The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
In a project I'm theoretically building a small server based network, would an Athlon 64 3400 be good as the processor on this? What are the advantages of the intel Xeon etc? Does anyone recommend anything different?
Page:
Cheers, always nice to have a little extra advice, which ISNT pointing out how inadequate you are! lol
Yeesh, I'm only in high school, so some people could take my age into consideration before grilling me on how suitable for a task I am! I'm still only 16, so I can only do my best!
Yeesh, I'm only in high school, so some people could take my age into consideration before grilling me on how suitable for a task I am! I'm still only 16, so I can only do my best!
Alexrose1uk wrote:
> I am going for a fast system, as the project also mentioned video and
> picture editing, some of which may involve the server,a nd at least
> streaming the results out over a network, both of which are processor
> or network intensive tasks.
Video and picture editing is not something you're going to be doing on a server though, it's a workstation task. If you're going to be streaming video media (in a doctors surgery? Why, pray tell?) to clients this is disk intensive, but not that disk intensive - your original post stated it was a small network, which is something IDE RAID should easily, easily be able to cope with. I honestly can't picture a network where you'd need anything more than a 1Ghz processor with 512MB RAM and a small RAID array running Windows 2000. You probably wouldn't even need the array if you were backing up to tape, as you should be.
I went 64 bit for future compatability
> and nothing else, as this is (if it were real) expected to last many
> years, and the hardware needs to be able to cope with software
> available in a few years time.... and the system isn't running
> Linux.
> Therefore I needed peak efficiency and reliability at every turn.
64bit processors are in their first generation and change is already on the horizon, now is not the right time to be investing in expensive server hardware. In your theoretical shoes, I would be buying a cheap system with a view to upgrade/replace it in the future. Not every business needs a supercomputer just to function.
> I am going for a fast system, as the project also mentioned video and
> picture editing, some of which may involve the server,a nd at least
> streaming the results out over a network, both of which are processor
> or network intensive tasks.
Video and picture editing is not something you're going to be doing on a server though, it's a workstation task. If you're going to be streaming video media (in a doctors surgery? Why, pray tell?) to clients this is disk intensive, but not that disk intensive - your original post stated it was a small network, which is something IDE RAID should easily, easily be able to cope with. I honestly can't picture a network where you'd need anything more than a 1Ghz processor with 512MB RAM and a small RAID array running Windows 2000. You probably wouldn't even need the array if you were backing up to tape, as you should be.
I went 64 bit for future compatability
> and nothing else, as this is (if it were real) expected to last many
> years, and the hardware needs to be able to cope with software
> available in a few years time.... and the system isn't running
> Linux.
> Therefore I needed peak efficiency and reliability at every turn.
64bit processors are in their first generation and change is already on the horizon, now is not the right time to be investing in expensive server hardware. In your theoretical shoes, I would be buying a cheap system with a view to upgrade/replace it in the future. Not every business needs a supercomputer just to function.
I am going for a fast system, as the project also mentioned video and picture editing, some of which may involve the server,a nd at least streaming the results out over a network, both of which are processor or network intensive tasks. I went 64 bit for future compatability and nothing else, as this is (if it were real) expected to last many years, and the hardware needs to be able to cope with software available in a few years time.... and the system isn't running Linux.
Therefore I needed peak efficiency and reliability at every turn.
I asked for info on the XEON and OPTERON as I wanted to see how the information I though I might get would correspond with what I already knew. When doctor's information is on the line, extra information, opinions etc are ALWAYS a good idea!
Therefore I needed peak efficiency and reliability at every turn.
I asked for info on the XEON and OPTERON as I wanted to see how the information I though I might get would correspond with what I already knew. When doctor's information is on the line, extra information, opinions etc are ALWAYS a good idea!
lol. No, it is just for a school project. I'd have done more research if it was a real thing, besides, who's ever heard of a 16 year old IT consultant? LOL
Besides, I did know most of what I've been told. However, it's always nice to get a second opinion, hence consultancy teams and firms...
