Building home/media server

[ggadrian]

Today my dad discovered that he lost 3 years worth of family photos because he screwed up copying them before I formatted his laptop. I gave it some thought and I think that we should protect our family memories and our data so I might build them a server for Christmas.

I was thinking in the following hardware:

-Intel i3 3240
-Asus P8-H77M
-1x4GB 1600 kingston hyper-x red
-1x seagate 7200.14 1TB system drive
-2x seagate 7200.14 3TB RAID 1
-Cooler Master 342 uATX case
-Corsair VS450
-Additional fan and fan-filter

What do you think? Should I change something? That essentially maxes-out my budget. I could spend more money if it were necessary, but I wouldn't like to.

On the software-side of things, I was thinking:

-Windows Server 2012 R2 (I have a spare license, so cost 0)
-Plex or XBMC for streaming to other devices
-uTorrent

I have some questions:

-If something goes south, every one of the drives has all the data, doesn't it? So if something happens to the OS I could just put one of the drives in another computer and retrieve my data, am I wrong?

-Is Windows server easy to use? There are 3 windows laptop at home and one mac and I'd like them to store all the data in the server. Is it going to give me a lot of headaches?

-Windows server has a good built-in backup tool? I'd like it to do backups to an external drive.

-Should I use plex or wbmc? At home we have 3-4 smatphones, one tablet and 4 computers. Would the i3 be able to stream to 2 or 3 of them at the same time? (I know it can stream, but can it transcode?)

Someone is using windows server at home? What do you do about the antivirus? Every antivirus that I find for Windows server is ridiculously expensive. Would it be to dangerous to use it without antivirus (no web-surfing or office use, just media streaming and file server)?

If it where just for me I'd put some flavour of Linux, but my parents and brother aren't really tech savvy, so I think that they'll be better served with windows. The easiest it is to use the less they'r gonna ask me for help.

 

[Torn Mind]

The app testdisk can restore old partitions. You can use it in any Linux LiveCD, although the Parted Magic LiveCD is probably the most convenient liveCD to use it since it is geared towards disk administering. As long the data aren't overwritten, there's a chance they can still be saved.

 

[ggadrian]

The app testdisk can restore old partitions. You can use it in any Linux LiveCD, although the Parted Magic LiveCD is probably the most convenient liveCD to use it since it is geared towards disk administering.

I'll keep that in mind, although I didn't know that the data was lost until tonight when my dad found out that he didn't copy the data to the external drive (I don't really understand how can you screw that up) and I installed quite a handful of windows updates and software, and I also use perfect disk to optimise and defrag the HDD, so it's provably gone.

I just found a backup of his laptop that I did just before the summer, so I'll ask him if what has been lost is worth the hassle to try (and provably fail) to recover.

But thanks, I hadn't thought in trying to recover the data.

 

[smitbret]

Better than RAID 1, why not just set up a backup system. You said yourself that they lost the photos due to bad procedure. Well, guess what RAID doesn't protect you against.... bad copy and formats. Backups do.

I still don't see the point of RAID 1 for home based servers. It gives people a false sense of security and is a waste of money. RAID 1 exists to maintain server uptime and increase read speeds over a single disk set up. My money says that your parents will never utilize the speed or be so busy they can't wait for the backup to copy back lost data.

 

[ggadrian]

Better than RAID 1, why not just set up a backup system. You said yourself that they lost the photos due to bad procedure. Well, guess what RAID doesn't protect you against.... bad copy and formats. Backups do.

I still don't see the point of RAID 1 for home based servers. It gives people a false sense of security and is a waste of money. RAID 1 exists to maintain server uptime and increase read speeds over a single disk set up. My money says that your parents will never utilize the speed or be so busy they can't wait for the backup to copy back lost data.

Well, I can use one of the 3TB drives to do backups instead of RAID, although I was going to use a 1'5TB USB external drive for that.

 

[Torn Mind]

I'll keep that in mind, although I didn't know that the data was lost until tonight when my dad found out that he didn't copy the data to the external drive (I don't really understand how can you screw that up) and I installed quite a handful of windows updates and software, and I also use perfect disk to optimise and defrag the HDD, so it's provably gone.

I just found a backup of his laptop that I did just before the summer, so I'll ask him if what has been lost is worth the hassle to try (and provably fail) to recover.

But thanks, I hadn't thought in trying to recover the data.

Hmm, that makes things a bit more difficult. But even so, using something like Recuva from a flash drive is still worth a shot. It merely scans, so no data is written to the disk. Just make sure to not use it on the hard drive.

