Server Build

H

Hawnted

n00b
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
33
I work from home and have business class internet with the bandwith to host my own server.I have a license for Server 2008 R2 (which includes Hyper-V).

I plan to have a WHS v2 (when it is released) WHS for now, and this is one of my priorities. I will also have a web server (3-5 sites, 2 of which have DB Backends, 75-100,000 hits per day), NAS, exchange server, and a few different desktop OSes to play on. I am a gamer, but my gaming machine is physical and will stay that way. I also use my computer to serve up media to all the TVs in my house (one media center pc, and two PS3s).

I am looking to spend around 500-750 dollars. I already have all the hard drives.

Here are my initial thoughts, looking for feedback.

  • Not sure on MB, but thinking possibly ASUS M4A785TD-V EVO/U3S6 AM3 - thoughts?
  • Thinking 2 sets of G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) Model F3-12800CL9D-4GBNQ
  • Antec Two or Three Hundred - Need quiet this is 24/7 box
  • CORSAIR CMPSU-750HX - Quiet and Efficient is priority (do i need 750w?)
  • AMD Phenom II X4 945 Deneb 3.0GHz Socket AM3 95W - thinking 95w bc of it being 24/7 box - suggestions here?
  • CPU Cooler I have NO CLUE on - I have been out of the Air Cooler market for a very long time - need quiet and efficient.
Thanks
 
Last edited:
I like all the stuff you have picked out. Hyper 212+ for max efficiency per dollar. Go with Antec Three Hundred as more space allows for better airflow.

You can stick to a 650 watt if you wanna save the 10 bucks or whatever it is. You can even go under 650. A box that's not used for gaming will rarely see more than 400 watt peak (depending on number of HDs and such).http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131627
 
Clarification needed: So will you be using WHS as a VM or as the host OS? The exchange server, NAS, web server are also VMs? Also how many drives do you have now? How many SATA ports will you need?
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
Server 2008 R2 will be the Host server. WHS will be a Guest along with the others.

I have around 15 or so 1TB 7200 RPM drives. I will use as many of them as I can so probably around 5 or 6.. I have an SSD drive for the OS. The more SATA ports the better I guess, but 6 SATA ports will give me one for the SSD, and 5 TB of storage which would be more than sufficient..
 
Last edited:
Hawnted said:
Server 2008 R2 will be the Host server. WHS will be a Guest along with the others.

I have around 15 or so 1TB 7200 RPM drives. I will use as many of them as I can. I have an SSD drive for the OS. The more SATA ports the better I guess, but 6 SATA ports will give me one for the SSD, and 5 TB of storage. More the better though.
Click to expand...

most motherboards even the cheaper server boards do not have more then 6 SATA 2.0 slots.

you would have to install some PCI sata controlers to be able to use that many drives on one board.


Also the cases you want to use for this server are in now way equiped to deal with 15 hard drives. even a full tower would be hard pressed to fit 10 drives in let alone 15. Mid towers might fit 6. The logistics of dealing with 15 is crazy.


IMO you have 2 options. build 2 computers with full tower cases, or ad hoc it and somehow fit 15 drives in a full tower or bigger case. either way your looking at getting an addision 2 sata controler cards.

Also I would stick with the 750 watt PSU with that many drives. each drive can use up to 20 watts x15 = 300w peak just for hard drives, add another 200-300 the system and video card and your easily reaching the max of that PSU.

Running 5 sites of a single processor system might not be the best way to run a profession website. If it was me I would look into a duo cpu or quad cpu dedicated server machine either xeon or opteron. I would also buy all new hard drives 2TB each transer the data to the new drives then craigslist the rest. it will reduce the amount of stress on the system alot.( you might want to do that anyway)
 
I am not trying to use all 15, was just stating that I have them available. Only need 5 or 6 of the 1TB drives plus the SSD. Even that would be ample storage. I edited my post to make that point clear. Sorry for the confusion.
 
