none
Recommended Motherboard RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm researching but hopefully someone has already been down this road.  I'm looking for an Asus motherboard wtih VGA and Windows 2003 compatible chipset drivers.  DDR2 is just fine in this application; however, I would like to put in a fairly beefy CPU for ripping and encoding.  So, I'm hoping for something compatible with a quad core.

     

    Any suggestions are highly appreciated.  Thanks!!

     

     

    edit: removed "Asus" from the title

    Saturday, August 16, 2008 10:09 PM

Answers

  • It's not that it won't work. It probably will. It's a question of design. Windows Home Server is designed to be a headless network device, not a workstation that you log into. As such, when you do log in, you have access to tools that could cause problems with WHS core functionality. In addition, a primary cause of system instability (on any system, any OS) is repeated installation, upgrade, and uninstallation of software. The less of that you do, the more stable your server will be.

    I would look at the Asus server motherboards if you're willing to spend the money on one. They're designed for server (24/7) use. Desktop motherboards usually aren't, and they usually have features that an end user may want, but that may not be needed or desirable on a server.
    Sunday, August 17, 2008 3:55 PM
    Moderator

All replies

  • The motherboard section of the Asus web site should contain everything you need to find a good motherboard for your purpose.

    However, I will point out that Windows Home Server is not a desktop operating system. You shouldn't install desktop applications (ripping/encoding software, for example) on it, as it's not designed for that use. You might want to read some of the documentation available on the Windows Home Server Support page, to get a better idea of just what Windows Home Server actually is.
    Sunday, August 17, 2008 12:42 AM
    Moderator
  • Hmmm, that's a good point (about the software).  I would have figured that something simple (not Nero or Roxio) for ripping and encoding would have worked.

     

    And yes, I am fully aware of Asus' web site.  However, there are always additional variables when it comes to operating systems, and if someone around here has had success with an Asus motherboard it would be great to hear of that.  Anyone reading this with an Asus mobo with built-in gfx?

     

    Thanks.

    Sunday, August 17, 2008 1:06 AM
  • Hi Matt.

     

    I'm building a WHS with the Asus M3A78 PRO motherboard which has win2003 drivers for the 1gb LAN.

    My parts haven't arrived yet, but when they do, i will let you know about compatibility with the drivers.

     

    This board supports AMD2+ quad-core 140w processors.

     

    Hope this helps.

     

    Ric

    Sunday, August 17, 2008 1:16 PM
  • It's not that it won't work. It probably will. It's a question of design. Windows Home Server is designed to be a headless network device, not a workstation that you log into. As such, when you do log in, you have access to tools that could cause problems with WHS core functionality. In addition, a primary cause of system instability (on any system, any OS) is repeated installation, upgrade, and uninstallation of software. The less of that you do, the more stable your server will be.

    I would look at the Asus server motherboards if you're willing to spend the money on one. They're designed for server (24/7) use. Desktop motherboards usually aren't, and they usually have features that an end user may want, but that may not be needed or desirable on a server.
    Sunday, August 17, 2008 3:55 PM
    Moderator
  • Guys,

     

    Thanks to you both for your posts.  I'm very excited about WHS (now that I've accepted the fact that I'm not going to do RAID, and they've fixed the corruption bug).  I'll look in to the server mobos.  Unfortunately, I did not buy server-type hard drives, just your standard 750 GB seagates.  But with a 5 year warranty I'll be OK.  Smile

    Sunday, August 17, 2008 10:22 PM
  • I guess the next question would be, are power usage specs given with these server motherboards?

    Sunday, August 17, 2008 11:05 PM
  • Server motherboards are not, as a rule, "green". That really shouldn't be a major consideration for you, as hard drive power consumption will quickly dwarf anything your motherboard and processor use, and you were looking at installing a quad core processor anyway.

    If power consuption is an issue, then perhaps you should look at an Intel Atom or other mini-ITX motherboard. You will have a limited number of drive connectors, but that may not be as big an issue as it would at first appear.

