Who else has built a ridiculously overpowered HTPC? What's your story? - Page 9 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #241 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

So you are telling me on top of the $369 I need to spend another $450 to add on or "upgrade" only 8 more bays. eek.gif

Thanks but no thanks.

Each their own I guess but it seems criminal to charge those prices for so little. I guess I am too entrenched in value to ever consider such. I know what you are saying, but for me it's not sinking in to the point you get my buy in. You are technically right, but my heart still says it's wrong.

How much would I have to spend to get your Norco build right now, minus the drives?

Case, motherboard, CPU, RAM, OS drive, Heatsink, Power supply, OS, flexraid license, the whole nine yards. Everything. What's the bottom line on that right now if I hop on Newegg or Amazon to go buy those (or equivalent) parts?

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #242 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:07 PM
Member
 
OrioniS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

It has 2 bays. It isn't limited to 2 hard drives.

Add one (or two) of these or these and you have a great deal of expandability. It's a simple, reasonably inexpensive solution that can grow as your needs grow. Sure its not as OMG ROFLCOPTER AWESOME!!1! as having a 24 bay Norco sitting in your closet, but the end result is much the same.

If you need 50TB right now, I certainly wouldn't take this approach, but if you need a few terabytes, now and think you might need more down the road, I think this is a perfectly viable approach. Especially if you don't want the headache of another windows machine to babysit.

You have an uncanny knack for making things as absurdly complicated as possible. And while that is warranted on occasion, I find it best to take the simplest approach, especially when dealing with people that just care about the end result. And I understand your desire to always make things the super-dee-duper bestest-most amazing ever, but I think you often lose sight of the fact that you are generally playing in "diminishing returns" land and a great deal of people are happy enough to put in 5% of the effort that you do, to get something that is 95% as good as your end results.

It's all depends on how much you know and how much you want to spend... Nothing else. If you know stuff you will never buy simple 1 -2 disk storage, but if you don;t know anything apart of windows or mac then your Simple ARM box will be the miracle box. But you will pay for this lack of knowledge either with money or data down the line...
OrioniS is offline  
post #243 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:09 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

How much would I have to spend to get your Norco build right now, minus the drives?

Case, motherboard, CPU, RAM, OS drive, Heatsink, Power supply, OS, flexraid license, the whole nine yards. Everything. What's the bottom line on that right now if I hop on Newegg or Amazon to go buy those (or equivalent) parts?

I donno what he is has - but on the Norco I have, I spent ~$112
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001NO0S1S/ref=oh_details_o06_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
justinjames is offline  
post #244 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjames View Post

I donno what he is has - but on the Norco I have, I spent ~$112
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001NO0S1S/ref=oh_details_o06_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Case, motherboard, CPU, RAM, OS drive, Heatsink, Power supply, OS, flexraid license, the whole nine yards. Everything. What's the bottom line on that right now if I hop on Newegg or Amazon to go buy those (or equivalent) parts?

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #245 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:19 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

Case, motherboard, CPU, RAM, OS drive, Heatsink, Power supply, OS, flexraid license, the whole nine yards. Everything. What's the bottom line on that right now if I hop on Newegg or Amazon to go buy those (or equivalent) parts?

I donno man... I think I have several times the cost of the case in hard drives in my box. He has a pretty sweet deal. All I was trying to say is - the case's aren't terribly expensive once you factor in the cost of the drives.
justinjames is offline  
post #246 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrioniS View Post

It's all depends on how much you know and how much you want to spend... Nothing else. If you know stuff you will never buy simple 1 -2 disk storage, but if you don;t know anything apart of windows or mac then your Simple ARM box will be the miracle box. But you will pay for this lack of knowledge either with money or data down the line...

You're falling into the same trap that Mfusick is. It isn't simply about "knowing" what all the various options can do. Everyone here that keeps screaming about how much better a full blow server is, seems to be ignoring the fact that a server doesn't always address everyone's needs better than a simple NAS box.

