Want to build a server at home (MSDN subscriber) 1

[sheu]

Hello,
First off, apologies for posting in this forum regards hardware but none of the other forums in the daunting list of forums seemed to apply.

About me...
I'm developer working primarily in the MS arena and, per the subject, have access to MSDN subscription and therefore, access to a host of different servers OS's to choose from.

In addition, I'm also a hobbyist proficent with hardware and software installs and know a few things about networking

I'd like to build a Win 2003 x64 server and want advise regards the hardware. I'll be primarily focused within the AMD camp and probably prefer to build an x64 dual core system, most likely utilizing 1 cpu (perhaps 2 if it feels like I'm not breaking the bank).

I expect to eventually run a true client/server network with roaming profiles and a central email server (which could get tricky since I realy don't have a clue what I'm doing here and want to utilize existing email account provided by 3rd party internet providers).

I also expect this server to be a primary gateway to the rest of the network (not sure how that's going to play with my currently wireless router) but that will happen 'later'.

I expect to write ASP.NET apps on this server as well which will probably NOT be shared with the outside work - we'll see

This machine will also server as a media server to the rest of my network (currently 5 machines).

In light of the media server issue, am expecting (or at least hoping) to store all user data on this machine, perhaps utilizing a backup solution.

Finally, this machine will sit in a cooled closet somewhere as I expect, unless there is a problem (and during the build), all access to the machine will be through terminal server.

I'm pretty good with hardware and just recently built myself an AMD 4800+ dual core machine on top of a pair of SATA WD Raptors in RAID 0 and 2 gig of ram - but server hardware is a different animal.

Of course I realize that the rig I just built would probably make a strong server foundation but I'd rather focus the build from the server perspective - I use the other for gaming

However I do NOT want to dump cash into the system as I really don't expect the machine to be utilized to any great extent. I see it more as a learning experience that also helps manage (or structure) the enviroment that I already have.

Perhaps it would be more in-line with a machine used in a small (very small) office environment.

So I see the following components
-AMD motherboard (probably not Opteron) with 2 cpu slots
-dual core proc (prob only 1 - not sure what to go with)
-2 HD (one for OS/apps, the other for media - prob no need for raid)
-NIC that passes traffic to my router (hazy here)

I expect to buy a WIN 2003 book on configuration as well

Your thoughts?

 

[NetIntruder]

given your requirements that you layed out, i would simply add a second NIC and call it a day so that this server can act as a router as well. Just curious, why not Opteron (i'm not a HUGE hardware guy, but i love hearing arguments for different gear.)

Also, a single processor would probably suffice, but if you don't have issues spending the money, the second NIC would make debug/building of your apps a much more pleasant experience.

~Intruder~
CEH, CISSP, MCSA/MCSE 2000/2003

 

[sheu]

Adding a 2nd nic to my toy isn't a solution for a number of reasons but foremost, the OS is XP Pro 32 (and won't be upgraded to a server OS in my forseeable future).

Hard to justify my position on the proc as my positioning is based on years building enthusasist machines. I know for example that Op's require more stringent error-checking RAM, which in my hobbyist frame of mind is a cap on speed.

But per my original post, I'm here to determine the hardware requirements of the machine!

Thanks for the reply

 

[NetIntruder]

... ok, your post had eluded to the OS being 2003 Server x64. Sorry, i must have misunderstood where you were going with this.

~Intruder~
CEH, CISSP, MCSA/MCSE 2000/2003

 

[kmcferrin]

If you want an AMD motherboard with 2 CPU sockets, you will have to go with an Opteron. All of the Athlon 64/X2 CPUs use either Socket 939 or AM2, and all of the dual CPU boards are socket 940 (for Opteron 200 series CPUs).

 

[sheu]

Thanks kmcferrin, that does make sense.

Now that I think about it, MAXIMUMPC built a dream-machine not this but last year and it was dual-core, dual-proc and if memory serves, was built with Opteron heads. Don't recall why but assume your post is spot on. Need to go back and read the article.

kmcferrin, do you have a recommendation regards where to get solid input regards building a true server? When I look around the web I see a lot of barebone rack mounted systems (which I guess is OK) and they seem to have 2+ lan ports already built in.

 

[kmcferrin]

It depends on what you want to spend. I personally buy lots of HP servers and I've been looking at Sun a lot lately, but I'm buying complete servers so that I don't have to mess around with building and troubleshooting them when something goes wrong.

What is a true server, anyways? I always thought that it was a machine that stored or processed data for end users that was not local. Today's CPUs are so powerful, my desktop machines run hardware that is nearly as fast as the server hardware. The biggest difference (other than the OS) is in the heavy duty power supplies, redundant parts, and support for high-end hot swap SCSI RAID arrays.

If you are building a server for home use (even if it is going to be the gateway and email server), you could probably get buy with the equivalent of a high-end desktop with mirrored SATA hard disks. Unless you are doing lots of heavily CPU-intensive work, you'll probably never come close to maxxing it out (especially if you have a dual core CPU). In reality, the AMD 4800+ system that you mentioned would probably be more than capable.

For example, up until this year I used to run my personal web site, Exchange 2000 server, chat server and private map server (for use by my guild in an online game) on a 450 MHz Windows 2000 Server box with 512 MB of RAM. It very rarely got a significant amount of workload, and the biggest problem was low memory and disk thrashing when it did. Granted, I had a separate server for file/print/DHCP/DNS and AD Domain Controller services. That one was a 333 MHz/512 MB system.

But if you're still interested in building an enterprise-class server, I will say that it's not cheap. A decent, entry-level rackmount server from HP or Dell runs $4000+ once you have accounted for more memory, disk space, etc. I doubt that you could build one much cheaper if you went the rackmount barebones route, as server-class components are expensive. The CPUs and memory cost twice as much, the mainboards cost 3 times as much, and getting enterprise class hard drives costs 4-5 times as much as consumer-level products. For my money I would just use an old PC, put in mirrored hard disks and 2+ GB of RAM, and then slap Windows Server 2003 R2 on it.

 

[sheu]

Thanks KM, that's a valuable post.

No, I do not want to dump a lot of cash into the system (per my original post) nor do I want to implement an old crusty machine as the foundation of my network

The HP angle, perhaps for a fortune 500 or 100 company makes sense but not for a mom & pop shop (very small office reference in my first note).

Perhaps a cheap NEW rig with your specs are in order but I keep thinking about barebone server solutions and how they might come into play...