    Edit: if by server drives you mean WD RE2 series drives or similar drives from other manufacturers, you should not generally use those drives other than in a RAID array. They are designed and optimized for that environment, and there is a greater risk of data loss if those drives are used as standalones.
    Monday, August 18, 2008 1:52 AM
    Moderator
  • I have learned through your previous posts that running applications on the server is not a good idea (although I found some info on Home Control that I simply MUST try, heh) so a quad-core is not a requirement or even necessary.  Now the issue is just finding the right motherboard.  I'm quite used to Asus and they usually include lots of extras such as USB and SATA ports.

     

    Asus P5E WS has nice features, nice array of expansion slots (none of which I can see needing anytime soon), 2 external SATA, 8 internal SATA, 12 USB, firewire, and 2 LAN ports.  (Come to think of it, this might be a nice gaming mobo.)  But no video.  I know that once the rig is up and running there's no need for a video card, but then again I might have to actually access the server itself, in which case I would need a video card.  Maybe I'll end up using one of the expansion slots.

     

    A nice Intel Xeon E3110 would go nicely with this board, at only 65w.

     

    On the other hand, a board with built in video such as this SUPERMICRO MBD-X7SBL-LN1-O LGA 775 Intel 3200 Micro ATX Server Motherboard has only six SATA ports and 7 USB.  I'm more concerned about the SATA ports, honestly.  No eSATA, but I'm sure I could get an expansion card if I really wanted that.  But for occasional use I'm sure USB 2.0 would work just fine.

     

    How many drives will I really need?  I know only I can answer that question.  I'm partial to 750 GB drives, and I'd put duplication on everything for convenience so with six drives I would only have 2250, which after formatting is about 2 TB of storage.

     

    I'm thinking that I should stick with Intel-based chipsets for compatibility.

     

    What do you all think?  Which motherboard would you choose?  Or would you choose something not in this list?

    Monday, August 18, 2008 10:27 PM
  •  

    I started out with the HP Ex 470 and realized it wasn't worth the money I'd spent and I figured I could build a monster system for the same price....(I hated the idea of a headless server) actually I had hardware laying around begging to be my server...

     

    I started with a Asus P5K-VM mobo..it isn't compatible with WHS driver wise but all that means is you have to install the drivers manually...you know, go into hardware, press update drivers and point to where you put the lan, video, etc. No big deal!

     

    Next a trip to the local Fry's and a retail Q6600 o/c to 3.2 filled the cpu spot..overkill to say the least but on sale for $169 what a deal. Picked up 4 gigs of Patriot ddr2 800 for 45 bucks after rebate...oh ya this build is getting fun.  I had a Coolermaster Centurion case up on the shelf and I picked up a 5 bay SATA2 backplane for $75.

     

    The most expensive part was the WHS O.E.M. software for $159...Smile

     

    anyway slap 1 Seagate 1TB, 1 750, and 3 500's and it's really to serve and back up my 7 computer home network.

     Hope this helps and don't be afraid to build your own....that's most the fun!!

     

    Primet

    Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:56 AM
  • Thanks for your response.  I would like to stick with Windows 2003 compatible hardware to avoid future issues.  So far the prospective hardware I've put together is quite expensive but I'm not so worried about the cost, honestly.  It's a hobby.

     

    So, of the two motherboards I've listed, would the group here recommend either one, or another server-type motherboard that I haven't listed?

     

    Thanks.

     

    Matt

    Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:27 AM
  • Honestly, Matt, you'll probably be fine with any MB that has Windows Server 2003 drivers, an Intel chipset, plenty of SATA ports, and enough PCI/PCI-E slots for any additional drive controllers you decide to install. I don't have personal experience with either of the MBs you're asking about, but I've had good results from both manufacturers in the past.
    Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:02 AM
    Moderator
  • Thanks Ken, I do appreciate the help!

     

    -Matt

    Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:01 AM
  • Is there any way of ascertaining whether a given mobo has server 2003 drivers?  Specifically the Asus P5QL-EM

     

    Tuesday, August 19, 2008 7:16 PM
  • First you check the Windows Server Catalog. Motherboards are listed under Servers, IIRC. If you find it there, it's been extensively tested. Next you look on the manufacturer's web site. If you find drivers for Windows Server 2003, it has drivers. If not, you can often use the XP drivers, as XP and Windows Server 2003 are more or less the same kernel.