 

[ggadrian]

I've been thinking and maybe AMD FM2+ is a better platform given my budget because it is slightly cheaper and supports AES instructions so it would handle encryption faster.

Also 4C/4T might be better suited for transcoding and other server stuff.

So those are the new specs:

-AMD A8-5600K
-MSI A88-XM-E35
-1x8GB Crucial Ballistic Sport 1600 CL9

The rest of the system is the same, just dropped the 7200rpm 1TB system drive in exchange for 4GB extra of RAM. I bought a laptop for the office and I'm replacing the HDD with a 120GB SSD, so I'll use the 2'5 5200rpm HDD; it's gonna be slow, but given that no one will be using the server as a computer it doesn't need to be snappy and I think that it will take more profit from the 8GB of RAM. What do you think?

So, is this AMD build better or at least as good as the previous intel one?

And also, can I install Windows Server in a FM2 mobo? Or in any consumer mobo? Or it just doesn't matter because it uses the same drivers as windows 8 and doesn't check the chipset you're using? It'll be my first Windows Server build and I'm kinda excited, but really lost.

Thank you

 

[smitbret]

The only thing I don't like about that CPU swap is the TDP. The AMD is rated to use about twice as much power and for an always on system it could make a difference in energy costs. Keep in mind, we're not talking hundreds of dollars, but it could mean an increase of $5-10 or so in their electric bill each month.

OTOH, more cores is better suited to server usage even though the i3 is a little better on each thread. Odds are, that outside of Plex transcoding, CPU power won't be an issue and either CPU would be up to the task.

If you are willing to go the AMD route, you may want to look at something from the AM3+ socket like an FX6300. Get a $50 Asus microATX motherboard with onboard graphics and swap that memory out for some server grade ECC unbuffered and it will help your data integrity. I have my server set up that way and the actual power consumption, with an FX6100 actually, is 50-75W and my UPS reports that the whole server never gets above 91W even under load.

 

[smitbret]

Yes, you can run Windows Server on consumer hardware.

 

[smitbret]

Yes, you can run Windows Server on consumer hardware.

 

[ggadrian]

The only thing I don't like about that CPU swap is the TDP. The AMD is rated to use about twice as much power and for an always on system it could make a difference in energy costs. Keep in mind, we're not talking hundreds of dollars, but it could mean an increase of $5-10 or so in their electric bill each month.

OTOH, more cores is better suited to server usage even though the i3 is a little better on each thread. Odds are, that outside of Plex transcoding, CPU power won't be an issue and either CPU would be up to the task.

If you are willing to go the AMD route, you may want to look at something from the AM3+ socket like an FX6300. Get a $50 Asus microATX motherboard with onboard graphics and swap that memory out for some server grade ECC unbuffered and it will help your data integrity. I have my server set up that way and the actual power consumption, with an FX6100 actually, is 50-75W and my UPS reports that the whole server never gets above 91W even under load.

The problem is that this would drive the price up, I would get more performance, but I don't think that I really need it. Also where I buy my hardware (I live in Spain) I don't have a great selection of AM3 boards, they all seem really cheap and old.

About the power usage, for the reviews I've seen the APU idles at lower power than an Ivy i3, which is really nice. Under load the power consumption will be horrible, but how many hours will it be under load anyway? I might be able to under-volt it a little too.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6332/amd-trinity-a10-5800k-a8-5600k-review-part-1/8

The graphic cores in the APU seem like a waste, and I though in buying an Athlon II x4 740 and using an old nvidia GT440 (if I recall the model correctly) that I have lying around, but I believe that the APU will be more power-efficient.

Yes, you can run Windows Server on consumer hardware.

Good to know, I was worried because any motherboard manufacturer listed Windows server in the supported OS list.

Thank you.

 

[ggadrian]

Well, smitbret got me a little worried about the APU power consumption and I might go back to intel. What do you think of that:

-i5 3330 (overkill for that use?)
-Asus B75M-A
-1x 4GB 1600 CL9 (I had to cut on the RAM to make budget for the i5)

I don't know, maybe this is a lot of power for a computer that will do almost nothing most of the time.

If I go the Intel route, is H77 worth the extra money over B75? I'm not going to do RAID anyway so maybe H77 is not worth it.

 

[Torn Mind]

Buy a an Ivy Bridge or Haswell Celeron, a server mobo for $200, and some ECC RAM. It sounds like all you want is a NAS+automated backup of that NAS. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I think plain windows should offer such functionality. You can make system images for sure. You probably could make automated backups of specific folders too, although that might have changed a bit post XP.

