WHS Box

S

soulesschild

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
6,176
Need some recommendations for a WHS box since the parts I wanted to use before are discontinued now.

What I need, just some standard WHS stuff that will run better or cheaper than the HP 495.

Case: Antec 300 most likely, 6 HDDs, then I can convert the 5.25 bays for extra HDDs
CPU: ?
Mobo: ? (Was going to use this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131376)
PSU: Corsair 400w most likely (can this even support say...10 drives? Should I go higher?)
Ram: 4GB
HDD: 1.5TB/2TB WDs most likely

What cards can I use to extend SATA ports on a mobo? HP SAS expander?

Buying from Egg or Amazon.
 
Last edited:
For 10 drives, the Corsair 400CX is cutting just a tad too close IMO.

I'd go for this setup if you can't get in on the Ewiz deal:
$59 - AMD Athlon II X2 240 CPU
$67 - Biostar A785G3 AM3 AMD 785G mATX Motherboard
$94 - A-Data AD3U1333B2G9-DRH 2 x 2GB DDR3 1333 RAM
$85 - Antec NEO ECO 620C 620W PSU
----
Total: $305 plus tax and shipping.

For additional drives, use one of these:
$100 - SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 PCI-X (PCI Compatible) 8 Port SATA Controller Card
$100 - SuperMicro AOC-SASLP-MV8 PCI-Ex4 8 Port SATA Controller Card
 
In all honesty I would go for an Atom.. If you look at the majority of the newer WHS boxes sold there using atoms.

Your build that your planning is pretty similar to what I have.. Just changed back to WHS from FreeNas last night. & I Must say I am COMPLETELY happy with the setup. I have a Atom D510 (dual Core) with 4gb DDR2 & currently 1x 1TB samsung Eco Drive & 2x 1.5TB samsung Eco Drives. I have a cheapo Sil3124 SATA controller in my only PCI slot. I am going to put another pair of the 1.5TB drives in for the pool as well. I have them in a Antec 300 Case with NO case fans. Infact I removed them all & removed the dust filter to let the natural current flow a little better. The only fan in the system is on my Corsair 520hx which is REALLY overkill for this type of system. I am only using it because I jsut built a MiniITX for my main system & I am going to be shortening the cables & Diddnt want to do it to the Expensive one. My gaming system now has the 400cx in it.

also I am not sure how accurate it is, but the thermaltake says all the way up to 20 green drives you only need a 285w with the reccomended CPU by danny..
 
While I could go with Atom, I also want the box to be a bit beefy in case they update WHS (which I think they are supposed to to support 64 bit right?) and have new cool features which may or may not be too much for the Atom. And, with the AMD proc, I can probably encode video while freeing up my main box to do other CPU intensive stuff or overnight since my main box is probably going to be much louder than the WHS. I did consider Atom at first but with the limited power of the Atom, I decided against it.
 
bastage said:
also I am not sure how accurate it is, but the thermaltake says all the way up to 20 green drives you only need a 285w with the reccomended CPU by danny..
Click to expand...

It's not accurate.
 
The next WHS is going to be 64bit only. Go with the beffiest build you can.

Just like everything else you'll probably keep upgrading / changing things for a while.
 
Uhmm So you do know that the atom's are 64 bit? Also if MS follows the current trends then the next version will be even lighter. then the current. Also with the Atom being the main goto cpu for WHS its not likely MS will build a box beyond what it can do.

I Do understand the need for more power though. But at the same time you CAN encode on an atom just fine, it just takes a little longer, but since this should be a 24/7 on system time doesn't matter so much. Alot of people also use them to transcode video for pytivo (for playback on Tivo Set top box's). & I was able to do that fine on a thunderbird @ 1.2ghz with 1gb ram. DVD Rips transcoded in just under real time & when I upgraded to a sempron 3000+ (single core 2ghz) they were well faster then real time. I havent had a chance to test with the Atom yet, as thats on my project list for today.

Edit: Also since the next version is based off of windows server 2008 I just checked the minimum requirements for it. & at 1ghz & 512mb ram it looks like the minimums are probably not going to be changing.

Edit2: I jsut tested a DVD rip.. Transcoding now at about 3x Live speed using an atom d510 with 4gb ram
 
Last edited:
criccio said:
All the Atom's that come on the desktop boards are 64bit compatible. Only the single core ones in Netbook's aren't.
Click to expand...

actually thats not true.. the n2xx series are available as desktop board on newegg, but do not support 64bit.. This is of course assuming the wiki about the atom is correct.
 
bastage said:
Uhmm So you do know that the atom's are 64 bit? Also if MS follows the current trends then the next version will be even lighter. then the current. Also with the Atom being the main goto cpu for WHS its not likely MS will build a box beyond what it can do.

I Do understand the need for more power though. But at the same time you CAN encode on an atom just fine, it just takes a little longer, but since this should be a 24/7 on system time doesn't matter so much. Alot of people also use them to transcode video for pytivo (for playback on Tivo Set top box's). & I was able to do that fine on a thunderbird @ 1.2ghz with 1gb ram. DVD Rips transcoded in just under real time & when I upgraded to a sempron 3000+ (single core 2ghz) they were well faster then real time. I havent had a chance to test with the Atom yet, as thats on my project list for today.

Edit: Also since the next version is based off of windows server 2008 I just checked the minimum requirements for it. & at 1ghz & 512mb ram it looks like the minimums are probably not going to be changing.

Edit2: I jsut tested a DVD rip.. Transcoding now at about 3x Live speed using an atom d510 with 4gb ram
Click to expand...

What current trend....there's only one version of WHS. Not saying I doubt you but how do you know it's going to be even "lighter." I would assume we'd get more features.
 
soulesschild said:
What current trend....there's only one version of WHS. Not saying I doubt you but how do you know it's going to be even "lighter." I would assume we'd get more features.
Click to expand...

the current trend I was talking about was MS realizing that people weren't going to build new systems when a new OS came out (ie vista) so MS made the OS work on the older systems & the less powerful ones (ie win7).. I Was not talking about WHS directly, I Was talking about as a whole with there OS's..

Just found this as well,

http://forum.wegotserved.com/index.p...-vail-on-atom/
Click to expand...

So.. that thread pretty much confirmed what I have been saying that an atom would be enough.. The only 2 negative posts really was 1 basing performance off of a single core from a phenom in a VM @ 2.2ghz.. That isn't worth anything.. The other said that a Atom wouldn't be enough for trans-coding.. Well there are allot of single core atoms doing it now in the HP's & I can definitely say that a d510 is up to snuff.. It trans-codes close to twice the speed of my old server (sempron @ 2ghz with 2GB ram). Most of the others are saying that a d510 is most ideal for it..

Edit: also it points out the the requirement is now asking for a 2ghz if single core..
 
In any case, if the OP wants a bit more CPU power and has the money for it, by all means, he should get it.
 
Danny Bui said:
In any case, if the OP wants a bit more CPU power and has the money for it, by all means, he should get it.
Click to expand...

Not arguing that.. I just hate people discounting a product because of popular misconceptions when quite often that may be the better product..

for a WHS in my opinion if your buying hardware an Atom is the way to go. If you need more then that then WHS is "probably" the wrong OS for what your doing. Now if its that you simply "want" more then thats another story all together..
 
soulesschild said:
After further consideration maybe I might switch to D510.

Would these two work/is what I need?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000TPXULC/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER
and
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128436
Click to expand...

Yes they would.. But unless you think you will "need" the extra 2 sata ports on that gigabyte motherboard I would reccoment saving a few bucks & getting the intel D510 board. 1st because since this will be a server your not going to be doing the enthusiast things that most of us avoid intel over since they don't give you the options in the bios. 2nd because of that big heat sink on it. Its completely passive. doesn't even come with a fan.. As for the memory, thats what I would have bought if I didn't already have 2x2gb sticks of OCZ laying around so I would say that should be fine. Also why do you have the memory linked from amazon when its the same cost also with free shipping from newegg?
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
bastage said:
Yes they would.. But unless you think you will "need" the extra 2 sata ports on that gigabyte motherboard I would reccoment saving a few bucks & getting the intel D510 board. 1st because since this will be a server your not going to be doing the enthusiast things that most of us avoid intel over since they don't give you the options in the bios. 2nd because of that big heat sink on it. Its completely passive. doesn't even come with a fan.. As for the memory, thats what I would have bought if I didn't already have 2x2gb sticks of OCZ laying around so I would say that should be fine. Also why do you have the memory linked from amazon when its the same cost also with free shipping from newegg?
Click to expand...

Tax. :)

The reason I chose the Gigabyte at first was mainly because of the SATA ports. How would I best expand to 10 HDDs if I wanted to later on? Would the HP SAS expander work?
 
soulesschild said:
How would I best expand to 10 HDDs if I wanted to later on? Would the HP SAS expander work?
Click to expand...

The HP SAS expander would not work since it's a PCI-E x4 card whereas the Intel or Gigabyte D510 mobos only have PCI slots. However if you use the SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 card I linked to in post#4, that will allow you to add more drives. So with that card, you'll have 10 to 12 drives depending on which D510mobo you go with.
 
Danny Bui said:
The HP SAS expander would not work since it's a PCI-E x4 card whereas the Intel or Gigabyte D510 mobos only have PCI slots. However if you use the SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 card I linked to in post#4, that will allow you to add more drives. So with that card, you'll have 10 to 12 drives depending on which D510mobo you go with.
Click to expand...

Ah okay, awesome :) Will be ordering soon >: )
 
Danny Bui said:
The HP SAS expander would not work since it's a PCI-E x4 card whereas the Intel or Gigabyte D510 mobos only have PCI slots. However if you use the SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 card I linked to in post#4, that will allow you to add more drives. So with that card, you'll have 10 to 12 drives depending on which D510mobo you go with.
Click to expand...

I Didn't even realize that would work in the slower PCI slot.. Thanks Danny I Will be ordering one of those to replace the Sil3124 I have..
 
bastage said:
I Didn't even realize that would work in the slower PCI slot.. Thanks Danny I Will be ordering one of those to replace the Sil3124 I have..
Click to expand...

