YANB (Yet Another NAS Build) - this thread is not like the others, I hope!

[destrekor]

No really, I promise, I'm special.

So I'm kicking around the idea of building a NAS instead of selecting a pre-built one. If I were to slowly set aside money for one, it'd be something like the QNAP TVS-471-i3, but I'm curious if I can create a custom FreeNAS build for right around the same price. Obviously the storage will add to the cost, so for the purposes of this post, that is not the main focus.

Purposes intended for this NAS? Plex server, for one, with full high-bitrate 1080p support. Capable of transcoding Blu-ray rips if the need arises. Most often it would be to just add in subtitles but there could be mobile viewing mixed in.

Based on this list, it would seem the equivalent of an Intel i3 or Pentium G3250 would be necessary, but if there are functional equivalents equally as capable, by all means, suggest away!

The main intended function would be to serve the recording engine for the HDHomeRun DVR. However, that is of course dependent upon Silicon Dust creating a functional DVR engine that can handle and serve up copy-protected content. And I think this post-Windows Media Center era is helping get other companies, slowly, interested in filling the void for copy-protected DVR content. Better late than never, eh?

So the main focus is obviously DVR and media server capability. What should be cake is the handling actual backup, which is a big reason for the NAS but otherwise should play second fiddle when it comes to processor priority.

Ideally, said NAS would also serve up minor virtualization for routing and firewall capabilities, should I endeavor to follow that interest.

But in the end, the main goal is to achieve all of that with the lowest power consumption possible, or at least, as best as I can afford for the hardware up front.

The pre-built NAS units I am considering can all handle 4 or 6 disks while keeping active power consumption around or below 50w. I'd very much like to achieve that in a custom build if at all possible. And ideally, I'd love for a hot-swap capability.

FreeNAS interests me greatly for the ZFS/Z-RAID capability, which seems to have greater data integrity/security than old RAID, especially for today's high-capacity HDDs. But if my best route ends up being a strong QNAP product, I'd likely choose that route. Everything I want my NAS to achieve can be had with both QNAP and Synology's OS, and I believe it is even possible to use an unofficial Synology OS build on custom NAS builds if that makes for greater compatibility for the software packages I would intend to run. It sounds like the HDHR DVR can be ran on FreeNAS, with a little tinkering. I'm not against said tinkering if it can be done once and is stable from then on out. I don't want to have to fight and constantly manage the software/services I choose to run, so I want to be careful in selecting the right base OS/system to serve up what I want.

So, with all that said... suggestions?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

An QNAP TVS-471-i3 with no HDs in it is like a thousand bucks. You can get something pretty similar capability-wise for not nearly as much.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/dNNT6h

^^ similar to the rig in my signature, but with a much beefier CPU to host all your VMs.

Case selection is actually kind of important here, if you want hot-swappable HDD bays, those tend to be more expensive. Cases with a lot of 5.25" bays can be converted, too.

http://www.istarusa.com/mini-ITX/nasspec.php

If you wanted to build a smaller mITX system, something like this would work as a motherboard:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157466

 

[dave_the_nerd]

I guess I should point out that you're basically just building a general purpose server, so it's, like, you can probably buy used rackmount server hardware for not too much money. But you usually need more expensive HD brackets and doodads.

 

[EXCellR8]

I agree, GP server would be way better.

I set up a Synology NAS at work and it's mega slow; not cheap. It's fine for basic file storage but not much else. I actually kind of regret implementation on our network.

 

[destrekor]

Well yeah, you can make a basic server all day, but those use power.

This needs to be as low power as possible, which is where it will get a bit more difficult to source. Building a generic Xeon E3 server is easy, and will use a load more electricity. This is something running 24/7 so I want to minimize to cost to run it.

It'll be a compromise for sure, it won't be able to run everything under the sun.

Getting low-power versions of everything will cost more than a generic build, but IMHO, would be worth it.

http://blog.brianmoses.net/2015/01/diy-nas-2015-edition.html

I've looked into this list a bit, 63w under load isn't so bad. But that load doesn't include transcoding, but I acknowledge that will not be a regular occurrence. But with other additional server functionality happening, it is still likely the CPU will be utilized more so than just during file transfers.

 

[destrekor]

I agree, GP server would be way better.

I set up a Synology NAS at work and it's mega slow; not cheap. It's fine for basic file storage but not much else. I actually kind of regret implementation on our network.

Synology tends to be slower than the QNAP devices.

But look at the list maintained by plex (or plex users, not sure): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...-Ac4oOLPRtCkgUxU0jdj3tmMPc/edit#gid=314388488

If it can do a single client 1080p high bitrate transcode, that's surely enough for many purposes.

Now, granted, I'd like as much raw power as I can get with an affordable build, but power usage is going to be sky high with standard server builds in comparison. There's a compromise I want to reach, whereby I get as much computational power as I can afford, while also striving to keep power usage as low as possible. Somewhere in there, computational capability will have to be sacrificed in order to reduce the wattage.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Now, granted, I'd like as much raw power as I can get with an affordable build, but power usage is going to be sky high with standard server builds in comparison. There's a compromise I want to reach, whereby I get as much computational power as I can afford, while also striving to keep power usage as low as possible. Somewhere in there, computational capability will have to be sacrificed in order to reduce the wattage.

Looked into SuperMicro Broadwell-based Xeon D boards? I think that they have both 4-core as well as 8-core. I think that they are 45W TDP. Not especially cheap though.

 

[destrekor]

Looked into SuperMicro Broadwell-based Xeon D boards? I think that they have both 4-core as well as 8-core. I think that they are 45W TDP. Not especially cheap though.

Oh man, looking into that, the Xeon-D series looks phenomenal, and has all the bells and whistles between the package and motherboard to almost make it worth it.

But the packages I can find prices for so far are all in the $800 range.

 

[destrekor]

Well there is this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...2973&cm_re=xeon_d_1520-_-13-182-973-_-Product

Intriguing, to say the least.

 

[Essence_of_War]

That seems like a great choice. I noticed it doesn't come with an active heatsink, do those need rack mount cases? Or can you attach your own fan?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

That seems like a great choice. I noticed it doesn't come with an active heatsink, do those need rack mount cases? Or can you attach your own fan?

They're just very low-power, don't need the fan.

Adding a couple of case fans is probably a good idea, and clipping a fan onto the heat sink wouldn't hurt anything, but it's not necessary.

 

[XavierMace]

destrekor, I have to ask, have you actually done the math of the power cost? Most of the time when I see/hear people talk about how much time it would take for a low power build to pay for itself, they haven't really done their research.

The build blog you linked to is $1,100 without drives. 63w of power 24x7 for a year (based on my cost here in AZ) is $66.

My Dell Poweredge R610 with 2x Xeon L5640 Hex Cores and 64Gb of RAM was running 150w under load. That's $158 a year (again at my cost). Hunt around on eBay and you could get one built for about $400, saving you $700. That means it would take a little over 10 years for that low power solution to pay for itself in electricity savings. Do you realistically expect either system to last you 10 years?

Meanwhile the Poweredge obliterates it from a CPU grunt perspective. Even if you skip the L series Xeon and go X series, you're still likely looking at under 300w in use. Which means it's still going to take over 2 years for the NAS build to pay for itself. Or you could go the other way, drop the second Xeon (a single is still faster than the Celery in that NAS build) to save 60w of TDP.

The Xeon L5640 has a Passmark score of 6,710. The C2550 in the NAS has a passmark score of 2,392.

The Xeon-D on that Supermicro is comparable performance wise (6,396) but is only saving 15w TDP on the processor. It's a nice board to be sure. But you're limited to a single socket and only 4 slots of RAM (and expensive DDR4 ECC to boot). Which means the energy savings is even less than the blog's build and the total cost of the system build is likely to be more.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

CPUs aren't pulling anywhere near their TDP most of the time - don't focus on that so much. (Especially for a NAS and/or Plex server - the thing is going to be 90% idle even when you're using it.)

The main thing eating power in the OP's build will probably end up being HDDs.

Don't let your RAID spin down unless you like sitting on your hands for 30 seconds every time you open a new file.