But yes, if I know, that what I need is a 1-2 disk NAS box, then that's absolutely what I'm going to buy. I'm not going to spend more money on an overpowered server, for no other reason than to participate in some sort of anatomical part waving contest.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #247 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ilovejedd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Personally, I'm a fan of the HP ProLiant MicroServers for a not so DIY, somewhat expandable, and relatively inexpensive file server. The latest version has a Celeron G1620 or Pentium G2120. I think it makes for a nice middle-ground between a 2-bay NAS with ARM and a 24-bay Xeon powerhouse. smile.gif
ilovejedd is offline  
post #248 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:24 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

You're falling into the same trap that Mfusick is. It isn't simply about "knowing" what all the various options can do. Everyone here that keeps screaming about how much better a full blow server is, seems to be ignoring the fact that a server doesn't always address everyone's needs better than a simple NAS box.

But yes, if I know, that what I need is a 1-2 disk NAS box, then that's absolutely what I'm going to buy. I'm not going to spend more money on an overpowered server, for no other reason than to participate in some sort of anatomical part waving contest.

humm... like a raspberry server? I'm pretty sure that Mfusick is technical... He likes powerful chips... but I wouldn't ever argue he lacks technical ability...
justinjames is offline  
post #249 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:24 PM
Member
 
OrioniS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

How much would I have to spend to get your Norco build right now, minus the drives?

Case, motherboard, CPU, RAM, OS drive, Heatsink, Power supply, OS, flexraid license, the whole nine yards. Everything. What's the bottom line on that right now if I hop on Newegg or Amazon to go buy those (or equivalent) parts?

£50.58 CASE: http://www.servercase.co.uk/shop/server-cases/rackmount/3u-chassis/3u-standard-chassis-10-x-3.5-hdd-bays-sc-33380b/

£49.58 MB http://www.servercase.co.uk/shop/components/motherboards/amd/asus-am3+-m5a78l-musb3-5200mts-m-atx-amd-ddr3-90-mibg70-g0eay00z/

£43.02 CPU http://www.servercase.co.uk/shop/components/processors/amd/athlonii-x2--3.0ghz-am3-adx250ock23gm/

£77.80 HDD http://www.servercase.co.uk/shop/components/hard-drives/hard-drives/wd-2tb-red-64mb-3.5-inch-desktop-sata-6gbsec-internal-hdd-for-15-bay-nas-wd20efrx/
Pick x6 @ £466.92

£32.05 PSU http://www.servercase.co.uk/shop/pc-cases/power-supplies/standard-atx-power-supplies/corsair-cx430-builder-series-430-watt-atx-ps2-power-supply-unit-cp-9020046-uk/

£98.92 MEMORY http://www.servercase.co.uk/shop/components/memory/server/supermicro-8gb-ddr31333-2rx8-ecc-unbuffer-lp-pbfree-memdr380lsl02eu13/


It's £274.15 plus any amount hdd you want... Cheap? No... but expandable as hell...
OrioniS is offline  
post #250 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjames View Post

I donno man... I think I have several times the cost of the case in hard drives in my box. He has a pretty sweet deal. All I was trying to say is - the case's aren't terribly expensive once you factor in the cost of the drives.

The case is irrelevant. Of all the parts listed, the case is the only thing that isn't even absolutely mandatory. Without a motherboard, ram, cpu, heatsink, power supply, OS, (and in Mfusick's situation, flexraid) you don't have a server. You have a bunch of parts sitting in a corner doing nothing. You might as well compare a pile of firewood sitting in the corner doing nothing to a NAS if you're not going to bother including all of the parts required to make a server.

If he bothers to answer the question, the reason I asked it will become self evident.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #251 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:29 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

The case is irrelevant. Of all the parts listed, the case is the only thing that isn't even absolutely mandatory. Without a motherboard, ram, cpu, heatsink, power supply, OS, (and in Mfusick's situation, flexraid) you don't have a server. You have a bunch of parts sitting in a corner doing nothing. You might as well compare a pile of firewood sitting in the corner doing nothing to a NAS if you're not going to bother including all of the parts required to make a server.

