Why not desktop system for enterprise applications?

[AMD Die Hard]

I just ordered the parts for this system at work to be a file server for about 10 people:

Cables - CABLE HD COOLMAX SATA 18" 2H GRN% - OEM (Qty=2,Price=$5.80)

Motherboard - MSI K8N NEO4 PLATINUM NF4ULTRA R - Retail (Qty=1,Price=$142.00)

CPU - AMD 64 3000+ ATHLON 64 939 - Venice core 1000FSB - Retail (Qty=1,Price=$159.00)

Hard Drives X 4 - Seagate 250GB 7200RPM 8M SATA ST3250823AS with NCQ - OEM (Qty=4,Price=$532.00)

DVD Burner - DVD+/-RW 16x|NEC ND-3520A BK W/O SW - OEM (Qty=1,Price=$48.99)

CASE - EMAX CS-5688AL-BLK ATX RTL - Retail (Qty=1,Price=$39.99)
Video Card - VGA JATON|Video-PX6600 128MB - Retail (Qty=1,Price=$112.00) (Probably overkill)

Power Supply - PSU OCZ OCZ520ADJ 520W RT - Retail (Qty=1,Price=$129.00)

Memory - DDRAM 2GB (2 X 1GB) PC-3200 GE2GB3200BDC - Retail (Qty=1,Price=$184.39)

Subtotal: $1,353.17
TAX: $0.00
Shipping and Handling Charge**: $58.73
Total: $1,411.90

So as far as I can see, this system outperforms most available server class machines at a fraction of the price.

Unbelieveable storage
I am starting with 4 X 250 GB SATA 150 drives in RAID 0,1. I could add 4 X SATA II drives in RAID and - and not or - 4 X ATA133 drives in RAID. That is serious power.

great memory
I am starting wih 2 X 1 GB memory running dual channel. I can double if need be.

Great CPU power
I started with the 3000+ venice core processor that has the new SS3 extensions. That isn't the highest available, but for the price ratio, it can't be beat and is hugely powerful. This motherboard can run the new X2 processors with just a bios update. That could give this system unbelivable power for a small price ratio when they become more common.

Throw in dual LAN, and this is a great file server just running windows XP Pro.


Compare this to an AMD alternative, the opteron. Forget the price, because the opteron can't compete. The 3000+ processor is competive with the lower opterons for file serving apps. On the choice of chipset, I think it is clear. First off, I really like the Nvidia chipsets. I find then fast and stable and ewasy to use. The Nforce4 chipset that I chose integrates many feautres never seen in previous chipsets before that I won't list here including SATA II. The competing Nvidia platform for the opteron, the Nforce pro, is still based ont eNforce3 250 chipset. A fine performer but missing many of the options of the Nforce4.

I had a computer guy say to me "You can't trust business data to a desktop system". I say why not? Systems nowdays are a thousand times more reliable than they were ten years ago. Electronic failure is more likely in the first 24 hours than in the next three years. Desktops class sytems built now from high quality components can be expected to perform for years on end without failure. My data is redundant, it will be backed up to 400 GB external USB 2.0 drives periodically. Its non ECC memory, but modern desktop systems don;t get memory errors unless there is something wrong with them anyway. For the cost of buasiness, this possbility of an unlikely anomally is an acceptable risk and easily recoverable from if even noticeable. 14 people serving Word files from a AMD 64 3000 - yea I think so, if not how about a FX55 or X2?

 

[CTho9305]

What kind of insane things are these 10 users doing that you need such a powerful system for file serving?

Video Card - VGA JATON|Video-PX6600 128MB - Retail (Qty=1,Price=$112.00) (Probably overkill)

For a server?

 

[Peter]

One word: Reliability.

 

[AMD Die Hard]

These users are creating and saving Microfost word documents and excel docuemnts. Thats pretty much it. We may have one machine begin scanning files to save them digitally - not sure of what format yet. As far as I can figure, this machine should be more than enough.

As far as reliability goes, I have been running an ATA133 RAID 0,1 array in a file serving machine for more than three years now. We periodically back up to an expternal 300 GB hard drive. Whats not to be reliable? This machine has never so much as hiccuped. I beleive that past incarnations of desktops and even modern off the shelf machines may be suspect to problems, but if you build a machine yourself out of the highest quality parts, you can expect an extremely stable machine. Modern systems, the Nforce3, the nForce4 are very stable, feature rich, high performance systems. If a mchine can operate for a month stably, then the fail rate after that is negligible.

 

[imported_Kensai]

I'd go with a different video card, you really don't need a 6600 for a file server. With that money, I'd get a better PSU. Maybe a Seasonic S-12 600W. They're quite solid or a Fortron would be quite nice. If you're really buff, go for a redundant PSU. Very reliable.

 

[dcdude]

shouldnt you be using scsi drtives for a file server?

 

[Zepper]

dcd - I certainly would...

Also want a mobo that fully supports ECC memory. No nForce chipset I know of supports ECC properly. But since the AMD 64-bit (not sure if all of them) took the memory controller on-board, that may not be an issue.

.bh.

 

[imported_Kensai]

How many SCSI drives can you get within his 1500$ budget?

ECC memory, you'll never need the error correction for that few number of users and if there is an error, you've got bad memory.

ECC memory is better justified for servers with a multitude of personel accessing it.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Your memory isn't ECC?
What extra parts did you pick up in case something fails?
No OS?

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Peter
One word: Reliability.

I would also add I/O throughput, at peak times with 10 people working simultaneously, access can get sluggish on that machine. It will pale in comparison to a business class file server.

Economical? Yes
Dependable????????? :roll:
Best performance? No

Dual socket server motherboards provided two banks of dual channel memory and dual fsb which greatly increases multitasking performance. A server running 2 x 1.4ghz opterons would destroy a desktop machine running 2.5ghz in file server performance.
And business class SCSII hard drives would easily double the performance of the drives listed in the OP

 

[CTho9305]

These users are creating and saving Microfost word documents and excel docuemnts. Thats pretty much it.

I'd bet you could usea 33 MHz 486 with one 7200rpm drive (or maybe RAID 0 for reliability) and they wouldn't feel the slowdown.

 

[Monoman]

not to mention the witn Windoes XP, it only allows 10 concurrent connections at a time. I know you said 10 peeps, but thats all she will allow. I kinda get the idea the admin will be doing some sort of gaming on this box

 

[nweaver]

reliability and scalability is the answer. Not sure on your raid, but I have found recently that some of the raid on desktop boards is pretty much all software throught the drivers (I have promise fasttrak 133 on gigabyte ga7vrxp rev 2).

Not to mention SCSI speed and reliability, hot swappable, SUPPORT and SERVICE and WARRANTY...

If you have a drive failure, how long to replace? A dell, you have a tech next day. Also, if this is a file server for enterprise class, you need SCSI for your tape drive. Surely, you don't consider raid0+1 your backup, right?

 

[nweaver]

also, the poll needs new options. A server is a lot more then processor.