 

[XavierMace]

No argument about that, but the drives are going to be the same in either case. That's why I stated total system consumption right off the bat. But the TDP is the only other easily available indicator of consumption available without having the build running in front of you.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

True.

I've been curious for a while - just bought a second Kill-a-watt so I can leave my server plugged into it. I need to power it down for an HD swap anyways.

 

[destrekor]

destrekor, I have to ask, have you actually done the math of the power cost? Most of the time when I see/hear people talk about how much time it would take for a low power build to pay for itself, they haven't really done their research.

The build blog you linked to is $1,100 without drives. 63w of power 24x7 for a year (based on my cost here in AZ) is $66.

My Dell Poweredge R610 with 2x Xeon L5640 Hex Cores and 64Gb of RAM was running 150w under load. That's $158 a year (again at my cost). Hunt around on eBay and you could get one built for about $400, saving you $700. That means it would take a little over 10 years for that low power solution to pay for itself in electricity savings. Do you realistically expect either system to last you 10 years?

Meanwhile the Poweredge obliterates it from a CPU grunt perspective. Even if you skip the L series Xeon and go X series, you're still likely looking at under 300w in use. Which means it's still going to take over 2 years for the NAS build to pay for itself. Or you could go the other way, drop the second Xeon (a single is still faster than the Celery in that NAS build) to save 60w of TDP.

The Xeon L5640 has a Passmark score of 6,710. The C2550 in the NAS has a passmark score of 2,392.

The Xeon-D on that Supermicro is comparable performance wise (6,396) but is only saving 15w TDP on the processor. It's a nice board to be sure. But you're limited to a single socket and only 4 slots of RAM (and expensive DDR4 ECC to boot). Which means the energy savings is even less than the blog's build and the total cost of the system build is likely to be more.

I've done some math on power differences, but I haven't looked into used servers primarily because I have this thing about buying new. I know what I'm getting, versus no idea on runtime for used equipment, in what environment it sat, etc etc etc. Too many variables.

And frankly, if I can have this NAS-primary server last more than 10 years, that would be great. It may lose functionality over time of other systems take those roles, but as a low power NAS, I'd just have to upgrade HDDs if I don't go big right away.

 

[XavierMace]

Eh, we are talking servers here. They're generally pretty well taken care of and it either works or doesn't.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Well yeah, you can make a basic server all day, but those use power.

This needs to be as low power as possible, which is where it will get a bit more difficult to source. Building a generic Xeon E3 server is easy, and will use a load more electricity. This is something running 24/7 so I want to minimize to cost to run it.

It'll be a compromise for sure, it won't be able to run everything under the sun.

Getting low-power versions of everything will cost more than a generic build, but IMHO, would be worth it.

http://blog.brianmoses.net/2015/01/diy-nas-2015-edition.html

I've looked into this list a bit, 63w under load isn't so bad. But that load doesn't include transcoding, but I acknowledge that will not be a regular occurrence. But with other additional server functionality happening, it is still likely the CPU will be utilized more so than just during file transfers.

My server idles (with 8x 7200rpm drives spinning, VMs up but CPU is idle) at 75w (at the wall). 100w with a ZFS scrub running. (Which is about as much disk activity as you can get, and about 15% CPU load.)

Max draw on the HDDs is just shy of 7w each, according to the labels (350mA @ 12v, 550mA @ 5v) so if my math is right, the CPU/motherboard/RAM/PSU is eating about 45w at idle?

Incidentally, it draws 5w even when it's off (trickle power and IPMI.)

With 4 5400rpm HDDs (or, god forbid, an array of 2.5" drives), shutting off IPMI, and only two RAM sticks instead of 4, you could probably power a similar system safely off of a 150w PicoPSU - which are a lot more efficient. (My PSU is probably only delivering 80% efficiency at that load) and I bet you could get that at-the-wall load number under 70w without having to pick crazy-weird-and-expensive low power parts and whatnot.

 

[destrekor]

To add to the complexity requirements, part of what I am planning is to utilize ESXi with FreeNAS running (with an HBA controller passed through), alongside pfSense for sure to serve as the gateway and firewall for my network. I wouldn't mind playing with maybe one or two more VMs in a sort of mini-lab.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

To add to the complexity requirements, part of what I am planning is to utilize ESXi with FreeNAS running (with an HBA controller passed through), alongside pfSense for sure to serve as the gateway and firewall for my network. I wouldn't mind playing with maybe one or two more VMs in a sort of mini-lab.

I wanted to do that, although some people have called that "the definition of too clever". (You know who you are!)

But it doesn't work with my CPU. (The newest-gen CPUs support it almost across the board, but for Haswell, you'd need an i5, i7, or Xeon.)

http://ark.intel.com/search/advanced?s=t&RetailSkuAvailable=true&VTD=true

 

[XavierMace]

I wanted to do that, although some people have called that "the definition of too clever". (You know who you are!)

Yeah, still not a fan of that. Too many things to go wrong, just adds more hoops to jump through when you do updates and whatnot.

 

[destrekor]

I figured I'd bump this thread to get some opinions on another component:

The case.

I'm generally focused on the Mini-ITX build route, but there are a couple fascinating FlexATX or MicroATX boards. Problem: while there seems to be a number of mITX cases with hot-swap front bays, it seems to be nearly impossible to find a quality mATX case with hot-swap for 6+ drives. I'll probably only use 6 drives at first, but ideally, the capability to expand to 8 or 10 would be super awesome. Plus even with 6, I'd like to have a hot spare. And then I'd still need room for OS drives and mirrored ZIL drives for FreeNAS.

I realize there are a number of cases where you can quickly and easily access the drives, but I am just too enthralled by the idea of hot swap and the ease that a backplane brings. If it's an interior backplane, I guess I could get by with that, but I won't deal with cables if I use interior HDD cages. I can either use a backplane on interior cages, or a backplane with front-facing hot-swap cages. One day in the far off future, I figure I might just have equipment worthy of putting in a small rack. A NAS and switch, for starters, likely home-theater A/V equipment in there too.

I've generally been looking at the Silverstone DS380, but it is strictly mITX. I wouldn't mind a 2U server case if it was affordable, one that had 8+ front hot-swap.

I wanted to do that, although some people have called that "the definition of too clever". (You know who you are!)

But it doesn't work with my CPU. (The newest-gen CPUs support it almost across the board, but for Haswell, you'd need an i5, i7, or Xeon.)

http://ark.intel.com/search/advanced?s=t&RetailSkuAvailable=true&VTD=true

Weird - my i7-2600K appears to not support VT-d, yet the regular i7-2600 and 2600S both do support it. Fascinating decision, Intel, if that is accurate.

 

[XavierMace]

I've generally been looking at the Silverstone DS380, but it is strictly mITX. I wouldn't mind a 2U server case if it was affordable, one that had 8+ front hot-swap.

What are you defining as affordable?

 

[destrekor]

What are you defining as affordable?

I would like to not spend $300+ on a case/chassis.

I have seen quite a few potentially awesome rack servers, but for just the chassis and power supply, they have been $300-600 or more. And if I'm getting a large server, I don't want it to be a pedestal tower - I'd eventually get a small rack for network/AV equipment and would want the server to seamlessly mesh... though I guess it could stand up in the rack on a shelf?

I'd still mostly prefer a smaller case that isn't designed for a server rack, but at the same time, I am entertaining the idea of a mATX or FlexATX motherboard for certain additional features in the Xeon D-1500 line, and the small NAS-oriented cases just aren't accommodating to anything other than mITX.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

I would like to not spend $300+ on a case/chassis.

I have seen quite a few potentially awesome rack servers, but for just the chassis and power supply, they have been $300-600 or more. And if I'm getting a large server, I don't want it to be a pedestal tower - I'd eventually get a small rack for network/AV equipment and would want the server to seamlessly mesh... though I guess it could stand up in the rack on a shelf?

I'd still mostly prefer a smaller case that isn't designed for a server rack, but at the same time, I am entertaining the idea of a mATX or FlexATX motherboard for certain additional features in the Xeon D-1500 line, and the small NAS-oriented cases just aren't accommodating to anything other than mITX.

Sorry, too many similar threads going on. Second link:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=38021487&postcount=2