Home server CPU/OS recommendations.

[XX55XX]

In September, I am planning to build a "private cloud" which will perform two functions:

1. Serve files at home and over the Internet.
2. Stream my personal music collection at home and over the Internet.

I plan to upgrade my Internet connection next month, which will grant me a 1 megabit upload speed. This server will be on 24/7, so I want it to use as little energy as possible.

Since Intel plans to release their new Atom CPUs next month, I am thinking about buying a mini-ITX board with the dual-core D2700 CPU on it and using that as a base. Does Atom offer enough horsepower for the two activities which I have listed previously?

Secondly, I am a relative novice at server administration and I don't know what software to use. I have access to a Windows Server 2008 R2 license via my university, so I can use that or Linux. How difficult would it be for me to configure these roles on either Windows Server or Linux?

 

[ViRGE]

CPU: Given that you're picking a processor that isn't out yet, it's hard to say. Existing Atoms have been lackluster compared to the AMD E-350. I'd imagine it will be fast enough either way, but it may not be the best deal.

OS: What you want to do can be done with Server 2008, however it's a textbook usage scenario for Windows Home Server 2011, which has those features built right in.

 

[MrTransistorm]

If you're interested in a Linux home server, then give Amahi a shot. It has lots of easy to use applications available. It also has Greyhole, a drive pooling feature similar to the one that was removed from WHS.

Or if you're not afraid of digging deeper, you can start with a minimal base distro (such as Debian), and install/configure only the services that you need. This is what I did for my home server. It's very fast, lightweight, and stable.

Another use that you should consider for your home server is client computer backup. It's very handy to have a central location to backup multiple computers to.

 

[mmaestro]

I have WHS 2011 (which can be found for $50 these days, and is extremely easy to set up and configure) running on a Wolfdale Pentium E5400 and a Gigabyte GA-G41M-ES2L. Honestly, the only time I might need more horsepower is if it's transcoding video, which can be a bit rough (WHS does this on the fly in an attempt to get as many files to appear compatible to clients), so I'd assume Atom would meet your needs assuming the board you get has enough SATA ports. Given the built in backup, I'd highly recommend the $50 to just get the WHS license and be done with it.

 

[imaheadcase]

WHS, version 1 is better than newest version.

They are very reliable and do exactly what you are asking.

 

[mmaestro]

Disagreed on WHS v1. Assuming your storage needs don't require drive extender, I'd take the 2011 version, having run both. For me, the built in DLNA server pushes it over the edge.

 

[soccerballtux]

In September, I am planning to build a "private cloud" which will perform two functions:

1. Serve files at home and over the Internet.
2. Stream my personal music collection at home and over the Internet.

I plan to upgrade my Internet connection next month, which will grant me a 1 megabit upload speed. This server will be on 24/7, so I want it to use as little energy as possible.

Since Intel plans to release their new Atom CPUs next month, I am thinking about buying a mini-ITX board with the dual-core D2700 CPU on it and using that as a base. Does Atom offer enough horsepower for the two activities which I have listed previously?

Secondly, I am a relative novice at server administration and I don't know what software to use. I have access to a Windows Server 2008 R2 license via my university, so I can use that or Linux. How difficult would it be for me to configure these roles on either Windows Server or Linux?

a 400mhz AMD K6-2 would be more than enough for this.

 

[blckgrffn]

a 400mhz AMD K6-2 would be more than enough for this.

Yep.

I currently do something similar with a 2008 Server box w/VMware Server and WHS v1 but I am moving to WHS 2011 and ESXi 5 (hopefully, or 4.1 U1 will have to do..) and I just went to Microcenter and did the following:

Pentium G620 + MSI mobo for ~$80 out the door (Sandy Bridge 2.66 ghz + H61 board)
i3-2100 + Gigabyte Z68 mobo for ~$160 AMIR

I am putting the 2100 in the cheaper board for ESXi and then the g620 in the nicer mobo (RAID ftw) and calling it a day.

Want to buy a 5400+ x2 w/8GB of ram or a 45W 2.5ghz X2?

 

[Gigantopithecus]

a 400mhz AMD K6-2 would be more than enough for this.

Sure, after Server 2008 finishes installing two months later.

 

[podspi]

If it were me, I'd probably do an E-350 build, but either should work well. Are you trying to go fanless?

Also, I'd go WHS. But for what you are wanting to do, almost any OS would do just fine.

 

[ethebubbeth]

I use FreeNAS on an AMD E-350 (dual core 1.6ghz bobcat) mini-itx system for my NAS. It works fantastic as a fileserver and I can access everything securely over the net using SFTP/SSH (you can configure FTP as well if you want).

