i will try to write allot of information about what i am trying to accomplish
purpose for this BOX will be home storage server 24/7 turned on... with no monitor...
most of the time the server will be idle... so i would like it to take minimum power as possible...
no one will be working directly on it...
only network access to it... (to shared folders)
i will install Linux on it and my family will access mapped folders for pictures and other files...
green hdds 4x500GB + -
thanks for any help
More about :recommendation low power consumption cpu
If it's going to be on 24/7 it's best not to go with a cheap Motherboard, but to spend a little more money on a more reliable one. I'm going to have to go AMD on this one. This motherboard from MSI should be good enough
The Gigabyte board has 6 SATA while the other two only have 4. That means that with the MSI or ASRock boards you will need to go PATA for your Optical Drive.
As for the CPU it entirely depends on how busy you think this system is going to be. If it's going to be heavily utilized and low power draw is your main concern then you should be fine with an AMD Sempron LE-1100 Sparta 1.9GH
But if you want a bit of CPU performance go with an Athlon 5000+ for 59.50 at newegg. If you expect alot of people to make heavy use of it at the same time then you way want to consider the 65W Phenom 9150, but that CPU will cost significantly more at $153.24 with shipping
For dual core, the 2400 am2 for $40 at newegg is hard to beat. I run my celeron 430 at .975 volts, the lowest voltage that will boot up windows. At that setting, it is probably using about 25-27 watts.
remember that you can simply ask it to power down the hdd's when not in use, clock down the cpu when not in use and so on (not all cpu's can do this but you get the idea) use integrated graphics like amd 780g chipset which is really powerful but still low power, see article on here for it somewhere, not hard to find.
gigabyte has a nice mini-atx mobo with the 780g chipset on, find one of the lower end amd am2 cpu's and a 1stick 1gig ram module (less modules uses less power) so 1x1gig > 2x0.5gig ram sticks
find a GOOD quality psu with 80+ rating and you are set
also good quality hdd's but I guess you got that covered when you wrote green hdd's
Athlon Vs. Atom: Duel Of The Energy Savers : AMD Athlon 64 2000+ At 8 Watts
While Intel's policy of pushing inefficient chipsets on low-power CPUs is retarded, I suspect that comparison would be substantially different with the new dual-core Atoms; 3-4 watts more power against a large increase in performance for anything that's multi-threaded (or multi-process) and not limited by the FSB.
Intel really is shooting itself in the ass with the Atom; they can't seem to decide whether they want to get into the low-power market or not, because they don't want to sell low-profit Atom systems to people who might otherwise have paid much more for a Core 2 Duo that would spend most of its time underclocked and idle.
Similarly, as the OP points out, while the Atom is a good choice for a low-power file server CPU, Intel have again crippled it by only providing two SATA channels.
if you really want low power linux server - find yourself a NSLU2
this is a nice solution but i need more storage... i would like to connect 4 or 5 HDDs
with software raid for redundancy... and install Linux with NO GUI.
and i would like to get 2 TB storage :-) if i would not need that much i would for sure
search for it. thanks
Athlon Vs. Atom
i could not find where to get this AMD Athlon 64 2000+ :-(
and the Atom looks also very good
but the Mother Board has only Two SATA ports and i need more...
gigabyte has a nice mini-atx mobo with the 780g chipset on
are this boards also power savers?
sorry but i don't know much about this power saving features.
find one of the lower end amd am2 cpu's
can you recommend the the most power saving one please?
is this one a power saver?
Integrated graphics motherboards normally are powersavers. Using something like the Atom is ridiculous in a situation like this. The Athlon 64 2000+ is abit too expensive for the savings to seep though. Maybe underclock and undervolt a 45W Brisbane to 1ghz/0.8v and you'll have something similar in consumption to the Athlon 2000+.
Something like these undervolt well. Currently I'm using a BE-2400 @0.9v 1.7Ghz
Using something like the Atom is ridiculous in a situation like this.
What's 'ridiculous' about using a low-power CPU in a low-power server? Even with the crappy Intel chipset, a dual-core Atom with five 'green' hard drives would use less than 100W at full load... if Intel hadn't crippled it to two SATA ports.