont you go build an intel server, traitor

id go with a cd-rw as opposed to a tape backup, its much easier and faster to deal with and store cds.

 

[GT1999]

<< I don't see why not. Most people are using them in workstations/home PCs now. Why shouldn't it be used in this? >>


I already stated why. I'll quote myself:


<< ... but for a server class system that needs to just sit there and reliability is extremely important, a dual P3/P4 system would be best. Yes, TBirds are indeed fast, cheap, and are very stable and reliable. However as an example, say the fan on one of the Dual Athlons (if you choose this setup) would die, you can say goodbye to the processor, and you'll have server downtime. For some people, they might just brush that off and the extra cost for a P3/P4 setup wouldn't be worth it, and to others that is extremely important. Server downtime = money in business situations, and sometimes even complete failure of the business for a period of time. >>



That's why it shouldn't be used "in this".

 

[AMDPwred]

Then I replied...



<< A bit of downtime isn't anything for these guys. They are on a 180mhz machiene now >>



If the fan going down and causing downtime is the only reason I shouldn't go with AMD, then it's not enough really. They are more conserned about cost. He said they will have people monitoring the server during business hours with a CPU or two for backup. You can monitor temps and fan speeds over MBM5 (and probably better, non-free tools) so I'm sure they will be ok.

 

[wfbberzerker]

i think that downtime will be a concern for both amd and intel processors. there are as many here who will swear that their amd servers have been on 24/7 for weeks as there are intel fanatics who say the same thing. its really your choice.

 

[AMDPwred]

I mean I do agree that an Intel CPU will be less prone to downtime due to the low CPU temps they have. But if it really doesn't matter, then I'll take the cheaper one. You know?

 

[Vincent]

<< id go with a cd-rw as opposed to a tape backup, its much easier and faster to deal with and store cds. >>



You shouldn't even consider using a CDRW as a backup solution for a server. No one is going to be willing to sit there and swap CDs for hours to backup 100s of GBs of data. Go with a tape backup for sure.

 

[AMDPwred]

What's a good tape backup and where could I find one?

 

[Motero]

Definitely NOT Sony. I was out at a location yesterday replacing one for a customer. It's their 3rd one that went bad since September.

Edit: I've had nothing but great experiences with HP tape backups...Other than Sony and HP, I don't know much about any other companies.

 

[Odoacer]

I was looking at your specs and I think that even 1 GHz is gonna be overkill considering its a fileserver. If you really want to go the AMD route i recommend the abit KG7, good and not based on via chipsets (AMD 760). Saves you money on the motherboard (versus that 250 dollar tiger MP) and you could just toss a cheap Duron in there.

Since your company has so much money to burn, SCSI RAID is an attractive option. You could try some of the WD special edition 100 giggers (the ones with the 8mb cache), i hear they are good but they arent SCSI.

Just my two cents.

 

[Tripleshot]

What server software/OS do you plan to run? Have you looked into the HCL requriments for that? If you use an AMD for even a file server, you should be shot. You have no business building or designing a server for this business.Why should they suffer because of your lack of knowledge? Advise them to seek a professional and invest in a server that will be dependable and work as servers should.

Your out of your league.

 

[AMDPwred]

Who kinged you god of servers? Take your negative comments somewhere else.

 

[AMDPwred]

<< I was looking at your specs and I think that even 1 GHz is gonna be overkill considering its a fileserver. >>



Yeah, I'm waiting for his call later in the week after he talks with his boss about the needs. It's going to be a fun project