Hawnted said:
I am not trying to use all 15, was just stating that I have them available. Only need 5 or 6 of the 1TB drives plus the SSD. Even that would be ample storage. I edited my post to make that point clear. Sorry for the confusion.
Click to expand...

ah ok, I see it now.

well if your running 6 drives, then a 650w is just fine. but if its only 10 bucks more for the 750w go for that. you do not use any more power and it might end up being more efficent overall.

you might want to look at a 890 amd chipset based mobo, atm only gigabyte and asus has one, and even has a few SATA 3.0 and USB 3.0 slots.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...010200022 107191003 1071955462&name=AMD 890GX

140 bucks is pretty decent, but you can still look at a 790 based board for 100.
 
What advantages does it have over the 790 board?

Are the other components sufficient?
 
Great. Also, it looks like the GB version supports USB 3.0, do you know if the one you linked does?
 
the GB on newegg has 4x USB 2.0 + 2x USB 3.0, and the ASUS board only has 6x USB 2.0
 
Ok, I guess the only thing I have left to decide is if the CPU I have chosen will be enough, and which case to get.
 
IMO if you can go full tower you should. Those drives will benefit from two big 120MM front coolers and all the room. They will live a lot longer if you put them in a big spacious tower.
 
Any tower recommendations?

If I am trying to stay under 750, is there any other CPU that would be better than the one I chose?

I think I am going to go with the Gigabyte 890 board.
2 sets of G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) Model F3-12800CL9D-4GBNQ
CORSAIR CMPSU-750HX
Hyper 212+ HSF
 
Hawnted said:
Any tower recommendations?

If I am trying to stay under 750, is there any other CPU that would be better than the one I chose?

I think I am going to go with the Gigabyte 890 board.
2 sets of G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) Model F3-12800CL9D-4GBNQ
CORSAIR CMPSU-750HX
Hyper 212+ HSF
Click to expand...

Built:

server750whyper.png
 
Yeah but he wants lower power hence the 925. If you want even less you can go with the 65 watt 905E but it's pricey and you're paying $45 more for .3 ghz less speed for a 30% reduction in energy.
 
CrazyCuz2k said:
Yeah but he wants lower power hence the 925. If you want even less you can go with the 65 watt 905E but it's pricey and you're paying $45 more for .3 ghz less speed for a 30% reduction in energy.
Click to expand...

The TDP is 125w, but it doesnt mean it uses that much when not at 100%. If he is going be running 5 different web sites with 100k hits a day from a single core box running 6 harddrives, i would like to point out that it probably worth it to take the 40-50w TDP increase for the added performace.
 
Last edited:
In the real world, how much will 125w vs 95w matter for 24/7 operation? Energy cost wise, heat etc? If your telling me its 2-3 degrees hotter with 2-3 dollars a month on my energy bill then I might as well go for it IF the performance increase is noticable

If I go with a 95w CPU I would think I would go with the 945...If I got 125w I might as well get the 955 or 965 BE. 965 BE will blow my budget just slightly, but hey, this is HF right?

Also, how does the EARTHWATTS line compare to the 750HX. Something like an Earthwatts EA500 in terms of efficiency, noise level, etc?

Reason I think I should go with the GB over the Asus is the GB has USB3.0 support now, the USB3 version of the Asus is not out yet
 
Last edited:
In the real world, how much will 125w vs 95w matter for 24/7 operation? Energy cost wise, heat etc? If your telling me its 2-3 degrees hotter with 2-3 dollars a month on my energy bill then I might as well go for it IF the performance increase is noticable
Click to expand...

Yes that 33% increase in power will be felt by your pocket but that is like $7 a year more.

If I go with a 95w CPU I would think I would go with the 945...If I got 125w I might as well get the 955 or 965 BE. 965 BE will blow my budget just slightly, but hey, this is HF right?
Click to expand...

For everyday server you are not going to see much difference between those cpu.

Also, how does the EARTHWATTS line compare to the 750HX. Something like an Earthwatts EA500 in terms of efficiency, noise level, etc?
Click to expand...

