For MB, I reccomend Tyan. I have built a number of dual processor machines with Tyan boards and have found them to be excellent quality. You can check them out at http://www.tyan.com/
The raid interface uses Promise technologies drivers and are fairly simple to configure.
What about dual processing? I note that lots of boards offer that these days. Do I really need it for a small business of say 8 computers connected and a remote site connected once in a while?
Or will this be overkill (which I sometimes like.) I have no experience with dual processors. With today's speedy processors is dual really needed? We just do day to day office stuff, laser printing, broadand, nothing really graphics intensive.
Paw, I don't like the all acrylic cases either and dust becomes an eyesore after a while. I currently have (at my home) a case with a big side glass window and sound activated lighting. I like that concept too as you suggest.
But my power supply is going to be one of those that are lit up inside. Just gotta have that!
John, I wouldn't build my own business computer if I were you. Home computers, absolutely. Business computers, you want to have a service organization on the hook if it blows up on you.
If you absolutely must, go with an AMD dual-CPU board like the Tyan (make sure you get the multiprocessor Athlons, not the regular XPs) and no more than 4GB of RAM. (True geeks will know why... :)--> )
I don't think there is a multiprocessor/Xeon version of the Pentium 4 at any speed. Get a beefy power supply, a RAID 5 controller, and at least 6 hard drives for your array. If you use 120GB drives that will give you 600GB of space spread across the parity set.
Zixar, will you just come here and build it for me? Now I feel intimidated. Nah, really, I'll be fine. Being a business owner I have everything backed up and up and up and off site. In fact I have sort of a mirror image of all my business data on my home computers. I like to think of what I would do if I came in one morning and everything was burned to the ground. We could run business by driving 3 miles away, almost seamlessly.
First off, this is not a big business location. You should see what we are using now for a "Server" and it actually works OK. It is a PIII with Window 20OO with 256 meeg of ram and one hard drive.
Maybe I should say this will be a "File Server", might be more accurate.
With todays powerful processors I am not even sure I need dual processors. And I am certain I will not need more than a gig of RAM.
After looking into it I think I will really only need a single powerful processor, probably Pentium 4 3.0 Ghz
But you should be aware of the fact that it makes no sense to build uni-processor systems on the Xeon. Performance of uni-processor computers on the Xeon and Pentium 4 is the same, while the Xeon+i860 platform is much more expensive. At the same time, a dual-processor system based on the Xeon is almost twice faster as compared with the Pentium 4 "Northwood" of the same frequency.
Zixar I am a little concerned about AMD and how they are prone to overheating problems. I have heard they can run much hotter than Intel. Just what I have heard from a couple of different sources.
The article lost me but one of their conclusions was this bold statement:
At present Athlon XP based systems DO have thermal problems and are not protected from serious failures of cooling systems. However, systems with the thermal diode support still have a minimal thermal protection.
The Intel Pentium 4 has a great reliability reserve as there is catastrophic overheating protection and Thermal Monitor support. But optimal reliability/performance ratio for Pentium 4 based systems requires the most effective cooling means.
[This message was edited by igotout on March 11, 2003 at 21:54.]
Geez, John, if you want to fly me down there, I'll even let you look over my shoulder while I build it! :)-->
You don't need a 3GHz processor to run a freakin' file server. The bottleneck is going to be your network speed and your hard drive speed. We have a real business database server running 4 ancient Pentium Pro 200-MHz processors, and we never go above 35% on the CPU utilization monitors, with hundreds of connections.
We're cloning it onto a newer surplus 2xPentium II 500MHz box with 4GB of RAM. Stress testing hasn't forced it above 10% utilization yet. This is with a 100Mbps Ethernet network and 7200rpm hard drives in a RAID 5 array, too.
Well, Zixar, Hope is coming to your city soon so send back a shiny new server with her and bill me. But it better have some pretty lights in it.
Thanks for the tips. But these processors are so dirt cheap now anyway. It's kind of like a 64 meg graphics card. Who really uses that power day to day? Few. But there they are all over the place with prices plumetting more and more. They are standard in all computers now. 128 is next up. I already have one and it is ridiculously powerful. Someday maybe they will make a game that touches its power. Ha!
