64 GB or 128 GB SSD for media server? - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-29-2013, 09:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WonHung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,007
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I meant no offense. I just meant for myself personally. Your specific machine or usage might not show the full benefit of an SSD, or in other words might hide some of it- But regardless of that fact I'm not sure I am wrong. Your going to have a very hard time convincing me that your right about " if your running spinning disks that you're leaving performance on the table. I can say for sure, that is not the case."

I just don't understand how a SSD could not improve performance over a HDD. It is superior in all measurable attributes.

Perhaps it's not a big difference, Perhaps it's not needed. Sure I will agree that is possible. But let's be honest and face reality that no HDD can compete with SSD on performance as to be exactly equal or superior. Even if the difference is small, or hidden it's there someplace.

Your just reinforcing what has been beated to death in this thread: SSD benefits might appeal to some more than others based on personality and typical application or usage. Don't confuse that by suggesting SSD offers no performance improvement, or HDD is not leaving any performance on the table.

SSDs do have clear advantages over spinning disks. I'm not a full time storage engineer. I'll have to consult my colleagues at work who are storage engineers. But from what I remember, there are applications where SSDs are explicitly not recommended based on the I/O profile of the application in question. I'll ask them in the morning to give me the details as there are specific criteria where SSDs make sense and where they don't. And this is for Enterprise customers spending millions of dollars on storage.

As I said, in my situation where I can say I personally have an environment in my home network which would make most medium sized business blush with envy, I don't have any performance issues the spinning disks in my ESXi server which are 146 GB SAS drives spinning at 15k RPM in a RAID 10 configuration.
WonHung is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-29-2013, 09:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Andy_Steb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 1,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonHung View Post

As I said, in my situation where I can say I personally have an environment in my home network which would make most medium sized business blush with envy, I don't have any performance issues the spinning disks in my ESXi server which are 146 GB SAS drives spinning at 15k RPM in a RAID 10 configuration.
Why don't you install your operating systems on a green drive and report back.

Andy_Steb is offline  
Old 04-29-2013, 10:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
StardogChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 3,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_Steb View Post

Why don't you install your operating systems on a green drive and report back.

I read in another thread green drives are bad and that you should only use orange or purple drives.

So, do I need to take my SSD and green drives out of my server now?

 

 

StardogChampion is offline  
Old 04-30-2013, 06:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bryansj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,449
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Liked: 206
I think an array of USB 3.0 thumb drives is the answer. I guess that would be a RAITD.

bryansj is offline  
Old 04-30-2013, 07:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,233
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_Steb View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by WonHung View Post

As I said, in my situation where I can say I personally have an environment in my home network which would make most medium sized business blush with envy, I don't have any performance issues the spinning disks in my ESXi server which are 146 GB SAS drives spinning at 15k RPM in a RAID 10 configuration.
Why don't you install your operating systems on a green drive and report back.

You beat me to it. ^

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 04-30-2013, 07:23 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,233
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1017
Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_Steb View Post

Why don't you install your operating systems on a green drive and report back.

I read in another thread green drives are bad and that you should only use orange or purple drives.

So, do I need to take my SSD and green drives out of my server now?


Yup. smile.gif

Do it immediately .

Ship them to my house just to be safe. It will help make sure your not tempted to reinstall them.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 04-30-2013, 09:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
vladd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 36
In the typical server environment used here (FlexRaid types), one would be better served by using a mechanical drive for the OS and SSDs for the data drives, especially the parity drive. The programs on the OS drive are loaded once at startup, but data is constantly being read/written on the data and parity drives. Just compare the number of posts asking "why does my server take so long to boot?" vs. "why are my parity calculations taking so long?".

Obviously, this would be at the cost of the GB/$ ratio.
vladd is offline  
Old 04-30-2013, 11:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
StardogChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 3,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Yup. smile.gif

Do it immediately .

Ship them to my house just to be safe. It will help make sure your not tempted to reinstall them.

You probably don't want the SSD. It was a $35 Black Friday special -- Kingston V100 64GB. At the time, far less expensive that getting a 2.5" HDD (all I had room left for).

 

 

StardogChampion is offline  
Old 04-30-2013, 12:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,233
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1017
Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Yup. smile.gif

Do it immediately .

Ship them to my house just to be safe. It will help make sure your not tempted to reinstall them.

