Need your opinion on this server build

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

thorion306

Reputable
Jan 11, 2016
9
0
4,520
Hi,
I'm building a server for my office. This server has to run a PDC, ERP, samba storage and an email server using four virtual instances. The user load for this server will be around 15 people. Here's what i have come up with till now:My Server Part list
My budget is around $2000 and i have already over-shot this by $500. Where can I cut costs in this build to bring it back to budget still managing to handle the above needs smoothly?
I think opting for AMD Opteron instead of Xeon will help with my budget but what do you guys think?
 
Solution
bambiboom


thorion306,

Given the potential future uses of multiple VM's and the possibilities of expanded performance needs, my view would be to use LGA2011 or LGA2011-3 for maximum flexibility. The memory bandwidth of Xeon E3 v3 is 34GB/s while LGA2011 is 56GB/s and LGA2011-3 is 68GB/s. Importantly, E3's are a maximum of...
Sort by date Sort by votes
kanewolf

kanewolf

Titan
Moderator
May 29, 2013
37,373
3,293
156,790
I think 32 threads is WAY more than you will ever use given your description of your work load. You can cut back your CPUs. Four DIMMs is not optimum for two sockets. You should populate 4 DIMMs / socket so you may save $$$ with lower density DIMMs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
kanewolf

kanewolf

Titan
Moderator
May 29, 2013
37,373
3,293
156,790
Yeah, one of the main reasons for virtual machines is to improve usage percentage. Even if each of the 4 VMs have 4 VCPUs that is only 16 VCPUs. With a 4 to 1 oversubscription a quad core could manage that load. Your proposed HW has a 1 to 1 ratio, which will leave you with unused resources.
If you really want a dual socket motherboard then just get one CPU and don't populate the second socket at first.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

GhislainG

Titan
Jul 16, 2008
23,962
5
74,965
A single Xeon exceeds your requirements, but you should consider different hard disks for a server. My experience with that desktop hard disk on a server has not been very positive, but I can't blame Seagate because I knew that it wasn't designed for that purpose. You really should consider the Seagate Constellation or equivalent hard disks from WD, etc. I had good results with WD Blacks, but I don't use them in RAID.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

thorion306

Reputable
Jan 11, 2016
9
0
4,520
First off, Thank you guys for helping me out in this build. Now, if I go with a quad core, then I found that both E3-1231v3 and E5-1620v3 are available for almost the same price. Is there any other advantage for LGA2011-3 than its max ram capacity? And I might add two more VMs to the server later on - fleet management server and database server, is quad core still the viable option or should i go for a hexa core?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bambiboom

bambiboom

Splendid
Apr 7, 2012
2,462
5
21,965


thorion306,

Given the potential future uses of multiple VM's and the possibilities of expanded performance needs, my view would be to use LGA2011 or LGA2011-3 for maximum flexibility. The memory bandwidth of Xeon E3 v3 is 34GB/s while LGA2011 is 56GB/s and LGA2011-3 is 68GB/s. Importantly, E3's are a maximum of 4-cores and will run 28 PCIe lanes while E5 v3 are 18-core and the E5-v5 that have been announced can be 22-cores and E5 supports 40 lanes.

Consider:

Supermicro SuperWorkstation SYS-7038A-I Dual LGA2011 900W Mid-Tower Workstation Barebone System (Black) > $650

https://www.supermicro.com.tw/products/system/tower/7038/SYS-7038A-i.cfm
https://www.supermicro.com.tw/products/system/tower/7038/SYS-7038A-i.cfm

The motherboard supplied:

Super X10DAi

https://www.supermicro.com.tw/products/motherboard/Xeon/C600/X10DAi.cfm

These use server grade components, have considerable drive capacity and are convenient as one only need add the CPU, RAM, drives, and graphics card, saving researching, ordering, assembly, configuration, and trouble-shooting. The CPU coolers and 900W PSU are included. RAM capacity is up to 512GB/ 1TB.

To this I would start with:

Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 Six-Core Haswell Processor 2.4/ 3.2GHz 8.0GT/s 15MB LGA 2011-v3 CPU, OEM > $390

http://ark.intel.com/products/83352
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=E5-2620V3

> and of course, there is a socket to add a second in the future.

