Windows 2000 Advance Server on old machine, interesting

[NozlerAtClemson]

I needed a server for my dorm room to store all my MP3s and other stuff (laptop only has 30GB) but I only had a license for Advance Server. The machine is K6-2 500Mhz 256MB PC133. I thought it would have been very slow but it seems to have made itself right at home. No performance issues.

In case you wondered about the complete system:
K6-2 500Mhz
Cooler Master HS w/60mm Vantec Steath
Gigabyte MB
20GB (OS)
80GB (Storage) & 30GB (No use yet) in Vantec LCD Removable Racks (these rock)
Asus V7100 Pure 16MB Ge-Force MX
3Com 3C905CX-TXM

 

[Poontos]

It would be a bit slow. Check the HWCL.

P.S. Running $4500 software for MP3 storage is funnaa.

 

[ivwshane]

That's nothing! I ran win2k server on a PII 200 with 128MB of ram and a 4GB hard drive

I had it running DHCP, DNS, active directory.



Ok it was only for my 5 home systems but still

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: ivwshane
That's nothing! I ran win2k server on a PII 200 with 128MB of ram and a 4GB hard drive

I had it running DHCP, DNS, active directory.



Ok it was only for my 5 home systems but still

Didn't P2s start at 266mhz? Depending on what you are using Win2k Server for, yes, Pentiums 166 are even capable machines.

 

[NozlerAtClemson]

Thats why I thought it was interesting. It doesn't seem slow. Of course I am not gaming on it or running benchmarks. I might do that though.

 

[ivwshane]

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: ivwshane
That's nothing! I ran win2k server on a PII 200 with 128MB of ram and a 4GB hard drive

I had it running DHCP, DNS, active directory.



Ok it was only for my 5 home systems but still

Didn't P2s start at 266mhz? Depending on what you are using Win2k Server for, yes, Pentiums 166 are even capable machines.

My bad but that's even better

 

[Abzstrak]

Yea I have some similar systems in our test lab at work... K6-2 500's and K6-2+ 550's running win2k server.... they all have 7200 rpm IDE drives and do run suprisingly well, we thought we should make some use of the machines, and we were pleasantly suprised and the performance and usability of the systems. All of them have 256MB to 512MB of RAM

 

[Fuzznuts]

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: ivwshane
That's nothing! I ran win2k server on a PII 200 with 128MB of ram and a 4GB hard drive

I had it running DHCP, DNS, active directory.



Ok it was only for my 5 home systems but still

Didn't P2s start at 266mhz? Depending on what you are using Win2k Server for, yes, Pentiums 166 are even capable machines.

they started at 233 so you both as wrong as each other

 

[ProviaFan]

A few years ago I went to a Microsoft thing where they were showing off different software from themselves and other related vendors. They were running several laptops hooked up to a projector, each with Windows 2000 Server; one was a domain controller, and it ran other software (such as SQL server). It appeared suprisingly "snappy."

Needless to say, my Linux box is still "snappier."

 

[NozlerAtClemson]

I have no doubt that linux would be snappier. I just don't have the time to learn what I need to know for linux. It has a lot steeper learning curve than windows.

 

[PCMarine]

Originally posted by: NozlerAtClemson
I have no doubt that linux would be snappier. I just don't have the time to learn what I need to know for linux. It has a lot steeper learning curve than windows.

That's what makes linux linux

 

[earthman]

I ran this on a PII 266 with 128 megs. Didn't seem slow at all to me. Alot of services errors though.

 

[MedicBob]

2000 Server on a cyrix 133 with 128 of ram slow, but SUS doesn't require alot.

 

[ivwshane]

Originally posted by: MedicBob
2000 Server on a cyrix 133 with 128 of ram slow, but SUS doesn't require alot.

And we have a winner!!

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: MedicBob
2000 Server on a cyrix 133 with 128 of ram slow, but SUS doesn't require alot.

Is it stable? (Cyrix chips always sucked in that aspect for me.)

 

[SoulAssassin]

I have an old Gateway 2000 (yes, it has the 2000 on the front) P/60 running W2K AS serving the domain at my parents house. Holds their roaming profiles, the usual AD stuff, NAV CE parent server, and MP3 shared drive. Only thing I did was bump it up to 128MB of RAM and add a ATA/66 RAID controller and a 7200 drive.

Oh, and it runs SETI 24x7 (although it's nearly 100hr turnaround time is killing my average).

Do I win?

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: SoulAssassin
I have an old Gateway 2000 (yes, it has the 2000 on the front) P/60 running W2K AS serving the domain at my parents house. Holds their roaming profiles, the usual AD stuff, NAV CE parent server, and MP3 shared drive. Only thing I did was bump it up to 128MB of RAM and add a ATA/66 RAID controller and a 7200 drive.

Oh, and it runs SETI 24x7 (although it's nearly 100hr turnaround time is killing my average).

Do I win?

Yes.

 

[skyking]

You win hands down. I threw some of those away not long ago.......

 

[ivwshane]

I'm going to have to see some pics of that before I delcare you as the winner!

 

[Xtremetechie]

 

[MedicBob]

LOL a P60, WOW. I use the Cyrix to run Software Update Services only, kinda neat so far. Downloads the MS updates and all my other computers go to it for updates. You can pick and choose what is approved for the users.

No glitches yet, 60 days uptime except for 1 manual reboot.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: ivwshane
I'm going to have to see some pics of that before I delcare you as the winner!

I would Terminal Service in to it but some meathead kept trying to login remotely so I had to close the port. Unfortunately, I won't be there for months and trying to teach my parents house to do a screen cap or dumping srvinfo out to a text file would be an hour long process.

Think about it though. No one is logging into the machine for any tasks except me for administrative type stuff (making sure NAV is up, checking event logs, occasional reboot, windows update, etc), it's only serving three machines, the odds of two people logging in at the same time are slim and even then you would be suprised at how little processing power the authentication process takes. NAV scans/updates run only at 3AM, memory consumed during normal operation is there but slim. Their profiles are <10MB each and except for my sister they always login to one machine. The ATA/66 HD controller really does make the difference in my mind because the hardest thing that might happen is when multiple people stream music or video off it at one time.

IMHO, anything else is overkill and a waste of money. I could have put a 350 or a 400 in there, but they wouldn't have noticed a difference. I wouldn't surf the web from it, but it does what it needs to.

I should really take SETI off it, though.

 

[mastertech01]

I like advanced server, especially because I got it free. I just dont install junk I dont need and disable services I dont use. It runs very well.