You probably don't want the SSD. It was a $35 Black Friday special -- Kingston V100 64GB. At the time, far less expensive that getting a 2.5" HDD (all I had room left for).

I used a $44.00 Agility 3 OCZ 60GB for my first server..... smile.gif

I have since replaced only because 60GB was too small. I have a 120GB now, with about 70GB used.

That was my original share, and intention of coming into this thread. That's basically the point I made (bringing this thread back on topic)

If you can afford and and have a choice- 120GB> 60GB.

But any SSD > HDD. And certainly both HDD and 60GB SSD can work if your back is up against a wall.

Your comment just reinforced the same feeling I have.... With SSD under $50 why not use one for your OS ????

It's a really hard sell to convince me on a HDD for OS installations in 2013

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 04-30-2013, 12:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,233
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1017
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladd View Post

In the typical server environment used here (FlexRaid types), one would be better served by using a mechanical drive for the OS and SSDs for the data drives, especially the parity drive. The programs on the OS drive are loaded once at startup, but data is constantly being read/written on the data and parity drives. Just compare the number of posts asking "why does my server take so long to boot?" vs. "why are my parity calculations taking so long?".

Obviously, this would be at the cost of the GB/$ ratio.


This would not improve like you think it would for a myriad of technical reasons:

First, Gigaspeed networks limited about 120MB/sec (slower than a 7200RPM 3TB drive)

Beyond that point I don't think much else matters, but your parity being SSD would not improve a flexraid server speed.... or the parity calculation time due to how flexraid works, and how parity is calculated just FYI

But- Using SSD for the OS installation (like Windows Home Server or Windows 7/8) would certainly make a noticeable improvement in the snappiness of your server and it's applications much the same it does in a HTPC

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 04-30-2013, 01:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,660
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 238 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Started using a new laptop recently with the OS installed (as delivered) on this drive

Was going to immediately remove and reinstall to an SSD, but it's extremely snappy already. I reboot maybe twice/month. It sleeps/resumes as fast as an SSD IMO

My wife's laptop has long been this ACER which is also making use of some 320GB laptop HDD. I run chrome / firefox / wmc / xbmc (usually 2 of 4 at a time) without any perceived delay. It's as snappy as the server htpc on a vector. Sure program installs take a little bit longer, but the majority of that time is typically spent with the d/l wait anyway.

There's long been a whole bunch of SSD-only-OS discussion, and I'd say there's a whole bunch of reasoning for them. However, a sleep/resume or always on device that doesn't multitask more than 3-5 programs at a time probably only sees a placebo type benefit from an ssd. If anyone else still uses computers booting their OS from an HDD / SSD with different expereince chime in, but I'd feel pretty confident that a majority of this thread's "Boot-from-HDD" contributive experiences died with Core2 and the RTM days of Windows 7 where boot always took quite a bit longer anyway and their tech was much slower. I'm running the laptop OS from the aforementioned HDD on an i5 3320m, 8gb ddr3, and w7 64 pro.

Also my VMs were getting too big to keep adding to my vector back on the server htpc, so I began booting / running them from the WD 1TB blue drive I leave outside the flexraid array and expected a big performance hit in the VMs. I didn't experience that hit however.

Long story short, if you're using a server that is well setup "as-a-server" instead of a workstation then don't even bother
Nethawk likes this.
Dark_Slayer is offline  
Old 04-30-2013, 02:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
vladd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

This would not improve like you think it would for a myriad of technical reasons:
Wrong. It would improve very much the way I think it would... for a myriad of technical reasons. wink.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

First, Gigaspeed networks limited about 120MB/sec (slower than a 7200RPM 3TB drive)
I never said anything about network speeds. The access times to the data would be significantly improved and rebuild times would be massively improved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Beyond that point I don't think much else matters, but your parity being SSD would not improve a flexraid server speed.... or the parity calculation time due to how flexraid works, and how parity is calculated just FYI
I meant parity calculations during a rebuild. All data drives (including the parity drive) would need to be SSD for there to be significant improvement. You would really see that improvement during a rebuild.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

But- Using SSD for the OS installation (like Windows Home Server or Windows 7/8) would certainly make a noticeable improvement in the snappiness of your server and it's applications much the same it does in a HTPC
Then you don't have a properly configured server, you have a PC that just happens to share some data. Once an application is started, it is loaded into memory. On a properly configured server, the application will not be any snappier beyond that point with an SSD vs mechanical OS drive. The only thing the application should be doing from there on is reading/writing data... which should be on your data drives.