If he bothers to answer the question, the reason I asked it will become self evident.

I see the case as the foundation... yes I can (and embarrassingly enough have) built a system without much of a case... but its like building a house on sand. Yes I can do it, but not a great idea. Have a case that meets your needs and go from there. Its a problem when you want another drive but CURSES you don't have a slot for it. Thats happened to more then a few of us... Sure you can use USB attached but thats slow. Not an issue streaming but it is slow loading up the media.
justinjames is offline  
post #252 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 01:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjames View Post

humm... like a raspberry server? I'm pretty sure that Mfusick is technical... He likes powerful chips... but I wouldn't ever argue he lacks technical ability...

Sure he likes powerful chips. But that doesn't mean that having a quad core Xeon is the best solution for everyone's media storage needs.

It's just like the SSD argument all over again. Yes an SSD is generally faster than an HDD, but that doesn't mean that an SSD will appear faster in every use compared to an HDD. He doesn't care about particular real world scenarios though. He's convinced himself that every OS in ever computer should be installed on an SSD, and the moment you try and suggest otherwise, he simply posts his stupid "kill it with fire" picture, hoping that he can distract people from the topic with enough funny pictures. If you back him into a corner he'll eventually acknowledge "yeah you're right" but then continue to try and convince you that you're actually wrong. (we're on the third iteration of that already in this thread.

And as I've said all along... if you want to have a server, that's great. It's very likely a server is a better solution than a simple NAS device. But there are certainly plenty of situations where a simple NAS device is ore than adequate to suit someone's needs. Bottom line is, mfusick doesn't like the idea of NAS, because it isn't "bigger faster more powerful, etc. Instead it's big enough, fast enough, powerful enough, and deep down, he hates the idea of something being adequate.
Mfusick likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #253 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:00 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

Sure he likes powerful chips. But that doesn't mean that having a quad core Xeon is the best solution for everyone's media storage needs.

It's just like the SSD argument all over again. Yes an SSD is generally faster than an HDD, but that doesn't mean that an SSD will appear faster in every use compared to an HDD. He doesn't care about particular real world scenarios though. He's convinced himself that every OS in ever computer should be installed on an SSD, and the moment you try and suggest otherwise, he simply posts his stupid "kill it with fire" picture, hoping that he can distract people from the topic with enough funny pictures. If you back him into a corner he'll eventually acknowledge "yeah you're right" but then continue to try and convince you that you're actually wrong. (we're on the third iteration of that already in this thread.

And as I've said all along... if you want to have a server, that's great. It's very likely a server is a better solution than a simple NAS device. But there are certainly plenty of situations where a simple NAS device is ore than adequate to suit someone's needs. Bottom line is, mfusick doesn't like the idea of NAS, because it isn't "bigger faster more powerful, etc. Instead it's big enough, fast enough, powerful enough, and deep down, he hates the idea of something being adequate.

I'm not sure I follow you on the SSD being slower then an HD. EMC is shipping ssd centered SANs now, replacing fiber channel mechanical disks. The only downside is the cost per GB being exponentially higher then a traditional disk and longevity.

Frankly I haven't considered another platform. I am pretty familiar with ubuntu and greyhole for the server. I also -really- like the cost. So for me - its the best choice. I don't like being locked into a closed platform so it never occurred to me there was another choice.
justinjames is offline  
post #254 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 23,011
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked: 852
Mechanical hard drives should never be used for OS installation

KillitwithFire.jpeg

biggrin.gif

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #255 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:09 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Mechanical hard drives should never be used for OS installation

KillitwithFire.jpeg

biggrin.gif

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 90

I can't help myself... not only is this thread interesting and at times amusing... It has also provided me with additional images to use at work.

I couldn't agree more - I ADORE sub 10 second boot times.
justinjames is offline  
post #256 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 23,011
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked: 852
Yup biggrin.gif. There it is^.