Yeah those SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 cards were the premier expansion cards for WHS before the release of the HP SAS expander and the SuperMicro AOC-SASLP-MV8 card. Quite a few 20+ drive setups still uses those AOC-SAT2-MV8 cards..
 
Well im not going to rehash all this BS about 64bit atoms, but here is what i have to say about CPU's

If you are going to build a new WHS today, and want to get some future proofing and/or some horsepower that you can turn on when needed you should get an i3/i5.

I just built an i3 WHS for a small business and with 1 drive WD20EADS it was pulling 30w from the wall.

In the BIOS you can turn HT off, you can turn cores off. Turn on Speed step, C-state, etc all of this saves electricity, but if you upgrade to WHS v2 you are compatible or if you want to run some CPU intensive apps you have the ability to do so.

Also I have seen a Corsair 400CX run 20x drives w/ no staggered spinup and it works just fine :)
If you already have it it will work.
 
nitrobass24 said:
In the BIOS you can turn HT off, you can turn cores off. Turn on Speed step, C-state, etc all of this saves electricity, but if you upgrade to WHS v2 you are compatible or if you want to run some CPU intensive apps you have the ability to do so.
.
Click to expand...

And all power saving measures you just mentioned there can also be done with a dual core atom.. & Definitely an i3 is a good choice as well.. But again more horse power thats needed & more power used as well as more that can go wrong.

People keep saying that you need more horse power, But I am not sure as to what for.. I Can trans-code video on the fly at 3x live using the atom. If this were a work station that we were talking about that may see some occasional Photoshop or something like that then I would agree.. But thats not what WHS was made for. & if it were a case where its being used for a business & 10+ users may be hitting it at once then again you "may" need more power.. But in a home use environment I am convinced that the best overall possible is an dual core atom with all things considered. & Being able to go completely fan-less is the freaking cats meow.. Thats just that much less power used & that much less that can go wrong. Especially if you are going to be shoving it in a closet somewhere where you may not notice the sound of a fan going out.
 
There is no way you are transcoding HD video on the fly using an Atom... not going to happen. Yes, i realize you didn't say "HD" video but this is 2010... you shouldn't have to transcode SD video to anything...

My next WHS will be a quad core for sure. My current WHS is a single core Athlon 3500+ and I could sure use more horsepower. Going to have a few VM's run full time on it so at least 8GB of RAM as well.
 
criccio said:
There is no way you are transcoding HD video on the fly using an Atom... not going to happen. Yes, i realize you didn't say "HD" video but this is 2010... you shouldn't have to transcode SD video to anything...

My next WHS will be a quad core for sure. My current WHS is a single core Athlon 3500+ and I could sure use more horsepower. Going to have a few VM's run full time on it so at least 8GB of RAM as well.
Click to expand...

To trans-code 1080p its about 1/2x live speed. But I dont bother often based simply on the amount of space that HD takes up. I only have 4tb of space & that would fill quickly otherwise. Most of my video is archived in DVD quality.

As far as a quad core with 8gb of ram goes.. Been there done that with a Phenom 9850 BE.. I didn't like the fact that my office was 15 degrees warmer then the rest of the house every morning & my power bill was outrageous.. thats what inspired me to do my 1st WHS & it was a Socket A Sempron that was alter upgraded to a faster Sempron & most recently completely changed to a D510 setup.
 
I'm a little confused. When you guys say transcode on the fly....what does that mean exactly? You're encoding while watching? If that's the case I won't be doing that as mostly my stuff is already HD, it'll only be used to rip/encode in its off time.

@ bastage, how well does streaming work? Can I say...stream 3x 1080p movies to three different computers without any stuttering?
 
soulesschild said:
I'm a little confused. When you guys say transcode on the fly....what does that mean exactly? You're encoding while watching? If that's the case I won't be doing that as mostly my stuff is already HD, it'll only be used to rip/encode in its off time.

@ bastage, how well does streaming work? Can I say...stream 3x 1080p movies to three different computers without any stuttering?
Click to expand...

sorry I had lost this thread. Actually just found it again due to looking for that card danny linked.

Just simply streaming.. I have little experience there. I Transcode everything. & to sum up what that is is that most popular video formats are no good for my tivo's so when I browse to a video from my tivo & tell it I want to play it it transcodes it to a format more tivo friendly. because of this there is no straight streaming off my tivo unless its to my desktop. I Can tell you that I can sustain transfers from my server to my desktop of about 60-70MB/s I believe that if your sending h.264 20MB should be sufficient so I would imagine that this should be more then enough.
 
So in other words: Transcoding means transforming or re-encoding the video and then streaming it. Streaming is just that, streaming whereas Transcoding is streaming while the video is being re-encoded to a different format.
 
Danny Bui said:
So in other words: Transcoding means transforming or re-encoding the video and then streaming it. Streaming is just that, streaming whereas Transcoding is streaming while the video is being re-encoded to a different format.
Click to expand...

+1 for translating to english
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top