locked
Setup Question RRS feed

  • Question

  • I am debating as to which route to go. I have an old system laying around that may work. It is a P4 478, 500Mhz FSB, 512 MB RAM. It has no onboard SATA, only IDE. My thought was to install the WHS software on the 160GB IDE hard drive, and then install a couple 500GB SATA drives with a PCI SATA controller card. 

    Will this system be able to function at anything close to a tolerable speed, or would it be better to upgrade to a board with onboard SATA? 
    Monday, September 22, 2008 3:39 AM

Answers

  • BeamNCoke said:

    I am debating as to which route to go. I have an old system laying around that may work. It is a P4 478, 500Mhz FSB, 512 MB RAM. It has no onboard SATA, only IDE. My thought was to install the WHS software on the 160GB IDE hard drive, and then install a couple 500GB SATA drives with a PCI SATA controller card. 

    Will this system be able to function at anything close to a tolerable speed, or would it be better to upgrade to a board with onboard SATA? 


    While you can use the hardware based on the specs you provided, I wouldn't even consider it.  There are 2 reasons why:  1)  512 MB of RAM is the minimum (and if you've ever tried using any MS OS with only the minimum RAM, you know how that ends up :)  ) and 2) your hardware is old (no way I would trust my central storage device to equipment that's been used/laying around for years).
    Monday, September 22, 2008 4:21 AM
    Moderator

All replies

  • BeamNCoke said:

    I am debating as to which route to go. I have an old system laying around that may work. It is a P4 478, 500Mhz FSB, 512 MB RAM. It has no onboard SATA, only IDE. My thought was to install the WHS software on the 160GB IDE hard drive, and then install a couple 500GB SATA drives with a PCI SATA controller card. 

    Will this system be able to function at anything close to a tolerable speed, or would it be better to upgrade to a board with onboard SATA? 


    While you can use the hardware based on the specs you provided, I wouldn't even consider it.  There are 2 reasons why:  1)  512 MB of RAM is the minimum (and if you've ever tried using any MS OS with only the minimum RAM, you know how that ends up :)  ) and 2) your hardware is old (no way I would trust my central storage device to equipment that's been used/laying around for years).
    Monday, September 22, 2008 4:21 AM
    Moderator
  • For testing the product the available hardware may be enough, but as already mentioned, there are also reasons speaking against it's productive use:
    • 512 MB memory is the minimum and therefore reason for some processes going really slow
    • CPU is one of the old CPUs, which are consuming much electrical power - for a device, which runs 24 hours, this may become a cost factor
    • SATA controller via PCI with multiple disks - the PCI bus becomes the bottleneck
    • old mainboards and coolers tend to die hard sometimes causing instabilities and data loss
    • noise of older coolers in an otherwise silent room can be annoying
    Best greetings from Germany
    Olaf
    Monday, September 22, 2008 8:22 AM
    Moderator
  • My 2 cents:

    My "slowest" system has 1.5 GHz (VIAC7) CPU, 512MB RAM, two SATA disks, both running in IDE mode. I don't have any performance issues at all with this machine.

    I also have HP MediasmartEX470 which also comes with 512MB RAM. Performance was horrible, however after upgrading to 1 GB of RAM the system is perfectly happy.

    I fully agree with the two previous answerers that you shouldn't use old or very low-end hardware for a WHS, unless you only want to test. I would also recommend to use power efficient hardware, this will certainly pay back.
    Monday, September 22, 2008 9:51 AM
    Moderator
  • Thanks to everyone...this pretty much confirms what I was thinking. It looks like I will go with the good deal I found on a 630i chipset board and Pentium dual core processor with 1 GB (2x 512) RAM and 2x 500GB SATAII drives. That processor is easily upgradeable in that board if there are issues. I am considering a smaller, third drive for the system and the 2 larger ones for pure storage.
    Monday, September 22, 2008 10:49 AM
  • I forgot to add...in a wierd twist, upgrading the board and processor only ends up about $40 more than trying to use the old equipment when all is factored in! Amazing!
    Monday, September 22, 2008 10:51 AM