Hard drives as a bottleneck. Yes, I was aware of that fact. Therefore I am going RAID and using today's popular 8MB cache drives. They are the fasest IDE and almost equal to SCSI in speed but much cheaper.
I'm considering a few of these for the RAID array: Fast Hard drives
I have one at home and it is nice.
The network bottleneck shouldn't be a problem but I will be asking you more about that later.
By the way I can get a gig of PC800 RDRAM for around $400. Again...dirt cheap, so why not?
[This message was edited by igotout on April 06, 2003 at 23:32.]
No, I don't really remember much from back in those days except how hard it was to do stuff without a mouse. And I have a fuzzy memory about paying $700 for a hot new item that everyone was getting.
It was an internal 20MB (yes MB) hard drive. That was an abundance of storage because most companies had only 10 in the previous generation computers. Ha! Compare for $185 today..... Today's hot drive
Of course, along with that I purchased the hottest monitor of the day for a mere $900. It was a 15" NEC MultiSync Monitor. And it was in VGA color as opposed to the green or amber!
But the HP Laser printers were just too much for my blood because they were $3,000.
Kind of how I feel now about the color laser printers out there.
[This message was edited by igotout on April 06, 2003 at 23:31.]
This has been put on the back burner for a few weeks because I have to research and purchase a laptop and configure it with all the programs needed. Laptops have come a long way as can be evidenced by this one!
Recommended Posts
Righteous Brother
Hi John,
I don't deal much with Intel, I like AMD's bang for the buck. The last server I built had a dual processor MB, 1GB RAM. The customer is happy.
As far as cases go, This one should fit the bill. Case = $65, side window = $25. Has a 450W power supply and 2 case fans.
RB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bluzeman
John..
For MB, I reccomend Tyan. I have built a number of dual processor machines with Tyan boards and have found them to be excellent quality. You can check them out at http://www.tyan.com/
The raid interface uses Promise technologies drivers and are fairly simple to configure.
Rick
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
Don't buy an Intel motherboard. I tried that on my last system and regret it.
The acrylic cases are fun to look at but not great. The ones with the acrylic sides but metal everywhere else is probably most practical.
You can use neon to embellish it.
I've had great luck with the ASUS boards in the past year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
What about dual processing? I note that lots of boards offer that these days. Do I really need it for a small business of say 8 computers connected and a remote site connected once in a while?
Or will this be overkill (which I sometimes like.) I have no experience with dual processors. With today's speedy processors is dual really needed? We just do day to day office stuff, laser printing, broadand, nothing really graphics intensive.
Paw, I don't like the all acrylic cases either and dust becomes an eyesore after a while. I currently have (at my home) a case with a big side glass window and sound activated lighting. I like that concept too as you suggest.
But my power supply is going to be one of those that are lit up inside. Just gotta have that!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
John, I wouldn't build my own business computer if I were you. Home computers, absolutely. Business computers, you want to have a service organization on the hook if it blows up on you.
If you absolutely must, go with an AMD dual-CPU board like the Tyan (make sure you get the multiprocessor Athlons, not the regular XPs) and no more than 4GB of RAM. (True geeks will know why...
:)--> )
I don't think there is a multiprocessor/Xeon version of the Pentium 4 at any speed. Get a beefy power supply, a RAID 5 controller, and at least 6 hard drives for your array. If you use 120GB drives that will give you 600GB of space spread across the parity set.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
Zixar, will you just come here and build it for me? Now I feel intimidated. Nah, really, I'll be fine. Being a business owner I have everything backed up and up and up and off site. In fact I have sort of a mirror image of all my business data on my home computers. I like to think of what I would do if I came in one morning and everything was burned to the ground. We could run business by driving 3 miles away, almost seamlessly.
First off, this is not a big business location. You should see what we are using now for a "Server" and it actually works OK. It is a PIII with Window 20OO with 256 meeg of ram and one hard drive.
Maybe I should say this will be a "File Server", might be more accurate.
With todays powerful processors I am not even sure I need dual processors. And I am certain I will not need more than a gig of RAM.