I know you can setup DLNA/UPNP on it as well, but I do not use such functionality. For me, it's the ZFS/RAID-Z functionality, support for CIFS/SMB as well as NFS sharing, and SFTP/SSH functionality that made me go in the FreeNAS direction.

 

[TwiceOver]

I use a Sempron 140 which I believe is about a 1.7ghz single core AMD. I can't remember. That, 4gb ram (overkill) and 4x 2TB drives in software Raid5 running Ubuntu Server doing all you listed and then some.

 

[Vic Vega]

I have a similar server at home using a dual core Atom. Fanless. Gets the job done, no noise, no heat. Good stuff.

 

[Aikouka]

I use an i3-2100t with Windows 7 Professional. The only annoyance is that you have to tweak some registry values to be better suited to file serving tasks. If not, you'll end up getting a ton of disk errors in your event viewer. :\

EDIT:

As for the motherboard, I went with an ASRock Extreme6 motherboard for the 10 built-in SATA ports.

 

[Ferzerp]

I use an i3-2100t with Windows 7 Professional. The only annoyance is that you have to tweak some registry values to be better suited to file serving tasks. If not, you'll end up getting a ton of disk errors in your event viewer. :\

EDIT:

As for the motherboard, I went with an ASRock Extreme6 motherboard for the 10 built-in SATA ports.

Why are you doing this when WHS is so cheap?

 

[guskline]

Why are you doing this when WHS is so cheap?

I bought WHS 2011 for$49.99 from newegg and put it in a box with a MSI 785gm mb, Athlon II x4-640 cpu , 4 gigs DDR3 ram, 320gWD Blue for OS, 1 tb WD green and 2 tb wd green hds for data. Great server.

 

[Binky]

If you're interested in a Linux home server, then give Amahi a shot. It has lots of easy to use applications available. It also has Greyhole, a drive pooling feature similar to the one that was removed from WHS.

This looks interesting. I may try this in a VM. Anybody know if this runs well in Vmware?

 

[AMDALLDAYSON]

Wait, I don't get it guys.
Why not just get a simple Pentium 4/D laptop off of craigslist for like 80 bucks? Why are all of you spending money on ITX or better systems? Unless of course you're encoding video on your machine or something. But otherwise, why the overkill?

 

[MrTransistorm]

Wait, I don't get it guys.
Why not just get a simple Pentium 4/D laptop off of craigslist for like 80 bucks? Why are all of you spending money on ITX or better systems? Unless of course you're encoding video on your machine or something. But otherwise, why the overkill?

Who the heck would run a 24/7 home server on a laptop?

 

[podspi]

Well, a storage server generally requires a decent amount of storage. Going desktop Pentium 4 or Pentium D means you are going to pay for it in the electricity bill...


I have no idea what mobile P4 or PD pulled in energy-wise, but I remember an awful amount of laptops dying after toasting themselves, so I am guessing they weren't terribly energy efficient either.

 

[fuzzymath10]

Who the heck would run a 24/7 home server on a laptop?

My Mini 9 served as a rudimentary one a while ago. Not a single moving part; no fans and no rotating disk. However it was ugly with a bunch of USB enclosures limited to USB 2.0 and had only 100M ethernet. However it was very quiet and stable!

 

[guskline]

I used a Kill A Watt device to measure how much I was using and with monitor turned off, no optical drive etc for an Athlon II x4-640, and 3 hds @49W/hr. You could go to lower cpus but i had it available and calculated the cost in my region for running the server 24/7/365 as $50/yr.
Specs for Home server
Athlon II X4-640 Zalman 9700HS
MSI 785GM-P45
4gigs DDR3 ram
320g D blue for OS; 1tb WD Green and 2 tb WD green for data; 500g Toshiba USB backup for server
OS - WHS 2011

 

[imaheadcase]

Disagreed on WHS v1. Assuming your storage needs don't require drive extender, I'd take the 2011 version, having run both. For me, the built in DLNA server pushes it over the edge.

Most people require it, hence why its still the most popular.

 

[Aikouka]

Why are you doing this when WHS is so cheap?

I've been leery of WHS ever since the data loss bugs back at the beginning of '08. I considered WHS back then, but because of that, I used Vista instead and transitioned to 7.

That Amahi looks interesting though.

 

[Binky]

Those WHS issues are long gone but it was a pretty ugly way to start a new server OS. There are still lingering annoyances with WHS (e.g. restore issues/quirks) but overall it seems to be very well liked if you read various WHS-focused forums. My own prebuilt WHS v1 box is extremely good and i wouldn't hesitate to recommend it for storage and backup, especially when the new OS is selling for $60 or less. That's an incredible deal.