new DIY NAS project, lots of questions!

ghostdunks

n00b
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
30
Hi all, I'm looking to build my own NAS and would appreciate some thoughts or comments on my proposed build. Am posting this in several forums which all have their own specialty(ie. silent computing specific, network, australian, etc..), so looking to collate everyone's thoughts and hopefully come up with a good system. Been lurking around and reading all sorts of threads and articles and these are my thoughts so far.

I haven't built my own computer for a while, so forgive me if I'm asking particularly stupid or newb questions, as technology seems to be advancing faster than I can keep up. I've done quite a bit of reading on this on a lot of different sites, so hopefully I'm asking the right questions.

Basically, I'm looking for a NAS that I can build myself with a minimm of 5 hard disks, that will run relatively quiet and is power efficient, as it'll be on 24/7. Will be running the starting point of 5 disks in RAID5, hooked up to a gigabit LAN and I want to go with software raid of some flavor rather than hardware raid.

System specs so far:

CPU:
Been hearing a lot of good things about the new sandy bridge processors, especially with regards to power efficency and also because they come with integrated video(a must for me for low power consumption). So I've basically picked the cheapest SB processors(LGA 1155) which looks like they're more than powerful enough to run a NAS.

i3 2100T
i3 2100
G620T
G620

Still doing my research on the T models(the designated ultra low-power processors) and whether it is worth the price premium over a normal chip. A lot of opinions on the web I've seen seem to indicate that the T versions aren't worth it, mainly because the SB chips all seem to idle at the same power consumption, and that the normal chips can just be undervolted or underclocked to match the T versions. Also, tossing up between the Core i3 processor or the Pentium G620 processor line. As I think the Pentium G620 chip seems to be more than powerful enough, I'm leaning towards that one as its the cheapest.

Am I right in thinking that any Socket 1155 motherboard that will accept a Core i3 chip will also accept a G620 chip, or are they fundamentally different other than clockspeeds and cache ram, and I need specific 1155 motherboards that will accept them?


RAM:
Was just going to whack any old sticks of 2 2GB DDR3 RAM in there for a total of 4GB, which should be plenty I think.


Case:
I was initially going to go with the Fractal Design Array R2(http://www.fractal-design.com/?view=product&category=2&prod=42) but I think I'm leaning more towards the Fractal Design R3(http://www.fractal-design.com/?view=product&category=2&prod=48) or even the XL version(but that might be overkill). Reasons why I picked the much bigger Design over the Array,
- The Array seems purpose built for a DIY NAS box, and has room for 6 HDs, but to me, it seems that all the drives are all crammed into a small space. Having lost HDs in the past due to heat issues, I'm erring on the side of caution and putting my HDs into a much bigger case where its easier to cool quietly. Also, with the Design case, it means I can expand the number of disks in my array a lot easier as there's room for 10+ HDs. As this NAS box I'm building is not going to be anywhere near the TV or living area, I don't mind if its a big box I can just toss into the corner somewhere out of the way
- The Array is significantly more expensive than the Design, especially in Australia



Hard drives:
Was just going to get a bunch of Western Digial Green 2TB hard drives(WD20EARX, the SATA3 versions, no particular reason other than they aren't much more expensive than the SATA2 versions). Everyone has their likes and dislikes of particular brands, but I've had HDs of pretty much every brand fail on me before, so much of a muchness. Mainly looking for low power high capacity drives, so these will do for now. Have been reading though that the WD green drives aren't particularly suitable for NAS so I'll have to research that a bit more.


Motherboard:
Now this is where I'm completely out of my depth... would appreciate any advice on this. Looking for the following features,
- low power and power efficient. From what I've read, Intel made boards use the least power, is this true?
- sata ports - Need at least 5 internal SATA ports so I can hook up 5 2TB drives to it. Would love to have more but doubt many motherboards out there have more than 6. I'm assuming that if I want to add more drives to my RAID later, I'll have to buy an addon PCIE SATA host adapter card that provides more SATA ports?
- esata - would like to have one esata port
- USB3 ports
- gigabit ethernet - that supports jumbo frames
- integrated video - for low power, I'm assuming then, that it has to be a H67 or H61 board.
- would be nice to have firewire but not a dealbreaker
Any suggestions on this would be great, at least as a starting point.

Power Supply:
Again, no idea on power supplies other than I want to get one that's silent, efficient, and powerful enough to run at least the CPU, motherboard, and 6 internal SATA drives, and it would be good if it could ultimately run 10 drives(if I add more drives later)


OS:
Was just going to toss freenas or ubuntu a spare usb disk and boot off that. Not much experience with either but I think it'll be good experience to try both and see what they're capable of. Any other suggestions here too would be good.


Not sure if its possible but would be good if a rig like this is capable of running 20-30w in idle.

Any and all feedback and comments would be appreciated! :) Would also be a lot easier if the parts are easily sourced in Australia(although I'm probably going to buy the cpu/hard drives in HK while I'm here), but if need to get them from US, thats still an option.
 
Your config is a bit of an overkill for a NAS. LOL
1. CPU, You can probably go with an ATOM with integrated motherboard. It will consume less power and it is less part for you to assemble. It will also be more compact.
2. The only thing that really matters in the motherboard is... The integrated network card. The bottleneck of the NAS lies in your network speed. If you want it to be fast try getting a quality Gigabit network card or make sure that the integrated one on the motherboard is good.
3. A single 2GB stick is already an overkill if you run FreeNAS
4. I am running the WD green drives and have had no issues.
5. On the case, it is really up to your liking. I prefered to have a compact case but if you like a big one it will work. The only thing that mattered to me when I picked out my box was compact and must have eSATA connectors. You can always buy a PCI bracket with a SATA-eSATA cable if not.
6. For my boxes I use pico PSU. They are more compact, rely on an external AC-DC converter and a small DC-DC converter. Runs very cool and it is basically a solid state power supply which runs very cool.
Freenas or Ubuntu are both very good. Ubuntu has a friendlier interface. Freenas is more to the point. I personally run 3 Freenas boxes
 
Yeah I was thinking about the ATOM platform, but figured I'll go with the new sandy bridge processors because knowing myself, I'm going to start off with a simple NAS box, but I know as I start delving into it and tinkering, I'm going to want to use it for more things such as virtual machines, etc. Will be very simple if I run out of horsepower then to just whack one of the higher end sandy bridge processors into it. I always like myself a bit of legroom :)

Motherboard wise, think I'm looking at the Intel ones now, as quite a few people have said they are very power efficient, and I've also heard good things about their gigabit LAN chips.

Will have to look into the pico PSUs. Looks interesting. Not sure if they'll be enough if I ramp the NAS up to 10 drives though.
 
6. For my boxes I use pico PSU. They are more compact, rely on an external AC-DC converter and a small DC-DC converter. Runs very cool and it is basically a solid state power supply which runs very cool.
How many drives and which picoPSU + brick are you using?
 
I am running 4 drives with a 150W pico PSU. The whole motherboard with all the fans consumes probably 20-50W in average. It leaves me plenty of room for the hard drives.

The green drives at peak consume less than 18W peak and run probably around 6-10W in average. I am pretty sure I can run 10 drives off of it.

http://www.logicsupply.com/products/picopsu_150?ctype=2&gclid=CKOahKzVu6kCFRNrgwodbCM_gg

As for the brick I just bought a random 180W brick for LCD monitors on eBay.

I found a 120W version which should be plenty for a NAS anyway

[ame="http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-12V-10A-Adapter-Power-Supply-LCD-monitor-Cord-/260779682564?pt=AU_Computers_Monitor_Accessories&hash=item3cb7ae2b04#ht_2198wt_905"]NEW 12V 10A Adapter Power Supply for LCD monitor +Cord | eBay[/ame]
[ame="http://cgi.ebay.com/12V-10A-AC-Adapter-Power-Cord-Supply-LCD-TV-Monitor-/290576196270?pt=Laptop_Adapters_Chargers&hash=item43a7b0e2ae#ht_2356wt_1139"]12V 10A AC Adapter Power Cord Supply For LCD TV Monitor | eBay[/ame]
I think mine is bigger.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for answering my question

The green drives at peak consume less than 18W peak and run probably around 6-10W in average. I am pretty sure I can run 10 drives off of it.
Im little worried thogh, an 10 drives on startup might go into 18W each.... 180W demand on startup, probably after should be fine considering they might consume 5W average.... so 10 drives 50W and the rest of the components should have enough room with the pico, but the startup is what worries with such a low watt psu.
 
Some setups support staggered spinup of disks. I don't know anything about this topic so unfortunately I'm of no help, just thought I'd throw the topic at you.
 
3. A single 2GB stick is already an overkill if you run FreeNAS

(my first post on this forum...)

Not if you're running ZFS. ZFS likes as much RAM as you can give it, preferably at least 6-8GB. Also make sure you're running the amd64 version of FreeNAS if you're running ZFS.
 
If you want > 70-90MiB/s you should not get an Atom processor =< Atom D510, I've not tested with higher end models, but even with an Intel X25-E or RAID-0 of 6 raptors (320MiB/s locally on the RAID) but FTP, NFS, etc, it struggles to keep up 70-90MiB/s and Samba is slow (50-60MiB/s) where a regular desktop board (DP55KG) gives > 100MiB/s sustained.

If you don't care about that and as long as you get 50-70MiB/s any Atom <= D510 should be fine.
 
If you want > 70-90MiB/s you should not get an Atom processor =< Atom D510, I've not tested with higher end models, but even with an Intel X25-E or RAID-0 of 6 raptors (320MiB/s locally on the RAID) but FTP, NFS, etc, it struggles to keep up 70-90MiB/s and Samba is slow (50-60MiB/s) where a regular desktop board (DP55KG) gives > 100MiB/s sustained.

If you don't care about that and as long as you get 50-70MiB/s any Atom <= D510 should be fine.

In my experience, with Acer AH342 with Atom D510 on WHSv1, i get 65 to 85MiB/s, depending on what im transferring, this is fine by me, would like to see 100s, but also most of my storage drives are 5400rpm.
 
Been looking at some numbers on SPCR, comparing the pico psus with a relatively efficient(ie. bronze or gold) psu, and the differences seem to be minimal at idle(a couple of watts), so for convenience and ease of sourcing, I think I'll just go with a Seasonic S12II-330Bronze first for like 40 bucks, and then maybe look at going to a pico later.

Thanks for the heads up on memory reqs of ZFS on freenas. I haven't actually looked into ZFS much, might have to do a bit of research on it.

The speed bottleneck of the Atom platform is what actually pushed me to think about the Sandy Bridge processors in first place, as I had read somewhere thats what was slowing the transfers down. Just out of curiosity, what are typical transfer rates for 5400rpm drives, if they weren't being bottlenecked by the processor?
 
Look at a AMD Zacate, I have the MSI E350IA-E45 running zfsguru and 4 western digital 2tb drives in a zfs array and its alot faster then gigabit(click for proof and thats with a 4 disc raidz), they are alot faster then a Intel Atom and really low power.
 
Eh, the i3-2100T may or may not be overkill depending on what else you are using on there - but, if the ~120ish premium over an atom system isn't going to break your bank it's a great choice.

It's still very light on the power, and you now have more flexibility if you ever want to re purpose/add additional services to the device.
 
Just a quick update on my build and experiences with the components I ended up going with:

Intel G620 cpu
Intel DH67GD motherboard
2 sticks of 2gb Kingston RAM
Fractal Design Define R3 case
Seasonic S12II-330Bronze 330 watts 80plus power supply
5 Hitachi 5K3000 2TB drives(5900rpm low power drives)

As I was aiming for low power draw, I had a powermeter measuring consumption with different OSes, options, and found out something interesting.

Win 7 Ultimate:
- Booted off an external eSATA drive. Without the 5 HDs powered up, at idle, the rig drew 23W. This was just to give a baseline for system power consumption of just the CPU,motherboard without drives hooked up.
- With 5 drives powered up, and idle, it drew about 46W
- With 5 drives powered, but spundown(ie. after hard drive inactivity for x mins), drew about 29W.

FreeNAS 7(freeBSD OS)
- Booted off a usb disk. Running the lastest distribution, the system had problems recognising the Intel Gigabit Ethernet built-in to the motherboard(82579V controller). After I managed to find a test distro with the latest intel drivers compiled into the kernel, I then ran into another problem as I found that the drives hooked up to the SATA6 ports wouldn't be recognised. Again, put it down to old drivers not supporting chipset. Gave up on FreeNAS7, even thought that was my first choice for features,etc. What I did find was that power consumption of the rig at idle running Freenas7 without the hard drives hooked up, it was about 31W, even with the power saving management features turned on. Played around with it a bit more, but couldn't get it down. Seems the power saving management of freeBSD(powerd) consists mainly of throttling the cpu. Even after my cpu was throttled to 350Mhz, there was negligible power savings. Seems that the sandy bridge cpus seem to not need to throttle down the cpu speed to save power....but I concluded that maybe freeBSD was missing perhaps the same power management features as other OSes, as I could never get it down below 31W.

FreeNAS 8(freeBSD OS)
- Booted off a usb disk. Drew about 31W at idle without drives hooked up(same experience as with FreeNas7, couldn't get it down further)
- drivers in latest freenas 8 seems to work with my config, ethernet controller was recognsed properly, and so were all the drives.
- With 5 drives powered up, and idle, it drew about 53W
- With 5 drives powered, but spundown(ie. after hard drive inactivity for x mins), drew about 37W.

Ubuntu 10.04(Linux OS)
- Booted off a usb disk. Drew about 25W at idle without drives.
- With 5 drives powered up, and idle, it drew about 48W
- With 5 drives powered, but spundown(ie. after hard drive inactivity for x mins), drew about 30W.


Conclusion I drew from all that testing was that, surprise surprise, Windows 7 was the most power efficient OS... That was really surprising to me as I expected Windows 7 to be comparatively bloated compared to the FreeBSD and Linux distros. Ubuntu wasn't far behind it in terms of power efficiency, just 1 watt or so diff. The freeBSD distros however....drew a fair bit more power than both Win7 and Ubuntu.

However, as I wanted to run this box as a NAS and boot of a USB disk, I had to write off Win7 as the OS of choice, and went with Ubuntu Server, as that allows me to boot the OS off a usb flash drive, and is quite power efficient as well, idling under 50W with 5 drives, and once drives are spundown, about 30W, which I think is quite good.

Also, with the case I got and power supply, with just the stock fans(1 intake, 1 exhaust), I can't hear the machine, and the temps all look fine(CPU at about 28 degrees and HDs about 30-33 degrees). Under load, temps go up a bit, but not much noticeably and machine is still quiet :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top