After looking into it I think I will really only need a single powerful processor, probably Pentium 4 3.0 Ghz
See this article:
Pentium 4 & Xeon: What's the difference.
One of their conclusions:
But you should be aware of the fact that it makes no sense to build uni-processor systems on the Xeon. Performance of uni-processor computers on the Xeon and Pentium 4 is the same, while the Xeon+i860 platform is much more expensive. At the same time, a dual-processor system based on the Xeon is almost twice faster as compared with the Pentium 4 "Northwood" of the same frequency.
Zixar I am a little concerned about AMD and how they are prone to overheating problems. I have heard they can run much hotter than Intel. Just what I have heard from a couple of different sources.
See this very technical article:
PEntium 4 & Athlon Thermal Conditions
The article lost me but one of their conclusions was this bold statement:
At present Athlon XP based systems DO have thermal problems and are not protected from serious failures of cooling systems. However, systems with the thermal diode support still have a minimal thermal protection.
The Intel Pentium 4 has a great reliability reserve as there is catastrophic overheating protection and Thermal Monitor support. But optimal reliability/performance ratio for Pentium 4 based systems requires the most effective cooling means.
[This message was edited by igotout on March 11, 2003 at 21:54.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
Pretty power
:)-->
480 Watts Should Do It
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Geez, John, if you want to fly me down there, I'll even let you look over my shoulder while I build it!
:)-->
You don't need a 3GHz processor to run a freakin' file server. The bottleneck is going to be your network speed and your hard drive speed. We have a real business database server running 4 ancient Pentium Pro 200-MHz processors, and we never go above 35% on the CPU utilization monitors, with hundreds of connections.
We're cloning it onto a newer surplus 2xPentium II 500MHz box with 4GB of RAM. Stress testing hasn't forced it above 10% utilization yet. This is with a 100Mbps Ethernet network and 7200rpm hard drives in a RAID 5 array, too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
Well, Zixar, Hope is coming to your city soon so send back a shiny new server with her and bill me. But it better have some pretty lights in it.
Thanks for the tips. But these processors are so dirt cheap now anyway. It's kind of like a 64 meg graphics card. Who really uses that power day to day? Few. But there they are all over the place with prices plumetting more and more. They are standard in all computers now. 128 is next up. I already have one and it is ridiculously powerful. Someday maybe they will make a game that touches its power. Ha!
Hard drives as a bottleneck. Yes, I was aware of that fact. Therefore I am going RAID and using today's popular 8MB cache drives. They are the fasest IDE and almost equal to SCSI in speed but much cheaper.
I'm considering a few of these for the RAID array: Fast Hard drives
I have one at home and it is nice.
The network bottleneck shouldn't be a problem but I will be asking you more about that later.
By the way I can get a gig of PC800 RDRAM for around $400. Again...dirt cheap, so why not?
[This message was edited by igotout on April 06, 2003 at 23:32.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
The damn operating system will be nearly as much as the server. No wonder people use Linux.
But it looks awesome.
Windows 2003 Server
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Since Windows is a 32-bit operating system, the maximum physical memory address space is 4GB.
Remember in the old DOS days and the 640K barrier? 4GB is the Win barrier.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
No, I don't really remember much from back in those days except how hard it was to do stuff without a mouse. And I have a fuzzy memory about paying $700 for a hot new item that everyone was getting.
It was an internal 20MB (yes MB) hard drive. That was an abundance of storage because most companies had only 10 in the previous generation computers. Ha! Compare for $185 today..... Today's hot drive
Of course, along with that I purchased the hottest monitor of the day for a mere $900. It was a 15" NEC MultiSync Monitor. And it was in VGA color as opposed to the green or amber!
But the HP Laser printers were just too much for my blood because they were $3,000.
Kind of how I feel now about the color laser printers out there.
[This message was edited by igotout on April 06, 2003 at 23:31.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
igotout
This has been put on the back burner for a few weeks because I have to research and purchase a laptop and configure it with all the programs needed. Laptops have come a long way as can be evidenced by this one!
Alienware Mobile
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.