    To give you a head start, that MB isn't in the Windows Server Catalog. Smile
    Tuesday, August 19, 2008 7:54 PM
    Moderator
  • Indeed.  If you've got existing hardware there's nothing to lose to install WHS and try it out.  If you're going out to build a system based on this OS, I think it behooves me to find equipment that has Win2K3 Server drivers.

     

    I bought the demo DVDs and WHS worked just fine on an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe.  I'll try it out on a CUSL2 (P3 800, 512 MB RAM) next and see what happens...

    Wednesday, August 20, 2008 1:12 AM
  • Matt, while I understand the desire to reuse old hardware, I think it's a dangerous choice. There are more components in a computer than fans and hard drives that can fail. Power supplies produce less power, filter capacitors on motherboards filter less effectively, etc. And the problems that you start to experience as a result can be very hard to sort out.
    Wednesday, August 20, 2008 2:23 AM
    Moderator
  • I have been using a 1999 vintage Abit KA7-100 (Raid) with a 750MHz Slot A AMD CPU and 512 MB of mixed ram for the since the first Beta of WHS and am now running the eval version and have had NO PROBLEMS with anything breaking.  This box prior to WHS had been running 2000 Advanced Server 24/7 since the release in 2000.  I also have a KG7-100 (Raid)  900MHz AMD and 2 gigs of ram that has been running 2003 server since 2003 24/7 and prior to that was running NT4.  So if you feel warm and cozy with what you have RUN IT.  This stuff of having to keep up with everyone else is reminding me of the next door neighbors (Hey Joe see my new car and satellite dish).  My newest machine I purchased last year for the upgrading of our HTPC.  The mobo was Abit AN7 w/AMD xp3200 with 2 GB ram.  This got turned into a standard desktop.  The oldest  machine I have PC wise right now is an old shuttle mobo with a 75MHz AMD in it (P1).  It was retired in 2000 but STILL works.  My 3 C=64's (Commodore), 1 Amiga 1000, 2 Amiga 500's and 3 Amiga 2000's all still work and function like NEW.  And one of the A2000's running right now I have emulating Mac software, Win 95 and Win 98 on it.

    jd
    Wednesday, August 20, 2008 7:29 PM
  • Ken,

    I have to take issue with your comment about the use of WD RE2 drives used in a stand alone configuration. These are excellent drives. We go through an entire pallet of these drives every month for use in CCTV DVR's. The configurations range from 1 to 8 of these drives per DVR. The MTBF from WD on these drives is well over a million hours and the failure rate that we see come back to us is less than 1 percent! There is No instalbility issue with running these drives individually as these are designed for continious duty use and are the best choice for use by themselves or within a RAID array.
    Friday, February 12, 2010 10:36 AM
  • Do you really have to take issue with a thread that is 18 months old.  The original post was about motherboards and not drives so it's even off topic.
    --
    Friday, February 12, 2010 12:13 PM
  • As Al pointed out, the last post on this thread was 18 months ago. That said...

    Western Digital does not recommend the use of RE2 drives in a non-RAID environment, because they incorporate TLER technology, so I stand by what I said.

    Per Western Digital's TLER white paper :

    It is important to realize TLER-capable hard drives should not be used in non-RAID environments.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, February 12, 2010 12:56 PM
    Moderator
  • As Al pointed out, the last post on this thread was 18 months ago. That said...

    Western Digital does not recommend the use of RE2 drives in a non-RAID environment, because they incorporate TLER technology, so I stand by what I said.

    Per Western Digital's TLER white paper :

    It is important to realize TLER-capable hard drives should not be used in non-RAID environments.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Mmmm, I don't want to disagree, because I can see the sense in the argument, but what about this:

    http://wdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1397/session/L3RpbWUvMTMxMzQ0ODYwOC9zaWQvY2s0RnpEQms%3D

    Just for yout info - this is quite a recent note from WD August 2011

    I don't know what to think now?????

    Monday, August 15, 2011 10:55 PM