That's the picture he's talking about. tongue.gif

What he's referring to is the past multi post debates and locked threads we've engaged in on various subjects; in this specific case the SSD vs HDD classic argument with a server twist to it. The bottom line is I'm passionate about how awesome and how much better an SSD is over a HDD. You can try to pretend otherwise but it's usually just pretending.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #257 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:20 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Yup biggrin.gif. There it is^.

That's the picture he's talking about. tongue.gif

What he's referring to is the past multi post debates and locked threads we've engaged in on various subjects; in this specific case the SSD vs HDD classic argument with a server twist to it. The bottom line is I'm passionate about how awesome and how much better an SSD is over a HDD. You can try to pretend otherwise but it's usually just pretending.

HEHE - I love that pic.
Just to use the pic -

I don't think I have ever seen a single benchmark with SSD behind. Access times, throughput, write speeds, everything except perhaps longevity are all in favor of the SSD. Cost is another story.
justinjames is offline  
post #258 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Yup biggrin.gif. There it is^.

That's the picture he's talking about. tongue.gif

What he's referring to is the past multi post debates and locked threads we've engaged in on various subjects; in this specific case the SSD vs HDD classic argument with a server twist to it. The bottom line is I'm passionate about how awesome and how much better an SSD is over a HDD. You can try to pretend otherwise but it's usually just pretending.

It's the exact same thing as we're talking about here.

You think an SSD is better than an HDD, regardless of the scenario in which it is used. Sure, you'll begrudgingly acknowledge that there are situations where it doesn't make any meaningful difference, but then you'll turn right around and start the "Mechanical hard drives should never be used for OS installation" generalizations again.

You think a server is better than a NAS, regardless of the scenario in which it is used. Sure, you'll begrudgingly acknowledge that there are situations where it doesn't make any meaningful difference, but then you'll turn right around and start the "Servers are better than a NAS" generalizations again.

So how much would it cost me right now to go out and buy you case, CPU, heatsink, motherboard, PSU, RAM, OS, flexraid, and everything needed to create your setup (minus data drives) if I were to go on Amazon or Newegg and buy those parts (or equivalent) What's the bottom line?

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #259 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nevcairiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 120
My old server was still running a HDD as OS drive, but i'm rebuilding my storage setup now, and now it got a neat mSATA SSD, feel the speeed, and its such a tiny package!
Mfusick likes this.
Nevcairiel is offline  
post #260 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjames View Post

I don't think I have every seen a single benchmark with SSD behind. Access times, throughput, write speeds, everything except perhaps longevity are all in favor of the SSD. Cost is another story.

Synthetic benchmarks are great and all, but they don't mean squat in a situation where the drive (SSD or HDD) isn't actually accessed beyond the initial boot. (Not every scenario involves significant OS drive access)

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #261 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 23,011
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked: 852
I'm just passionate on the subject. I feel like SSD is better, and in most cases it isn't close. If there's a scenario where someone wants to use a HDD for whatever reason there's not much I can do to stop them; but at least you'll know where I stand on the subject. I'm not sure why having strong opinions offends you so much. I've apologized to you for it countless times but I guess I should stop apologizing because it's who I am. I can't help it.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #262 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:32 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

Synthetic benchmarks are great and all, but they don't mean squat in a situation where the drive (SSD or HDD) isn't actually accessed beyond the initial boot. (Not every scenario involves significant OS drive access)

Ok - I'll take you up on this. Industry leaders such as EMC, HP, IBM, Netapp, etc all have offerings leveraging SSD. There is a reason for this and its not just 'cuz'. Database applications love the SPEEEEEEEED!!! (Thats with zooming sounds). If you have some facts showing a traditional or hybred being faster - I'd love to seem them. But they don't exist. The only reason to use something else is cost. Thats it - cost.

EDIT:
Another place where it is better - is in paging. Windows uses a page file for stuff... even with a boatload of ram. Paging on SSD is going to be faster... like 10x faster. It only makes sense. Applications load faster, everything is faster.

EDIT 2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

they don't mean squat in a situation where the drive (SSD or HDD) isn't actually accessed beyond the initial boot.