Besides, I did know most of what I've been told. However, it's always nice to get a second opinion, hence consultancy teams and firms...
If this is for a school project then it would look better if you were to not just spec up a server with all the most expensive componants you can as it would be OTT, depending on the size of this surgery would also depend on the spec of the server, I assume the server will be running some some of database (maybe visual basic front) which is linked to microsoft access (or something similar, For this it would not need anything top spec, a normal mid-spec system would do it easily with a good amount of memory, If you are going to run a RAID setup in it then run it as mirroring not striping as you do not really need the performance of striping but you would need the security of mirroring, normal IDE drives should be fine for this, Using it for an internet gateway would also be no problem.
Colin
Colin
The word theoretical is the key here. I assume it is a school computing project where you have to show that you can design and build a system for a set specification.
However if this is for real then I think that if you have to ask so broadly then perhaps you aren't quite the right person to do it.
However if this is for real then I think that if you have to ask so broadly then perhaps you aren't quite the right person to do it.
Alexrose1uk wrote:
> Well, basically it was gonna be running 4x SATA drives with RAID
> config, and was to be used as a file server for a small doctors
> office. I was also gonna rig broadband into it, and then use it to
> filter the internet through to the other machines on the network. It
> wasn't meant to be a gaming or intensive use network.
The spec of your server is entirely dependent on what it's going to be used for. A 500Mhz machine will easily cope all of this, especially if it's running Linux without a graphical user interface.
Are you sure you're the right person to be doing all this?
> Well, basically it was gonna be running 4x SATA drives with RAID
> config, and was to be used as a file server for a small doctors
> office. I was also gonna rig broadband into it, and then use it to
> filter the internet through to the other machines on the network. It
> wasn't meant to be a gaming or intensive use network.
The spec of your server is entirely dependent on what it's going to be used for. A 500Mhz machine will easily cope all of this, especially if it's running Linux without a graphical user interface.
Are you sure you're the right person to be doing all this?
Well, basically it was gonna be running 4x SATA drives with RAID config, and was to be used as a file server for a small doctors office. I was also gonna rig broadband into it, and then use it to filter the internet through to the other machines on the network. It wasn't meant to be a gaming or intensive use network.
Why spend so much on a server? Well if it's going to be a corporate server, then yes a fast one is required, but you can salvage an old machine and use that for a "home" server if you needed it. It'll do the job with no problems.
My mate has just built his own server, just a simple 1.4ghz athlon and huge hard drive.
My mate has just built his own server, just a simple 1.4ghz athlon and huge hard drive.
The Athlon 64 is more of a home PC processor, although it would be able to run a server. However Xeon's have a much bigger cache memory which improves performance.
Cache memory improves performance because more instructions can be stored on the processor itself. And a processor nowadays runs at 2 or 3 GHz, whereas RAM only runs at 800 MHz (well sort of) in an Intel system, 400 MHz in an AMD system. So being able to get instructions quicker makes the system quicker. I thought I best explain that.
AMD had an Athlon called the Athlon MP that was designed for dual processor systems, like many servers are. However it is a bit old.
What you would really want would be an AMD Opteron processor. It is 64 bit and has a large cache memory and is designed for use either on its own or for use in multiple processor workstations or servers.
In short, Opteron or Xeon.
You might also want to look up the Intel Itanium.
Cache memory improves performance because more instructions can be stored on the processor itself. And a processor nowadays runs at 2 or 3 GHz, whereas RAM only runs at 800 MHz (well sort of) in an Intel system, 400 MHz in an AMD system. So being able to get instructions quicker makes the system quicker. I thought I best explain that.
AMD had an Athlon called the Athlon MP that was designed for dual processor systems, like many servers are. However it is a bit old.
What you would really want would be an AMD Opteron processor. It is 64 bit and has a large cache memory and is designed for use either on its own or for use in multiple processor workstations or servers.
In short, Opteron or Xeon.
You might also want to look up the Intel Itanium.
Page: