Penny Arcade Forums› Games and Technology› Moe's Stupid Technology Tavern
As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

File Server General Questions

1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
edited May 2008 in Moe's Stupid Technology Tavern
So I have a new gaming PC now; my old gaming PC will become a file server. I have 4x500gb drives to get started (all from the old PC) but I'm rearranging some parts into my girlfriend's Shuttle.

Complexify!

CURRENT SHUTTLE
Processor.................2.66 Intel P4 533mhz
Memory....................758mb DDR400
Graphics...................XFX 6800GS 128MB
Storage....................80GB WD Caviar
Motherboard............Shuttle SN45G

CURRENT OLD GAMING
Processor................3.0 Intel P4 800mhz
Memory...................2GB DDR400
Graphics..................ATI X1950 Pro 256MB
Storage...................4x500GB SATAII
Motherboard...........Gigabyte 8KNXP


I'm moving the RAM, Processor, and Video card to the Shuttle. I have 2 choices with the file server. I can either replace the processor in the FS with the 2.66 (non-HT) P4 478, buy a cheap 2.8ghz (HT) P4 478, or upgrade to a motherboard with a 775 socket and use my 3.6ghz P40 (from a Compaq X6000 notebook). This means, however, using DDR2.

Investment with old Shuttle proc: $0
Investment with new 2.8ghz P4: $30 (refurb)
Investment with new mobo/RAM: $58-70 (new mobo) $38-41 (new RAM)

The new mobo will have onboard video so I don't need to buy a video card as well (and for overall reduction in power consumption).

So, should I spend $100+ for a 3.6ghz single core, or deal with a slower 2.6 or 2.8ghz single core and sub 1GB RAM?

1ddqd on

Posts

  • ginguskahnginguskahn Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I doubt you will see any performance gain with a slightly faster cpu in a file server. What OS will it be running, the extra ram may help but barely (unless its Vista). You seem to have the most important bits down (big fast hdds), what about the networking side? If you don't have a gigabit NIC in that machine the money may be better spent there, or a gigabit switch (even a small cheap netgear should see a good improvement over 10/100 stuff).

    Maybe an idea of what you will be sharing and the number of users accessing it would be helpful to.

    ginguskahn on
    ginguskahn360.png
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Get a gigabit NIC definitely.

    For a fileserver I recommend Linux just because it makes it easier to setup any other server software you might want to run on your network, and because then you can install glusterfs which let's you unify all your volumes into one big logical volume without any striping or spanning across the disks (so if one goes down you only lose whatever was stored directly on it). It also supports various types of redundancy, and can be expanded to use discs from more then one computer (it's a clustered computing program).

    electricitylikesme on
  • 1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I have the DGL-4300 router, and the Gigabyte 8KNXP has built in gigabit (one of the first 875 boards to include it!) port, so that's covered.

    The PC will be running XP Pro - I may look into Linux, but for now, I'll keep things familiar. Mainly, the content is HD rips; 1 drive is filled with music, the other 3 will be filled with mostly HD content, various programs, and random personal backups.

    I would ultimately like to use this to stream the HD content, which is why I'm contemplating the upgrade for the faster proc. However, I don't know if processing power matters when all the HD content is doing on the file server is streaming/accessing, not necessarily displaying.

    1ddqd on
  • ginguskahnginguskahn Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Unless your transcoding video on the fly, you really wont notice that CPU bump, I would say that machine will more than cover what you want to do, might be worth looking at services etc you can permanently disable in XP as you won't actually be "using" that box to keep the memory usage down and stability up, other than that, looks like you have it covered.

    ginguskahn on
    ginguskahn360.png
  • wabbitehwabbiteh Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    1ddqd wrote: »
    However, I don't know if processing power matters when all the HD content is doing on the file server is streaming/accessing, not necessarily displaying.

    Streaming a video file should basically be the same as sending a file over the network (if it's not, then whoever wrote the program that's requesting the file is doing things *very* badly, or doing something strange/fancy). Not much processing power is required at all.

    wabbiteh on
  • 1ddqd1ddqd Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Sweet; now I just need to optimize for power consumption and setup wake on lan (uses 250W from my 400W Antec knock-off when on, so I don't want it sitting there when I'm not using it lol)

    Maximum PC did a great write up on this a couple issues ago, if you're wondering.

    1ddqd on
Sign In or Register to comment.
Penny Arcade Forums› Games and Technology› Moe's Stupid Technology Tavern