The Supermicro has 16 RAM slots and start with 32GB:

4X Samsung DDR4-2133 8GB/1Gx72 ECC/REG CL15 Server Memory > $268 ($67 each)

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=D4218G4S1

Add an OS/Applications PCIe SSD:

Intel 750 Series AIC 400GB PCI-Express 3.0 x4 MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) SSDPEDMW400G4X1 > $350

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167359

A hardware RAID controller:

LSI MegaRAID SATA / SAS 9260-4i 6Gb/s PCI-Express 2.0 w/ 512MB onboard memory RAID Controller Card, Single--Avago Technologies > $270

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816118106&cm_re=lsi_megaraid-_-16-118-106-_-Product

And the storage drives: I agree with the comments to use enterprise grade HD's. For this I would start with a pair in RAID 1 and later add another for a RAID 5:

Seagate Constellation ES.3 ST4000NM0033 4TB 7200 RPM 128MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Enterprise Internal Hard Drive Bare Drive > $420 ($210 each)

I like these- I have 2X the 1TB version- as they have 128MB cache instead of 64MB and are enterprise rated with 1.4M HR MTBF and 5 year warranty.

The graphics card need only have a strong 2D performance:

PNY NVS Quadro NVS 310 VCNVS310DVI-PB 512MB 64-bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 Workstation Video Card > $100

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133463&cm_re=quadro_nvs-_-14-133-463-_-Product

Case /motherboard /PSU, /CPU coolers: $650
Xeon: $390
RAM: $268
SSD: $350
RAID controller: $270
HD's:: $420
GPU: $100
________________________
TOTAL = $2448

So, initially, build without the hardware RAID controller = $2178. If the HD's are 2TB then the total = $2002.

If your firm would consider a system that employs used CPU's - Xeon LGA 1366 or E5-v1 or v2, an equal or higher capability for equal for less cost is possible.

However, the performance and reliability of the above approach should be very good in this use. On Passmark Perfornace Test, there are 6 system tested using hte Supermicro X10DAi and with 2X Xeon E5-2620 v3, the CPU scores are from 15688 to 16289 and with a single CPU, 9797 and 10283. There is significant future expansion,and the Superworkstations are rated to be very quiet.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

HP z420 (2015) > Xeon E5-1660 v2 six-core @ 3.7 / 4.0GHz > 32GB DDR3 ECC 1866 RAM > Quadro K4200 (4GB) > Intel 730 480GB (9SSDSC2BP480G4R5) > Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > 600W PSU> Logitech z2300 > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440) > Windows 7 Professional 64 >
[ Passmark Rating = 5064 > CPU= 13989 / 2D= 819 / 3D= 4596 / Mem= 2772 / Disk= 4555] [Cinebench R15 > CPU = 1014 OpenGL= 126.59 FPS] 7.8.15

Dell Precision T5500 (2011) > 2X Xeon X5680 six -core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz, 48GB DDR3 ECC 1333 > Quadro K2200 (4GB ) > PERC H310 / Samsung 840 250GB / WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB > M-Audio 192 sound card > 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (1920 X 1080)
[ Passmark system rating = 3844 / CPU = 15047 / 2D= 662 / 3D= 3500 / Mem= 1785 / Disk= 2649] (12.30.15)










 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
T

thorion306

Reputable
Jan 11, 2016
9
0
4,520
I just have one doubt. Why do i need an SSD? All my VMs are going to be in linux, so if I install my OSes in SSD then all my applications will go to it and not the HDD unless I edit the source code for each app. Or am I wrong and there's a simpler way to do it?



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bambiboom

bambiboom

Splendid
Apr 7, 2012
2,462
5
21,965
"I just have one doubt. Why do i need an SSD? All my VMs are going to be in linux, so if I install my OSes in SSD then all my applications will go to it and not the HDD unless I edit the source code for each app. Or am I wrong and there's a simpler way to do it?"

thorion302,

My general approach with workstations has been to run OS /applications on a fast SSD and the data on mech'l drives as this means independent access and I/O on the storage drives will reduce latency. I had this in mind to minimize for a server that is expected to expand in capacity.

I use an elderly Dell PowerEdge 2900 with modest demands using a RAID 5 of small capacity 15K SAS drives (146GB Seagate Cheetah 15K) for the OS (the now obsolete Win Server 2003) plus OS and the storage is on larger (600GB) SAS drives in RAID 1 all on a PERC 6i controller. I use a Seagate Cheetah 300GB 15K drive for OS/applications with a WD Black 500GB on a PERC 6/i on a backup workstation (Dell Precision T3500 Xeon X5677 /12GB / Quadro 4000) and except for comparatively slow startup times, ti works very well. Of course, startup times is not a consideration on your proposed server.

With today's fast disk systems, the access times are not so problematic on a server so yes, use a good hardware RAID controller and fast SAS drives such as the SAS version of the Seagate Constellation ES.3:

Seagate Constellation ES.3 ST4000NM0023 4TB 7200 RPM 128MB Cache SAS 6Gb/s 3.5" Enterprise Internal Hard Drive Bare Drive

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178306

There are of course 10K SAS drives also, but I wonder if experentially that would be noticeable.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom