• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Core 2 Duo for a server???

L

Lyquist

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 21, 2004
Messages
3,368
I am in the final stages of putting together a server for a client (they don't want Dell, they want me to build it so I'll "know" the parts). Has anyone put together a server with a Core 2 Duo?? Seems like a great chip and for them it will be more than enough. I will be using the following ASUS server motherboard. Any thoughts on the board?? ANyone own it??

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16813131039

Thanks in advance for your help.
 
What's this server being used for? People run PIIIs and Athlon XPs as file servers with no trouble.
 
If you are building a server, I would think that stability would be your #1 concern. If that's the case i would suggest going with an Intel board. They are rock SOLID and you can get them with on board graphics which would be more than powerful enough for a server. You may also want to look into the Intel Single Processor server boards. They are VERY stable (held up to enterprise standards) and are focused more on the performance necessary for server type applications. I know the chipset launched a couple months ago... let me see if I can find you a link.
 
Here's a link to the Intel Server boards.

http://www.intel.com/products/server/motherboard/index.htm?iid=mbd_main+sv

Look at the S3000 line of chipsets and see if there isn't something there that fits your needs. Great Chipset BTW.

A lot of those are form factors that are better suited for rack systems. Here is an ATX form factor.

http://www.intel.com/design/servers/boards/s3000ah/index.htm

EDIT... You are probably wondering about it not mentioning Core 2 Duo on the site. Not sure why it isn't listing it. I think they are working out a new naming scheme for the Xeon 3000 series. That IS core 2 duo. Here is the technical specs doc:

ftp://download.intel.com/support/motherboards/server/s3000pt/sb/s3000pt_tps_rev_1_0.pdf

From the CPU support section:

Processor and Front Side Bus (FSB) support
- Supports Intel® Xeon® processor 3000 sequence, Intel® Core™2 Extreme Edition,
Intel® Core™2 Duo, Intel® Pentium® Processor Extreme Edition,Intel® Pentium® D
Processor,Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor,Intel® Celeron® D Processor in the Intel®
LGA775 package
Click to expand...

It is supported.
 
Pretty much anything will work for a typical server. The board doesn't have to say 'server' in it's name to work with a server.

Having said that...

The board seems fine, just as pretty much any other board.

Like others have said, if you want stability and NO complications what-so-ever get an intel board. But, you don't have to as again, anything will pretty much work as a typical server.
 
That ASUS board is pretty expensive. Does anyone have a suggestion for an Intel board that I can get off Newegg that will work with the Core 2 Duo??? Please provide a newegg link if you can. Thanks in advance.
 
Lyquist said:
That ASUS board is pretty expensive. Does anyone have a suggestion for an Intel board that I can get off Newegg that will work with the Core 2 Duo??? Please provide a newegg link if you can. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Most of the server boards I've seen don't support the core duo yet. Personaly I would stick with intel or supermicro. You also don't really need a "server" board. A desktop board with the expansion you want would be fine. The company I work for a few clients whos servers are pentium 4/d's and most of them are running intel desktop boards. Work fine. Just when you built it get a raid card. I really don't like running a raid off onboard. Everytime I've had a raid card fail it has been harder to find a replacement motherboard then the same raid card.
 
Here's a list of all the Intel 965 boards WITH on board graphics that newegg carries. I listed them all since I'm not sure what specific features you are looking for. ex. if you want onboard raid you'll have to make sure you get a board with ICH8R. Also things like mATX or ATX, etc.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...7&Submit=ENE&Manufactory=1157&SubCategory=280

Any one of those would be a solid base for a small server.
 
swatbat said:
Everytime I've had a raid card fail it has been harder to find a replacement motherboard then the same raid card.
Click to expand...


Slightly off topic....

But this is why I LOVE using sofware RAID5 for my file servers @ home where speed isn't a #1 priority. Software RAID frees you up from hardware constraints. If you want to move the array to a different platform... no problem if you are running the same OS at the same update level. Pretty cool....

Downsides are that it's typically slower than your high end ($$$) cards and you can't boot from it.
 
Poncho said:
Slightly off topic....

But this is why I LOVE using sofware RAID5 for my file servers @ home where speed isn't a #1 priority. Software RAID frees you up from hardware constraints. If you want to move the array to a different platform... no problem if you are running the same OS at the same update level. Pretty cool....

Downsides are that it's typically slower than your high end ($$$) cards and you can't boot from it.
Click to expand...