I'm not advocating the use of an SSD data array in a FlexRaid server (due to the cost/space ratio), I'm just pointing out that in a properly configured server (where the majority of applications are launched only at startup and then the only real drive access while the server is running is to/from the data drives), mechanical OS + SSD data gives you a "faster" server than the other way around.
vladd is offline  
Old 04-30-2013, 03:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
vladd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 36
For full disclosure, my server has a 256GB SSD for the OS data that needs fast access. But my server is anything but typical. It performs all recording as well as hosts several VMs used for RDI, programming and testing. I also allocate specific data drives to specific purposes, no FlexRaid.
vladd is offline  
Old 05-03-2013, 12:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,233
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1017
256GB SSD is strong in a media server.... smile.gif

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 10-07-2013, 10:20 PM
Newbie
 
bmr44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am new to this Forum, I couldn't even find how to start my own question, so I thought I would ask on this on since my question revolves around this also.. I'm getting ready to get a new computer..Im looking at the HP 800..Is it better to have 10gbram, and also have 128gb ssd? I really use my computer as a media server..and make dvds..or should I go with one with 16 gbram no ssd?and what's so special about the 128gb ssd? thks appreciate your time guys..
bmr44 is offline  
Old 10-08-2013, 06:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,233
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 1017
8gb of ram is probably better and plenty.

128 just gives you twice as much space for not twice as much money biggrin.gif

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 10-08-2013, 07:37 AM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 150
I have a 256GB SSD in my gaming PC and it is more than enough (since I am old school and uninstall games when I am done playing them). In my HTPC, I have a 60GB SSD and it is more than enough for every application I can think to use on it. Look at the price differences and if the additional cost of a larger SSD is not too much (for your monetary situation), then buy the larger one.

As for memory, there are people who successfully ran WMC on only 2GB RAM...though I would never recommend it. I am now running 8GB RAM, due to my recent rebuild and the price being so low, but I ran 4GB RAM for years without any issue. No need or benefit for more than 8GB of RAM - and most likely no need or benefit for anything over 4GB either.
cybrsage is offline  
Old 10-08-2013, 08:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
itznfb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 840
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmr44 View Post

I am new to this Forum, I couldn't even find how to start my own question, so I thought I would ask on this on since my question revolves around this also.. I'm getting ready to get a new computer..Im looking at the HP 800..Is it better to have 10gbram, and also have 128gb ssd? I really use my computer as a media server..and make dvds..or should I go with one with 16 gbram no ssd?and what's so special about the 128gb ssd? thks appreciate your time guys..

Definitely go with the SSD. SSD's are 3~6 times faster than an HDD and have virtually no latency. Which makes your day to day computing a much better experience. I would say 8GB is the minimum RAM for a comfortable build with a little breathing room for most people. It all depends on what you're using it for though. I have HTPCs with 2GB of RAM that run great and I also have servers with over 1TB of RAM and would be happy if we could another 10TB.

Running Windows Home Server 2011 Evil Abandoned Edition
itznfb is offline  
Old 10-08-2013, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,660
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 238 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmr44 View Post

I really use my computer as a media server
This is really the point of significance.

In any case where you are using the server as double duty the SSD quickly becomes a necessity. If you were setting up a server to operate just like a NAS and storing all your data on HDDs with no real intentions to login and use it as a workstation or dekstop then the SSD is an unneeded expense.

Also, welcome
Dark_Slayer is offline  
Old 10-08-2013, 10:29 AM
Advanced Member
 
DanPackMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NC
Posts: 533
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 31
I would recommend an SSD for the OS, then add HDDs for storage. For me, the biggest advantage of using the SSD in media server is that it can be easily mounted in a non-standard configuration, leaving more room for storage drives.
Bizzy G.L.X. likes this.
DanPackMan is online now  
Old 10-08-2013, 07:18 PM
Newbie
 
bmr44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Im running plez as a media server, doesn't it transcode by itself? I have been trying to watch movies on my IPAD,but they won't play unless I convert them first. Is it because my computer is old? Does that even matter? Is there a better media server than Plex?
bmr44 is offline  
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off