What CPU Power would I need for a NAS running Windows Server 2012r2

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
loweherzat

loweherzat

Honorable
Jul 20, 2018
16
0
10,510
I want to build a simple server that run WIndows Server 2012 r2 - could be considered upgrading to 2016 in near future though!

Currently I'm using a Buffalo WS5600D (using Intel Atom with 4GB DDR3 ram) with a Dual-link 1Gbps, Windows server 2012r2 with Storage Tier using 2x 500GB SSD and 3x 3TB HDD, but only for 12 workstations. It's working fine at the moment, but we're expanding, so:

The needs:
- Share files to 18 other workstations working simultaneously!
- Shared files are in all kind of range, from small word documents to a 400-500MB 3Ds graphic file, and some 300-400MB Revit file - which requires auto-save from each PC hourly.
- The server wont be running any other fancy things except for sharing working files in the network.
- In the future: maybe running like dropbox for cloud-backup, and remote file access!
- Low idle power

I'm actually looking at the SUPERMICRO MBD-A1SAi-2750F-O Mini ITX Server

So, is an Intel Atom C2750 with 8GB/16GB of RAM and 4-ports NIC enough for my needs?

Tks!
 
Solution
RobCrezz
Yeah that atom should be fine, doesnt require a huge amount of CPU power.

To maximise you performance I would suggest creating a NIC team for your 4 adapters if you have a network switch capable of creating an Etherchannel.
Sort by date Sort by votes
RobCrezz

RobCrezz

Expert
Ambassador
Mar 14, 2013
19,080
99
75,190
Yeah that atom should be fine, doesnt require a huge amount of CPU power.

To maximise you performance I would suggest creating a NIC team for your 4 adapters if you have a network switch capable of creating an Etherchannel.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
loweherzat

loweherzat

Honorable
Jul 20, 2018
16
0
10,510


Tks for the suggestions.

Can a normal unmanaged switch do it? I thought in Windows Server 2012r2 if you create a NIC-teaming with 4 different IP then any switchs would be fine???
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

mdd1963

Titan
Jan 14, 2006
16,617
1,735
81,240
The switch needs to support NIC teaming, as well...

WS2012/2016 will certainly suffice as a file server, but, it costs $450-$600 and up, plus requires CALs for those that will access it...(assuming you already have the appropriate CALs at $50 each for 12+ stations, then, less of a consideration)

If truly needing a NAS, and not wanting what Synology or QNAP have to offer, I'd investigate FreeNAS, NethServer, ClearOS, or Zentyal
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
loweherzat

loweherzat

Honorable
Jul 20, 2018
16
0
10,510


Tks for the Suggestions. We already have WS2012r2, with no CALs, since we dont use Active Directory. Each computer has its own Windows 10 licenses on its own SSD.
The Windows Server 2012r2 running barebone with no virtualization, and share folders directly!

The shared folders on the server is used by "map network drive" on each individual computer!

I'm actually the only one who manage the system with no IT/network background so if you guys have anything to suggest there I'd appreciate very much!

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RobCrezz

RobCrezz

Expert
Ambassador
Mar 14, 2013
19,080
99
75,190
Yeah it would need to be a managed switch for the NIC team/LAG.

When you team all 4, you dont give it 4 IP addresses as its a layer 2 function (switching), you essentially bundle them together to make 1 4gb connection, just gives you a bit of flexibility that you wont get maxed out by a single 1gb connection, which can happen when you are using SSDs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
loweherzat

loweherzat

Honorable
Jul 20, 2018
16
0
10,510


OK i understand. I might worded it in a wrong way, however from my research (googled LACP vs NIC Teaming) then the NIC Teaming in the WS2012 could somehow replace the need for LACP switch?

Given the disadvantage of the NIC Teaming is only load balance OUTBOUND connections, i guess from our needs (working on files on client workstations, then saving them ON TO the file-sharing server) the LACP would be a better choice though, right?

So again, with the Intel Atom CPU, for my needs how much RAM should it be? Is 8GB enough? ECC for sure?
Thanks!

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RobCrezz

RobCrezz

Expert
Ambassador
Mar 14, 2013
19,080
99
75,190
LACP is a form of NIC teaming, i think you are getting mixed up.

You create a team of NICs in windows but you need to create a port group on the switch also with all the connections in the team.

There are forms that dont require a switch that supports LACP, but they just dont work as well.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
loweherzat

loweherzat

Honorable
Jul 20, 2018
16
0
10,510


Thank you,

I meant "NIC Teaming" in a sense of within WS2012r2, and using "switch independant" mode for load balancing. But from what I've research, the NIC Teaming from server side with WS2012r2 only allow for heavy Outbound, and using only 1 port for Inbound.
In my case I need heavy Inbound as people are saving big files to the server all the time (1 hour period as I mentioned). Reading activities in Local Computer that pull the data from server are much less as the files are cached in the local computers after opened.

So i guess I do need LACP on a managable switch to get the heavy Inbound in the files server.

Please correct me if I'm wrong anywhere, a lot of things are all new to me, i had to spend a good amount of time to be able to research all that :) !!!

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RobCrezz

RobCrezz

Expert
Ambassador
Mar 14, 2013
19,080
99
75,190


Yeah yours is heavy inbound, so you really need a switch capable of LACP/Etherchannel. This will allow your inbound connections to balance over your multiple NICS and give you more bandwidth to the file server. Individual Client could potentially max out their 1Gb connection without maxing out the servers connection.

Its pretty straight forward to do. Im more familiar doing this on Cisco switches, but im sure its very easy on other brands.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
loweherzat

loweherzat

Honorable
Jul 20, 2018
16
0
10,510


Actually at the current moment we have 2 CALs, for extra 2 users right with different level of file access (one with limited file-access, one with almost umlimited file-access)

All of the Windows workstations divided into 2 group, and only using those 2 users in file sharing, with about 8 machines using the same user setting in the “windows credential manager.”

Somehow it worked.

In the future i guess we need to buy more CALs in case we need more user for file-sharing setting permission.

 
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