If budget is real tight, you might need to find older hardware and simply repurpose said machine into a server.

There are also third-party backup tools that offer automated backups. As for backing up to the "cloud", there's something like crashplan.

 

[mfenn]

If it where just for me I'd put some flavour of Linux, but my parents and brother aren't really tech savvy, so I think that they'll be better served with windows. The easiest it is to use the less they'r gonna ask me for help.

I would consider unfamiliarity a positive rather than a negative in this instance. If they plug a monitor in and are greeted by a strange text login screen, they will probably leave well enough alone. A Windows box is just begging to be screwed with, because everybody knows how to use Windows, right?

The ideal case in my mind is that you set up the shares, backups, etc. and then they never ever touch the admin interface. I would probably try out FreeNAS for the ZFS data integrity features, but you could certainly roll your own if you're familiar with Linux.

 

[smitbret]

i5 would be overkill. Like I said, the only CPU intensive task your server will do is Plex transcoding.

 

[ggadrian]

Buy a an Ivy Bridge or Haswell Celeron, a server mobo for $200, and some ECC RAM. It sounds like all you want is a NAS+automated backup of that NAS. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I think plain windows should offer such functionality. You can make system images for sure. You probably could make automated backups of specific folders too, although that might have changed a bit post XP.

If budget is real tight, you might need to find older hardware and simply repurpose said machine into a server.

There are also third-party backup tools that offer automated backups. As for backing up to the "cloud", there's something like crashplan.

Well, plex functionality is a must, I think they're gonna love to have all their media in any device, and I don't thing that a cheap cleron is gonna cut for more than one stream at a time, and less if it's also doing backgroud work.

Server mobo and ECC RAM I think that is way overkill, this is far from being a critical system; I think that consumer hardware will cut for it.

And about second hand hardware, I'd rather buy new. It isn't that money is tight, it's just that I don't wanna overspend and build a system that will be overkill for the task, so I'm trying to keep the budget at around 500€ (that is almost equivalent to 500$ when buying computer hardware).

 

[ggadrian]

i5 would be overkill. Like I said, the only CPU intensive task your server will do is Plex transcoding.

Sorry for asking so many questions, but I almos have it. One more:

Do you think that the i3 eill be able to do a couple of streams to low power devices? Like for example to a raspberry pi in the kitchen TV (let's say 720p), an android phone (720p) and also one stream to a laptop (1080p) all of them via wifi (supposing that bandwidth is not an issue).

Because that might happen pretty often and I imagine that the more you have to reduce the bitrate of the media (for transfering multiple streams via wifi and to allow low power devices such the rasp to play it back) the more CPU cicles you need.

Maybe I'm just paranoic, because when I encode with handbrake my i7 struggles to have a decent framerate, but I also use very CPU intensive x264 presets.

 

[smitbret]

You are talking about steaming HD to all 3 locations at once, right? Keep in mind that the streaming itself isn't CPU intensive and you probably won't need to transcode to the laptop, depending on the codes jnstalled and the software used for playback. In that case I would say, "Yes, the i3 would most likely be OK".

The ability to stream the 1080p over wireless is questionable and I'm not sure if Plex has quality settings for individual devices like some software. It will need to be a lower bit rate 1080p.

I will test out my media server today and do some simultaneous streaming lime you've proposed. I use Mezzmo instead of Plex but they both use FFmpeg as their transcoding so the results should be very similar. I'll get back with my results in a few hours.

 

[ggadrian]

You are talking about steaming HD to all 3 locations at once, right? Keep in mind that the streaming itself isn't CPU intensive and you probably won't need to transcode to the laptop, depending on the codes jnstalled and the software used for playback. In that case I would say, "Yes, the i3 would most likely be OK".

The ability to stream the 1080p over wireless is questionable and I'm not sure if Plex has quality settings for individual devices like some software. It will need to be a lower bit rate 1080p.

I will test out my media server today and do some simultaneous streaming lime you've proposed. I use Mezzmo instead of Plex but they both use FFmpeg as their transcoding so the results should be very similar. I'll get back with my results in a few hours.

That'd be incredibly helpful, thank you.

I've set up 3 different wifi n AP's to distrubite the load like that (I had them lying around, so I put them to use):

-AP1 300Mbps 2'4GHz: 2 laptops, PS3
-AP2 300Mbps 2'4GHz: 3 smartphones
-AP2 450Mbps 5GHz: paspberry pi in main TV (to be purchased with the server as plex client) and PS4
-AP3 300Mbps 2'4GHz: 1 laptop, 1 ipad
-Wired 1Gbps: 1 laptop and server (when purchased)

So distributed like that there's going to be just 1 device per AP in use simultaneusly. I tested them and I get 6MB/s in the slowest one (the one for the smartphones), 12MB/s in the 5GHz one and 9MB/s in the other two. So I think that the bandwidth will be OK for one 720p/1080p stream per AP at least.