Pretty much all of the servers we run for clients are running sbs 2003 as the os. Couple run std. Problem is software raid just doesn't cut it in a multiuser enviroment. In our case most of these servers now run 3 to 4 gigs of ram(we have been upgrading all the ones that had less) because we are starting to max them out. With 4 gigs being the top for a sbs server we need the hardware raid as we don't want to give up anything. I mean exchange, file and print services, ad, dns, apps, sav, spyware doctor, etc all have to run on a box. Not sure what the OP is going to be running on the server he is running but even a cheaper raid card with cache onboard would be a very good idea.
 
swatbat said:
Problem is software raid just doesn't cut it in a multiuser enviroment.
Click to expand...

Agree completely. Like I said... if speed isn't your #1 priority, software RAID is an excellent choice. Speed matters... then get your boss to pony up for the expensive card. :D
 
Lyquist, what's this box going to be running? How much is your budget? What type of raid setup do you need? Is this a rackmounted server or do you have a case in mind for it?
 
just get the Asus P5W DH, and save $100
or the BadAxe 975.

No need for a $350 motherboard.

This doesn't sound like a HIGH end fancy server from his limited description.
If it was, I think he would have detailed a lot more requirements, etc.
 
Well, I think we need to find out if he intends to use PCI-X cards like the Asus supports before we can give him a recommendation, plus it would be nice to know some other requirements for the box.
 
ND40oz said:
Lyquist, what's this box going to be running? How much is your budget? What type of raid setup do you need? Is this a rackmounted server or do you have a case in mind for it?
Click to expand...

This would help me too before I recomend a board.
 
Lyquist said:
I am in the final stages of putting together a server for a client (they don't want Dell, they want me to build it so I'll "know" the parts).
Click to expand...

I don't understand the reasoning.

I know hardware extremely well and I'm confident that I could build a pretty darn fast and reliable server too. But there is NO WAY that I know as much as engineers that design servers for the big names and rate the equipment they design and refine for server duty.

There's a great deal of expense that goes into making servers reliable. The added expense is justified over buying parts and slapping one together in your garage.

If they don't like Dell for some reason, then what about HP or IBM?

Even though you won't be overclocking, none of the available boards for Core Duo are suitable for server duty (IMHO). You don't want to be dealing with the silly BIOS issues and overall poor reliability (for server use) that is common in the retail mobo market.

You want a server to be up & running 100% and NEVER fail. That is not realistic of course, but you want to come as close to that target as you possibly can.

I also agree with the suggestion that you likely do not need that much CPU horsepower anyway. Typical small-medium business applications run just great with older slower cooler running CPUs. Fast reliable storage is a lot more important to a typical server than a hot-rod CPU.

IF I was buying a server for my own business, I'd buy a low to mid range Dell server. That's even though I could easily build my own for less.

.
 
Spartacus

I don't know I think a well built server could hold up just as well as an entry level server from the likes of dell or hp. Big thing with them is you can get next or same business day service. It is nice having a part the next morning waiting for you to install. Once you get into the bigger servers it just makes more sence to buy prebuilt though Many places would rather have custom built machines anyway. For most of our cleints we just put in dells(after we erase the hd to set them up right) because they are dirt cheap. Unless the board goes in it your fine. If the motherboard goes we just have them replace the system if it is out of warranty. We have a few clients that prefer custom build machines though. The OP may be in the same boat.
 
I know what you are saying swatbat. You are right that a seasoned tech could build a box very comparable to a retail server. Just not a good idea though.

I've been in the IT biz a LONG time. Mini's, mainframes, PCs, etc., many years.

When I "build" a server, I start with a base server (usually Dell) and I install controllers and drives as needed from the same company. All parts that are rated for server use.

I would never, ever, ever..... buy a box of parts from Newegg and bolt them together and expect it to work as well as parts that have been tested for thousands of hours in a server environment and are known to work together and work reliably.

Look at the forums... you have tons of issues with random reboots, mobo controllers not seeing SATA drives, on and on with wacky problems that are just not acceptable in a server.

Servers are designed from the mobo to every last part to be a server. They are not a box of retail consumer parts you assemble and "call" a server.

Would you rather fly in an experimental unproven passenger jet built from parts that "should work fine" or would you rather fly in a genuine Boeing 757? :)

.
 
I've seen people use low end ECS board for file server as well and it runs find for years. I guess it all depend on the luck of the draw...
 
smilepak said:
I've seen people use low end ECS board for file server as well and it runs find for years. I guess it all depend on the luck of the draw...
Click to expand...
indeed, which is the reason why people recommend "server grade" things, since the luck of the draw ought to have been skewed in favor of higher reliability. The idea is not "server components never fail", but rather "there is a higher likelyhood that this component will not fail soon".

It's amusing that Lyquist asks for a "server motherboard" gets 20 recommendations withouer anyone knowing what he needs this for. For all we know he could be building a CS:S server or the ECG monitoring server for an intensive care unit. Two applications that would require significantly different setups, yet both are "servers".
 
It will be used for basic file serving. I ended up buying an Intel board that supports Core 2 Duo and will use that. I will be running two hard drives in RAID 1. There will only be 3-5 users. It is probably overkill for them, but they wanted something good and that's what I put together.
 
Spartacus said:
There's a great deal of expense that goes into making servers reliable. The added expense is justified over buying parts and slapping one together in your garage.
.
Click to expand...

As long as you get server hardware... you will have the SAME if not better stability and performance then you'll find with Dell, HP, IBM, etc. You do realize that none of those companies build their own boards right? Sure... they are involved in the design process but their boards come from ODMs. I know HP and Fujitsu use Tyan built boards. Not 100% sure who builds dells boards. Really... as long as the chipset used is designed for servers, there will be no difference in a bought or a built system.

Now... if you are comparing server to desktop boards then you are correct... to a point. Server hardware is designed to higher standards than desktop but that's not to say that desktop boards can't make for a decent base for a small office or home server. If you stick with quality components that are stable (Intel boards) then you can have a trouble free server. For example I am running a 945 based Intel board at home, running a Smithfield CPU, and the thing has never been turned off and has always worked. It's been up for almost a year now without a single issue. It also runs quiet, cool, and has a VERY small footprint. Something that you don't always get with your typical "server" setup.

Really it depends on what your intentions are for that server. If it's a big business that needs it, with many users, then the more typical "server" hardware would be more appropriate. But if you need a small file server, for a few users and a small business then GOOD quality desktop hardware can be a completely viable solution.
 
Youdo not need a core 2 duo for a file servers


File servers consist of a fast I.O subysstem., your wasting the companies money on getting anything above a P4 / AMD XP system, hell i got a P4 1.4ghz running 900G's of HD;s (8 drives)

Save your money , get a lower CPU and spend the money on a good PCIX serevr board with some fast 66/133mhz PCI HD cards and fast harddrives.
 
MrGuvernment said:
Save your money , get a lower CPU and spend the money on a good PCIX serevr board with some fast 66/133mhz PCI HD cards and fast harddrives.
Click to expand...

He doesn't even need that for what he is doing. Yes... Core2Duo is overkill... but it's a VERY low power cpu and will run quiet. That alone is worth the marginal premium in price. PCIX and add in controller cards, at least good ones, would be VERY expensive and overkill.
 
Lyquist said:
It will be used for basic file serving. I ended up buying an Intel board that supports Core 2 Duo and will use that. I will be running two hard drives in RAID 1. There will only be 3-5 users. It is probably overkill for them, but they wanted something good and that's what I put together.
Click to expand...


The key is stability. If this is just a basic file server then performance isn't that big a issue, Keeping the Network running smoothly is. If i were you I would get a cheap XEON processor and a good Intel Board. This will cost more, but it will be a safer solution. This is a business I wouldn't screw around by saving a few extra bucks, its not even a huge saving. The Difference between a E6600 and a Xeon 3.4 is only about $150. I am sure the Duo Core solution would work without issue, but this is a server I wouldn't take a chance.
 
That board is an excellent choice. I'd throw in an X300 graphics card and call it a day. The ASUS will be just as good as any Intel or Supermicro board for what the system is being used for. Plus you get PCI-X which would be great for using SCSI controllers or even SATA RAID cards since the selection is still far better for PCI-X than it is for PCIe. Additionally, an Intel board that supports Core 2 Duo is another good choice even with integrated graphics.

I agree with the Xeon option, that is a good one. Network I/O is important, but so is disk I/O. Do not dismiss the performance of your SATA/SCSI or whatever devices.

Core 2 Duo may be overkill, but they can be had cheap, have low heat generation, and low power consumption.

MrGuvernment said:
Youdo not need a core 2 duo for a file servers


File servers consist of a fast I.O subysstem., your wasting the companies money on getting anything above a P4 / AMD XP system, hell i got a P4 1.4ghz running 900G's of HD;s (8 drives)

Save your money , get a lower CPU and spend the money on a good PCIX serevr board with some fast 66/133mhz PCI HD cards and fast harddrives.
Click to expand...

As stated above, I agree with the sentiment about disk and network I/O. Buying an old Pentium 4 1.4GHz or even an Athlon XP or other dated platform is BAD ADVICE. This is one of the worst statements I have ever read on this forum. Not to say that he isn't correct about those processors and platforms working for your needs, because they would, however buying a dated platform requiring out of date motherboards is always a bad idea. Especially for a business.

You can pick up a Pentium D 805 or Core 2 Duo E6300/E6400 on the cheap, and then slap that on an Intel or ASUS board and call it a day. I'd get a decent SATA or SCSI controller, and run with some kind of hardware RAID array for data, but that's just me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top