Author Topic: Building a Xeon server (Read 1779 times)

Mini D · « **on:** February 10, 2005, 08:11:07 PM »

I'm starting to build a new server to replace my dual pentium2 xeon 400MHz system that I've been running for 8 years now. I managed to get my paws on a couple of 3G Xeon Noconas, so now I'm ready to give it a go again.

Here's what I have so far:

3.0 GHz Xeon (Nacona) x 2
ASUS NCCH-DL motherboard

I'm leaning towards 1 GHz of RAM, but don't know if ECC is necessary or not. I'll most likely go with 2 160Gig SATA HDs a DvD burner of some type. I'll also be adding a media reader to this one.

Anyways... any suggestions would be appreciated.

Schutt · « **Reply #1 on:** February 11, 2005, 03:02:54 AM »

What are you going to do with the server?

Generally I would go for 2GB RAM with ECC, but depends on what you run on it.
If you run a database application and it has to swap because your are 1GB RAM short, that will be slower than having one harddrive and more RAM.
ECC ram is neccessary... i have seen a lot of servers without and its a pain to get errors in your database for crapped ram because you dont notice the ram is wrong for quite a while.

Or maybe more hard drives, one 40G for system and a raid array for data and application?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #2 on:** February 11, 2005, 06:46:54 AM »

Going with an ASUS board instead of a SuperMicro?

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #3 on:** February 11, 2005, 07:27:20 AM »

This may sound like a dumb question to most of you but,
Whats the difference between a Server and a regular desktop PC?

And outside a corperation why would it be desirable to have one?

Mini D · « **Reply #4 on:** February 11, 2005, 07:44:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Going with an ASUS board instead of a SuperMicro?

I bought a supermicro for my P2 dual Xeon server back in 97. It was a decent board (very expensive), but had some limitations I didn't like (though, I'd be hard pressed to remember what they were). I've been relatively happy with all of the ASUS stuff I've owned and also liked that they were $50 cheaper than the cheapest super-micro board. If I were going with a SCSI solution, I would have gone super-micro without batting an eye. But, I was looking for SATA and more of a "budget" server.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2005, 07:55:06 AM »

Got it. SuperMicro is definately not a budget motherboard. I like ASUS and the only servers I have ever built were critical, so I have always used SuperMicro for those.
I'd be curious as to how this one works out for you MD.

DRED, server motherboards support significantly higher amounts of ram (8 ram slots are normal), usually do not have an AGP slot (cheap video solution onboard), almost always have, at least, one 64 bit PCI slot, almost always require ECC ram and are large form factor boards.
If you need something with a lot of ram (>4GB), then a server board is the way to go. However, the CPU's for those boards will have the loudest HSF you have ever heard.
I know our Xeon systems sound like F16's on full afterburner when they are running. Not something you want in earshot.

Reschke · « **Reply #6 on:** February 11, 2005, 08:34:38 AM »

Yep Supermicro boards with Intel CPU's are anice combination in my opinion as well.

I am getting ready to build a new server for our office here and we are converting over to a new software package for manufacturing and distribution (We are considering going with MAS90 if anyone has any insight into that package.) so our current server that some "IT" guy bought and configured 4+ years ago was maxed out in RAM when we bought it. The Compaq crap box only came with 512MB of RAM and according to the Compaq book and website for it thats the max it will take.

I have looked at Opteron chips for the server but I think that would be overkill. If someone can give me a few ideas I would appreciate it.

Mini D · « **Reply #7 on:** February 11, 2005, 09:59:38 AM »

One thing I'm not very clear on is the benefit of ECC ram. What are the pros/cons involved?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #8 on:** February 11, 2005, 12:06:03 PM »

The Pros; ECC memory can regenerate data from a bad read, preserving the original.
The Cons: ECC memory can regenerate data from a bad read, preserving the original.

It's strength is also its weakness. To generate the ECC, it takes one extra cycle per write to the ram ,making it a lot slower than non-ECC memory.

If an ECC error is detected, the an NMI is generated back to the CPU. Software *could* take advantag of this and correct the error, but virtually all operating systems will simply shutdown on an ECC hit.
Basically, you know when ECC ram is about to go belly up. Without ECC, you can scribble bad data all day long.

Mini D · « **Reply #9 on:** February 14, 2005, 12:16:23 AM »

Well, I picked up the memory yesterday and downloaded WinXP64 beta from Microsoft (with 1 year license) at a very reasonable price (note: free).

The next step is figuring out the power supply. I'm a bit confused in regards to the dual Xeon setup. It almost appears that I need a special power supply, though the manual for the motherboard doesn't say so. Skuzzy, have you ever heard of a power supply for Xeons having to be compatable with "EPS12V Server Boards"?

Kev367th · « **Reply #10 on:** February 14, 2005, 07:35:06 AM »

XP64 will run on a Xeon?
Thought it only ran on AMD64, Intels soon to be EM64T thingy and Itanics, oops Itaniums.
Ooops just checked it will, pity the EM64T implemetation is a poor shadow of the AMD 64 bit extensions.

Wow this is getting silly - just read a review of a 3.6Ghz 1mb cache Nocona vs AMD3500 512k cache. They proudly announce at the end that in math intensive operations the Nacona wins.

Well lets see - 3.6Ghz Nocona $750+ vs AMD 3500 $250, at least match prices and put it up against an FX-53, then lets see who wins what.

Only thing that does surprise me is that the review is not from Toms Intelware site.

Mini D · « **Reply #11 on:** February 14, 2005, 07:52:03 AM »

You're a bit behind the times, it seems. Try looking up "Nocona".

Mini D · « **Reply #12 on:** February 14, 2005, 10:33:30 AM »

BTW... XP64 will not run on Itaniums. You need MS Server 2003 for that one.

Kev367th · « **Reply #13 on:** February 14, 2005, 10:58:22 AM »

Ahh cc.
Wasn't sure about the Itanics.

Mini D · « **Reply #14 on:** February 14, 2005, 11:10:02 AM »

Kev... put the soapbox away. There's no need for it in this thread. You're participation has not been helpfull and apparently is not intended to be. Take it somewhere else.