locked
New hardware for WHS or recycle existing...? RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm going to install WHS and was wondering if I would benefit by getting a dedicated server (Dell has one on sale with dual 160 SATA's for $399) or if I would be fine by just taking an existing XP-installed box and converting it to WHS use exclusively?

     

    This is for home use of course and would be primarily for sharing media and for back-up's.  There are 3 desktops and 3 laptops that are on the network.  One of them is running Vista, the rest some form of XP, FYI.

     

    Thanks for any suggestions.

    Sunday, April 13, 2008 8:22 PM

Answers

  •  drdeputy wrote:

    I'm going to install WHS and was wondering if I would benefit by getting a dedicated server (Dell has one on sale with dual 160 SATA's for $399) or if I would be fine by just taking an existing XP-installed box and converting it to WHS use exclusively?

     

    This is for home use of course and would be primarily for sharing media and for back-up's.  There are 3 desktops and 3 laptops that are on the network.  One of them is running Vista, the rest some form of XP, FYI.

     

    Thanks for any suggestions.



    Unless you have money to burn, I'd recommend the recycle method of reusing an older PC. My recycle was a Dell SC420 server that I had been using as a desktop machine. It has performed perfectly for me. Have had no issues with it other than a couple self inflicted ones. WHS has been solid on that setup.

    Cruise
    Sunday, April 13, 2008 9:12 PM
  • You probably want to list the HW specs of the XP box in question.   WHS is not a CPU\Memory intensive implementation.   Most noticeable performance gains would be in the area of optimizing disk I\O.   

     

    For starters you want the largest disk in the box to be the disk where you install OS.   I think the general consensus on these forums is to use a 250gb drive at a minimum with a 320gb drive being the sweet spot.   I went with a 750gb drive with 32mb cache.

     

     

    Sunday, April 13, 2008 9:42 PM
  • Absolutely not, I've seen WHS humming along just fine on a rebuilt P3 1Ghz, 1024MB RAM box with SATA controller and Gigabit ethernet. The biggest cost of that box was WHS itself and the drives.

     

    You don't need a high-spec CPU for WHS, that should be a general consensus, you don't have dozens of clients submitting server requests all at once, WHS has 10 CALs as a maximum. At most, you'll have 10 client PCs accessing the server and most families are not anywhere near that large. This is why the minimum specs are so low for WHS.

     

     FlyGuyAZ wrote:
    If you are at all technically savvy you shouldn't have issues reusing an old machine.  Save yourself some scratch and and diy.

    Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:34 PM

All replies

  • I'm running an OLD Abit KA7-100Raid here with a 750MHz CPU, 1 Gig Ram and a 500GB drive.  And have had no problems after getting the outside remote working.

    jd
    Sunday, April 13, 2008 8:46 PM
  •  drdeputy wrote:

    I'm going to install WHS and was wondering if I would benefit by getting a dedicated server (Dell has one on sale with dual 160 SATA's for $399) or if I would be fine by just taking an existing XP-installed box and converting it to WHS use exclusively?

     

    This is for home use of course and would be primarily for sharing media and for back-up's.  There are 3 desktops and 3 laptops that are on the network.  One of them is running Vista, the rest some form of XP, FYI.

     

    Thanks for any suggestions.



    Unless you have money to burn, I'd recommend the recycle method of reusing an older PC. My recycle was a Dell SC420 server that I had been using as a desktop machine. It has performed perfectly for me. Have had no issues with it other than a couple self inflicted ones. WHS has been solid on that setup.

    Cruise
    Sunday, April 13, 2008 9:12 PM
  • You probably want to list the HW specs of the XP box in question.   WHS is not a CPU\Memory intensive implementation.   Most noticeable performance gains would be in the area of optimizing disk I\O.   

     

    For starters you want the largest disk in the box to be the disk where you install OS.   I think the general consensus on these forums is to use a 250gb drive at a minimum with a 320gb drive being the sweet spot.   I went with a 750gb drive with 32mb cache.

     

     

    Sunday, April 13, 2008 9:42 PM
  • Another vote for use what ever is laying around.

     

    Like most PC users, i have a big box full of spare parts, and had an old case and mb.  In short, using and old ASUS MB, P3 @ 1.3 mhz, 215 mb ram.

     

    I bought a new 750gb hard drive for the main system drive, and will add more new and old drives when the data coruption bug is fixed.

     

    Monday, April 14, 2008 6:11 PM
  • Although the data corruption bug can only occur when more than 1 drive is in the WHS box, as long as you are not editing files which are stored on the server, then you are ok using multiple drives.   Copying data to a multi drives WHS server is not a problem.   I would use this time to add some drives and really put the hardware you plan to use through its paces.   I have been doing just that with test data, so when PP1 is installed I will be ready to go.    
    Monday, April 14, 2008 7:15 PM
  • If you are at all technically savvy you shouldn't have issues reusing an old machine.  Save yourself some scratch and and diy.
    Monday, April 14, 2008 9:01 PM
  • moved thread to Hardware forum

     

    Monday, April 14, 2008 9:48 PM
  • Absolutely not, I've seen WHS humming along just fine on a rebuilt P3 1Ghz, 1024MB RAM box with SATA controller and Gigabit ethernet. The biggest cost of that box was WHS itself and the drives.

     

    You don't need a high-spec CPU for WHS, that should be a general consensus, you don't have dozens of clients submitting server requests all at once, WHS has 10 CALs as a maximum. At most, you'll have 10 client PCs accessing the server and most families are not anywhere near that large. This is why the minimum specs are so low for WHS.

     

     FlyGuyAZ wrote:
    If you are at all technically savvy you shouldn't have issues reusing an old machine.  Save yourself some scratch and and diy.

    Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:34 PM
  • Thanks to all who replied.  Yes, I guess tech savvy would describe me.  I'll keep the money for the server in my pocket and recycle one of the many boxes that I have and put it into service.  I have the WHS beta that I got from MS, but I never installed it.  I've also ordered the 120 day trial, so I think I will wait until it gets here assuming there to be some refinements over the beta and see how it goes.  I'm also noting the 'known issues' and will try to avoid some of the pitfalls that others have discovered until (hopefully) they get resolved.

     

    I believe I will just concentrate on media sharing for now and see if I can get that going happily.

     

    Thanks again....

    Tuesday, April 15, 2008 9:23 PM
  •  

    Hi

    save your money, here in the UK I bought a secondhand pc on ebay, £42, about $84 US, DELL OPTIPLEX GX270 Celeron, upgraded disk to 250gig loaded WHS and we have now have a fully functional server. Its an evaluation copy but will upgrade in due course. Hope this helps

     

    regards

     

    Geoff 

    Thursday, April 24, 2008 5:31 PM