Win2k Server?

[Guest]

I was asked to come up with the hardware specs for a Windows 2000 Server. I see M$ says you need at least a "Pentium 133 with 256 Megs of RAM." I wouldn't even run Windows 95 on a 133!!!! Anyway, anyone have some real-world ideas of the amount of RAM and CPU speed for a server (assume with a RAID-5 disk array for sure of about 18 or more gigs worth of hard-drive) in a small LAN with about 45 to 50 users max?? I have several NT 4.0 Servers that run on P-200's with 128 Megs of RAM now, and they do okay in our work environment of many small LAN's...
Thanks!

Mild Mannered Network Tech by day, PC Freak by Night.

 

[breed33]

It really all depends on how much money you have to spend. For the RAM aspect do not scrimp below 256MB of RAM. That is the absolute minimum amount of RAM you want to have. You may even want more. Get PC133 CAS 2 memory because it is the quickest.

As far as a processor and board I would have to say Intel 815e, Asus CUSL2. The Athlon is inexpensive and powerful but is not quite as dependable in Win2K yet. There are many people running it as stable as a rock, but in a work environment you can't afford even any small problems. Don't get me wrong all systems will have the occasional glitch, but for what you need the Intel platform is the most seasoned for Win2K in my experience. I have both an Intel CEleron 400 that runs Win2K super stable, never once crashed (programs did, but not the OS). I bought an Asus A7V and a 1GHz Athlon and I have the occasional mishap. It is OK for me because I am not servicing 45-50 clients, just me. (If you are not sure about which way to go, check the Mainboard and chipset board and see how many AMD related issues people are having. Keep in mind some are inexperienced people, but others are true unexplainable problems.)

I hope this helped. My intent is not to condemn AMD, but to help you with the best choice for your needs.

Good Luck!

 

[Guest]

Thanks.
It's not my money, just my employer's....
So, how about a single CPU P-3 933 Mhz, 512 Megs ram, with 3 18 gig drives on Raid-5 SCSI?? Running Win2k server, hosting network print queues, and user home drives, plus maybe an application off the server??

Mild Mannered Network Tech by day, PC Freak by Night.

 

[Guest]

That system is fine for sure. If all it's doing is a file and printer server, you could probably go with a slower CPU.
Definately go SCSI for the disks. And don't forget the tape backup drive - they can be more expensive than you expect.

I use an athlon at home, and it's rock stable, but I couldn't recommend one for a server. Not because I believe the P3 is a better CPU, but because many others do and it's too easy for your employer to say "Why didn't you use intel?" if you have problems.

 

[Guest]

Any server in a work environment should be no less than rock-solid. If you want rock-solid stability on Win2k you need dual processors. That combination is bulletproof.

If you can't afford much in the way of hardware I recommend going for dual PII 400s or something comparable. I have that configuration and I can't even remember the last time I had a system crash. Also you should go for at least 256MB of RAM.

<b><i>MK</i></b>

 

[Guest]

Windows 2000 Server will run by itself fine on an Active Directory domain with 128 mg's of ram. if you plan to add another service, you need more. Exchange will run horribly with less than 256. Add in something like SQL server and it rises higher.

 

[Guest]

Yeah, the minimum system requirements that M$ posts is just that, the minimum not the real world. That setup you mentioned should do fine, the only thing left is how you're going to back up all that data.

 

[smn198]

I would recomend DVD-RAM instead of tape backup