This is a werid statement. You say where the drive isn't accessed beyond the initial boot.
Modern OS's use the OS all the time. Applications are constantly using the OS API for such mundane things like opening a file or using the TCP stack. Sure they aren't constantly hitting the disk but they do in fact use it. For instance - Java, or .NET prob (and in the case of .net are) are loaded there and that will get hit HARD when the app loads. All of these things cause massive amounts of IO at runtime. Just wanted to point that out.


But show me wrong...
justinjames is offline  
post #263 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 23,011
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked: 852
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

So how much would it cost me right now to go out and buy you case, CPU, heatsink, motherboard, PSU, RAM, OS, flexraid, and everything needed to create your setup (minus data drives) if I were to go on Amazon or Newegg and buy those parts (or equivalent) What's the bottom line?

i7 CPU $250
Asrock z series mobo $100
8GB DDR3 $60
Evo 212 cooler $30
120gb SSD for OS $80
(2) IBM 1015 or Dell perc sata cards $160
Norco 4220 case $300
Rosewill capstone PSU $50
(18) 3TB 7200rpm hard drives $1800
(2) 4TB parity drives $300

I paid less than that ^ because I got deals on the way like $80 hdds on Black Friday , $50 SSD and the mobo was $99 and came with free 8GB ddr3 skill 1600mhz back then. I got 15% off coupon with free shipping on my case, another 15% off on the psu, the cooler was marked wrong at only $20, I used a hand me down 2600k CPU I already owned from a desktop upgrade etc... Etc....


But that's about what it would cost above if I guessed. You could do i5, and half the drives in a cheaper case if you wanted more apples to apples comparison vs a high end NAS than my server. Not many i7 powered 50TB NAS units for sale that I've seen. smile.gif
justinjames likes this.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #264 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjames View Post

Ok - I'll take you up on this. Industry leaders such as EMC, HP, IBM, Netapp, etc all have offerings leveraging SSD. There is a reason for this and its not just 'cuz'. Database applications love the SPEEEEEEEED!!! (Thats with zooming sounds). If you have some facts showing a traditional or hybred being faster - I'd love to seem them. But they don't exist. The only reason to use something else is cost. Thats it - cost.

EDIT:
Another place where it is better - is in paging. Windows uses a page file for stuff... even with a boatload of ram. Paging on SSD is going to be faster... like 10x faster. It only makes sense. Applications load faster, everything is faster.

But show me wrong...

You've clearly missed the point... SSD are clearly better for many, if not, most applications. No one is arguing that.

Suggesting that just because it is faster in synthetic benchmarks means that translates to real world performance gains in EVERY situation is wrong.

HP using them, doesn't make them faster for EVERYTHING.
IBM using them doesn't make them faster for EVERYTHING.
EMC using them doesn't make them faster for EVERYTHING.

The same applies for Server vs NAS. Just because a server has certain advantages over a NAS, doesn't mean those advantages translate to real world benifits in EVERY situation. There are situations where an won't show improved speed over an HDD (again, in situations where the OS drivbe isn't accessed post boot) and there are situations where a server isn't any better than a vanilla NAS box. (like when you just need to store some movies outside of you HTPC)

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #265 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:51 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I'm just passionate on the subject. I feel like SSD is better, and in most cases it isn't close. If there's a scenario where someone wants to use a HDD for whatever reason there's not much I can do to stop them; but at least you'll know where I stand on the subject. I'm not sure why having strong opinions offends you so much. I've apologized to you for it countless times but I guess I should stop apologizing because it's who I am. I can't help it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

You've clearly missed the point... SSD are clearly better for many, if not, most applications. No one is arguing that.

Suggesting that just because it is faster in synthetic benchmarks means that translates to real world performance gains in EVERY situation is wrong.

HP using them, doesn't make them faster for EVERYTHING.
IBM using them doesn't make them faster for EVERYTHING.
EMC using them doesn't make them faster for EVERYTHING.

The same applies for Server vs NAS. Just because a server has certain advantages over a NAS, doesn't mean those advantages translate to real world benifits in EVERY situation. There are situations where an won't show improved speed over an HDD (again, in situations where the OS drivbe isn't accessed post boot) and there are situations where a server isn't any better than a vanilla NAS box. (like when you just need to store some movies outside of you HTPC)

These companies offer them because big money wants them (because they are better /faster. You keep saying they aren't faster for everything - please tell me where are slower! The only place where ssd sucks is in cost, and when that isn't a factor... ssd wins everytime. SSD uses less energy, generates less heat, is friggin FAST, is smaller, and... is better.

so really - what ISN"T to love about ssd? ohh yea - they are spendy. What else? seriously - I really wanna know. You are the first person I have ever talked to that isn't in pro-ssd. So your a bit of an oddity.
justinjames is offline  
post #266 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

i7 CPU $250
Asrock z series mobo $100
8GB DDR3 $60
Evo 212 cooler $30
120gb SSD for OS $80
(2) IBM 1015 or Dell perc sata cards $160
Norco 4220 case $300
Rosewill capstone PSU $50
(18) 3TB 7200rpm hard drives $1800
(2) 4TB parity drives $300

I paid less than that ^ because I got deals on the way like $80 hdds on Black Friday , $50 SSD and the mobo was $99 and came with free 8GB ddr3 skill 1600mhz back then. I got 15% off coupon with free shipping on my case, another 15% off on the psu, the cooler was marked wrong at only $20, I used a hand me down 2600k CPU I already owned from a desktop upgrade etc... Etc....


But that's about what it would cost above if I guessed. You could do i5, and half the drives in a cheaper case if you wanted more apples to apples comparison vs a high end NAS than my server. Not many i7 powered 50TB NAS units for sale that I've seen. smile.gif

So (minus data/parity drives) you're suggesting I have to spend more than $1000 to have a storage server? I'm pretty sure lots of people would scoff at spending $1,000 for a storage solution that doesn't actually have any storage. If that sounds familiar it's because you did the same thing to me a few posts ago...
Quote:
So you are telling me on top of the $369 I need to spend another $450 to add on or "upgrade" only 8 more bays.

So again, if you want to talk about NAS vs Storage server, lets actually compare apples to apples.

Don't tell me how expensive or unrealistic a device that I suggest is, without any context.


What are the requirements you want to lay out and let's compare apples to apples.

What are the storage requirements?
What are the transcoding requirements?
What's your price point?
Is redundancy a requirement?

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #267 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 03:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 23,011
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked: 852
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjames View Post


These companies offer them because big money wants them (because they are better /faster. You keep saying they aren't faster for everything - please tell me where are slower! The only place where ssd sucks is in cost, and when that isn't a factor... ssd wins everytime. SSD uses less energy, generates less heat, is friggin FAST, is smaller, and... is better.

so really - what ISN"T to love about ssd? ohh yea - they are spendy. What else? seriously - I really wanna know. You are the first person I have ever talked to that isn't in pro-ssd. So your a bit of an oddity.


This basically the 50 posts I made at him on the same subject.

Just admit that there's a really small percent of special use circumstances where the benefits of an SSD might not be easily utilized and it will save us all 50 posts of arguing.
If you can man up and take that your only 99% right it's the path of least resistance. Trust me I've been all the way down it wink.gif

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #268 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 03:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,418
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinjames View Post


These companies offer them because big money wants them (because they are better /faster. You keep saying they aren't faster for everything - please tell me where are slower! The only place where ssd sucks is in cost, and when that isn't a factor... ssd wins everytime. SSD uses less energy, generates less heat, is friggin FAST, is smaller, and... is better.

so really - what ISN"T to love about ssd? ohh yea - they are spendy. What else? seriously - I really wanna know. You are the first person I have ever talked to that isn't in pro-ssd. So your a bit of an oddity.

First of all, I never said that HDDs were faster in a given application. You're trying to fight a strawman.

I said that SSD's weren't always faster... that includes being the same speed.