You don't need a 750watt, 400 to 500 watt would be fine.

Reason I think I should go with the GB over the Asus is the GB has USB3.0 support now, the USB3 version of the Asus is not out yet
Click to expand...

And more importantly it has SATA 3.0 native.
 
I believe the Asus 890 board has sata 3 native also. There is supposed to be a USB 3 version of the asus soon.

Are you saying I won't notice much btw the 945 and 965 BE?
 
Hawnted said:
Also, how does the EARTHWATTS line compare to the 750HX. Something like an Earthwatts EA500 in terms of efficiency, noise level, etc?
Click to expand...
The Corsair 750HX is of far better quality than the Earthwatts. Noise wise, the EA500 does use 80mm fans so it's a tad noisier than the Corsair 750HX. While lt_shiro is right that for NoForgiveness' setup + 6 drives, a quality 500W PSU would be enough, I would recommend spending the extra cash for a larger PSU just in case the OP wants to use 15 drives. Something like the Corsair 650TX.

Speaking of NoForgiveness' setup, if you do go with the 650TX, that shaves off $50. Also, I recommend this case combination instead:
$70 - Cooler Master RC-590-KKN1-GP ATX Case
$24 - Cooler Master STB-3T4-E3-GP 4 in 3 Device Module w/ 120mm Fan
-----
Total $94 plus tax and shipping

Costs about the same as the Antec 900 but you gain an additional two 3.5" bays which means two more drives that you can use. In addition, the Coolermaster case is a bit roomier and has better cable management than the Antec 900 case.

Also, if you go with this combo deal, you can get a slightly faster CPU and the same mobo for the same price:
$280 - AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition CPU + GIGABYTE GA-890GPA-UD3H AM3 AMD 890GX AMD Motherboard

Hawnted said:
Are you saying I won't notice much btw the 945 and 965 BE?
Click to expand...
Performance wise, not much.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
It looks like if I up my budget just 100-200 more, my options open up SIGNIFICANTLY. It allows me to go I7, with a albeit cheaper quality motherboard, but other wise pretty much the same components. The only trade off is that I would end up with 6gb of ram HOWEVER, it is upgradeable to 12gb with only another 165 dollars spent down the road. In my other build I am maxed out at 8gb unless I spend a fortune on 4gb sticks. And also would not be able to go with a aftermarket HSF right away. I am very unsure about my Motherboard choice what do you think there?

COOLER MASTER RC-690-KKN1-GP Black SECC/ ABS ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - Retail
$79.99

CORSAIR CMPSU-650HX 650W ATX12V v2.2 / EPS12V 2.91 SLI Ready 80 PLUS BRONZE Certified
$119.99

G.SKILL 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Triple Channel Kit Desktop
$164.99

ASRock X58 Extreme LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail or GIGABYTE GA-X58A-UD3R LGA 1366 Intel X58
$159.99 or $209

Intel Core i7-920 Bloomfield 2.66GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80601920 -
$289

EVGA 512-P2-N738-LR GeForce 8400 GS
$40
 
Last edited:
Danny Bui said:
I prefer Gigabyte mobos over Asrock mobos.

Also, if you go with this combo deal with the i7 920 and the Gigabyte mobo, it'll shave off $25:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.355679

In addition, ditch the 8400GS as the AT HD 4350 is faster and has more features.

Do you actually want a modular PSU?
Click to expand...

No does not have to be modular. So does this i7 build do a lot more for my server for the ~150 more I am shelling out? Or would it be fine to go with the AMD build?
 
So it looks like this changes my price by $175. I have to buy a 40 dollar vid card with the i7 setup, but the RAM is 40 cheaper with i7 so that is a wash. The RAM/mobo is 175 higher with i7. Everything else is the same.

So I guess my question is, is it worth it to spend $175? Or will the prior system do all I need?
 
I say previous system does what you need. Hosting a handful of sites doesn't bring hardware to its knees, it brings network connections to their knees.

I urge you to go with a big case with two front fans for your drives.
 
Will you actually be using 12GB of RAM in the future?
 
just curious, but how much bandwidth does your biz class line provide?
 
Danny Bui said:
Will you actually be using 12GB of RAM in the future?
Click to expand...

I am not sure, I guess it would all depend on performance of the ~5 VMs. I would like to spend as little as possible and still have plenty of room for the servers to have all the resources they need (I guess that is an obvious statement). If i7 is way overkill, even though it is only 175 more dollars I would rather not spend it. But if my hardware will be maxed out if I go with P2 then I would rather spend the money now on i7.
 
I have a Q6600 OCed to 4GHz on Water, 8gb ram with VMWare Workstation installed. I have an instance of Server 2008 installed. Is there a way I could load it up and do some kind of stress test to see if the P2 will be enough?
 
just curious, but how much bandwidth does your biz class line provide?
 
Hawnted said:
I have a Q6600 OCed to 4GHz on Water, 8gb ram with VMWare Workstation installed. I have an instance of Server 2008 installed. Is there a way I could load it up and do some kind of stress test to see if the P2 will be enough?
Click to expand...
Not too sure. A PH2 will perform about the same as a Q6600
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
I have 2 VMs running on it now testing. They are not doing anything intensive like some of the VMs will be doing on the server, but I guess it is somewhat of a test. I have 3 cores basically idle, and one core at 10%-15% usage. RAM usage is about 3gb.

Maybe some of you can help me out here what are the bottlenecks, in order, for a Hyper-V Server?

I would guess for what I am doing it would be this:

Internet Connection - Not An Issue
Disk IO - Would be an issue in either setup
RAM - Could be limitied by the 8GB on the AMD setup
CPU - Doesnt seem like this will be a limitation either way

Does this seem accurate? I have an SSD (OCZ Solid 2 60GB) that should help for the OS, but my guests will be on a raptor, with storage on 7200 RPM drives.
 
Last edited:
OK, I just had 5 VMs running. Looks like I am going to hit a Disk IO ceiling LONG before I need to worry about CPU or RAM. I have one OCZ Solid 2 SSD that is 60gb. I have a Raptor X. And I have 15 1 TB drives at my disposal.

Where would the SSD serve me best? Is it best for the host to utilize the SSD, put my IO hungry VM on the Raptor, and put the other 3 on separate 1TB drives?

After I get the system built I could work towards getting another SSD.

Heres another option. Since the server is my #1 priority now (I am not currently playing any PC games) I could use parts of my current system as a server:

Parts to Use for Server

CPU - Q6600 G0
Mobo - P5K Premium
RAM - 8 Gig G.Skill DDR2 PC8500

Parts to Save for Gaming System

Videocard is an EVGA GTX 280
PSU - Ultra X3 1000W
Hard Drives - Raptor 150x2 RAID 0
Case - Custom MM U2-UFO Opti-1203
Display - 2 Samsung 305t Monitors
Soundcard - Creative X-Fi Platinum
Sound - Logitech Z5500 Digital
KB/Mouse - Logitech G15 Keyboard/G7 Mouse
Burners - 2xLite-On 20x DVD Burner
WC CPU Loop - Swiftech MCP655, PA120.3, D-Tek Fuzion, DD Dual Bay Res, Masterkleer 7/16
WC GFX Loop - Swiftech MCP655, MCR220, MCW60, DD Dual Bay Res, Masterkleer 7/16


So basically I would need PSU, Case, GPU right now, and a new mobo, RAM, and CPU for gaming system in a few months.

Like I said, my server is my #1 priority right now, so if this isnt going to give me the performance the AMD system would, then I would rather buy server parts new, and worry about upgrade my gaming system down the road.
 
Last edited:
I think I am going to go with this build.

buildo.jpg


I already have 1 SSD this is a second one to dedicate to one of the VMs.

Some have said to go with a bigger case and suggested the Antec 900, everything I have read seems to think this case is the same size or bigger. Which one is the better pick?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top