If you want to know when they are the same speed, read what I've already written multiple times... Situations where the OS drive ISN'T BEING ACCESSED POST-BOOT isn't going to see any increase in performance.

Adding a supercharger to my BMW isn't going to make my drive to work any faster. Yes, the supercharger will give my engine more power, more torque and it'll sound way cooler, but if my unsupercharged engine will already allow me to travel at the maximum speed allowed by law, then supercharging the engine won't let me get to work any faster. The point is my morning commute isn't limited by the available power of my engine, so making the engine more powerful doesn't change anything.

If you want an example of a real life situation regarding SSD vs HDD performance, I'll give you my storage server. It's a headless server that only turns off when the power goes out. It boots fast enough to have files available from any other PC when the power comes on and has absolutely no impact on it's ability to serve media to my network. It is the same size as an SSD, and uses less power than many SSDs. If you want more details regarding the scenario you can go necromancer the old thread that has all the details in it. I'll be happy to continue the discussion there, but it is off topic here especially considering the existence of that other thread.

(and I've already shot down every single point you've made in here, that thread as mfusick has already tossed them all out there.)

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is offline  
post #269 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 03:07 PM
Member
 
justinjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

This basically the 50 posts I made at him on the same subject.

Just admit that there's a really small percent of special use circumstances where the benefits of an SSD might not be easily utilized and it will save us all 50 posts of arguing.
If you can man up and take that your only 99% right it's the path of least resistance. Trust me I've been all the way down it wink.gif

Ok I'm wrong... SSD sucks... No more necro thread.
justinjames is offline  
post #270 of 346 Old 04-25-2014, 03:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 23,011
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked: 852
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

So (minus data/parity drives) you're suggesting I have to spend more than $1000 to have a storage server? I'm pretty sure lots of people would scoff at spending $1,000 for a storage solution that doesn't actually have any storage. If that sounds familiar it's because you did the same thing to me a few posts ago...
So again, if you want to talk about NAS vs Storage server, lets actually compare apples to apples.

Don't tell me how expensive or unrealistic a device that I suggest is, without any context.


What are the requirements you want to lay out and let's compare apples to apples.

What are the storage requirements?
What are the transcoding requirements?
What's your price point?
Is redundancy a requirement?

I never suggested you need to spend $1000. smile.gif

You asked me what it realistically would cost someone for mine. I answered best I could. Mine is not exactly comparable to a NAS, I'm special tongue.gif

The more appropriate comparison would be a Pentium chip, h series mobo, and a cheaper 8 hdd case.

Something like:

CPU $50
Mobo $70
Ram $50
PSU $30
Case $50


Perhaps SSD for a windows OS $80

That's probably more in line with NAS typical attributes, a better comparison.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Reply Home Theater Computers

Tags
Intel Core I5 3570 3 4 Ghz Processor , Intel Pentium G2020 2 9ghz Lga 1155 Dual Core Desktop Processor , Intel Pentium G3220 3 0ghz Lga 1150 Dual Core Desktop Processor , Intel Core I7 4770k 3 5ghz Lga 1150 Quad Core Desktop Processor , Intel Core I3 4130 3 4 3 Fclga 1150 Processor Bx80646i34130 , Intel Core I5 4670k 3 4ghz Lga 1150 Quad Core Desktop Processor , Asrock Z87m Extreme4 Lga1150 Intel Z87 Chipset Ddr3 Quad Crossfirex Quad Sli Sata3 Usb3 0 Microatx M , Asrock , Amd A10 6700 Richland 4 2ghz Socket Fm2 65w Quad Core Desktop Processor Amd Radeon Hd Ad6700okhlbox , Amd A6 5400k 3 6ghz Socket Fm2 Dual Core Desktop Processor , Amd A8 5600k 3 6ghz Socket Fm2 Quad Core Desktop Processor , Amd A6 3650 2 6ghz Socket Fm1 Quad Core Desktop Apu Cpu Gpu With Directx 11 Graphic
Gear in this thread - G2020 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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