 

[smitbret]

So, here's what happened. Check the screenshot and at the bottom right you'll see how FFmpeg handled multiple streams:

http://i42.tinypic.com/2je4pvl.jpg

The source video files are all 1080p BR Rips. Happy Feet 2 has been reencoded down to about 6GB, though.

Transcoding Destination:
Downstairs Bedroom 1024x768 Medium Quality
Master Bedromm 1280x720p Medium Quality
Living Room HR24 1920x1080 Medium-->Very Good Quality
Kindle Fire 1024x600 Fair-->Medium Quality

The nice thing about Mezzmo is that it will show exactly how fast the programs are being transcoded. The Bedrooms and Living Room are all being transcoded for DirecTV HD Receivers that require 29.97fps. Blu-Ray is 24fps and DVDs are 29.97fps. You can see that transcoding all four of these, my FX6100 is just not quite up to task.

If I dialed everything back to 1280x720 Medium Quality:

http://i41.tinypic.com/qp1cnp.jpg

But when I added that fourth stream with the Kindle Fire:

http://i42.tinypic.com/nqwsxs.jpg

The server can chug along fine with a 1080p and a 720p transcode or 3 x 720p transcodes at the same time, but adding one more 720p seems to be just a touch more than it could cope with. It might even be able to keep up if the destination devices could playback at 24fps instead of 29.97 but it's close enough that I wouldn't chance it.

The i3 3240 is a little less powerful at multi-threaded tasks because it lacks the cores of the 6100 but it is certainly much more powerful with each core. Really, if you bench them, they are just about equal for this particular task.

An i5 3350 seems to be about 20% faster and should give you the performance boost you need. Keep in mind, though, that streaming to a laptop may not need any transcoding at all. If you are using VLC or something else besides Windows Media Player that supports codecs beyond .mp4 and .wmv then this whole issue is moot and any of the CPUs you've presented would be more than up to the task.

Keep in mind the real world usage. I have 4 TVs, a tablet and 2 mobile phones that I can stream to at any one time but it's a rare thing when I am streaming to more than one. I can't remember a time when we have had to stream to more than 2.

 

[ggadrian]

So, here's what happened. Check the screenshot and at the bottom right you'll see how FFmpeg handled multiple streams:

http://i42.tinypic.com/2je4pvl.jpg

The source video files are all 1080p BR Rips. Happy Feet 2 has been reencoded down to about 6GB, though.

Transcoding Destination:
Downstairs Bedroom 1024x768 Medium Quality
Master Bedromm 1280x720p Medium Quality
Living Room HR24 1920x1080 Medium-->Very Good Quality
Kindle Fire 1024x600 Fair-->Medium Quality

The nice thing about Mezzmo is that it will show exactly how fast the programs are being transcoded. The Bedrooms and Living Room are all being transcoded for DirecTV HD Receivers that require 29.97fps. Blu-Ray is 24fps and DVDs are 29.97fps. You can see that transcoding all four of these, my FX6100 is just not quite up to task.

If I dialed everything back to 1280x720 Medium Quality:

http://i41.tinypic.com/qp1cnp.jpg

But when I added that fourth stream with the Kindle Fire:

http://i42.tinypic.com/nqwsxs.jpg

The server can chug along fine with a 1080p and a 720p transcode or 3 x 720p transcodes at the same time, but adding one more 720p seems to be just a touch more than it could cope with. It might even be able to keep up if the destination devices could playback at 24fps instead of 29.97 but it's close enough that I wouldn't chance it.

The i3 3240 is a little less powerful at multi-threaded tasks because it lacks the cores of the 6100 but it is certainly much more powerful with each core. Really, if you bench them, they are just about equal for this particular task.

An i5 3350 seems to be about 20% faster and should give you the performance boost you need. Keep in mind, though, that streaming to a laptop may not need any transcoding at all. If you are using VLC or something else besides Windows Media Player that supports codecs beyond .mp4 and .wmv then this whole issue is moot and any of the CPUs you've presented would be more than up to the task.

Keep in mind the real world usage. I have 4 TVs, a tablet and 2 mobile phones that I can stream to at any one time but it's a rare thing when I am streaming to more than one. I can't remember a time when we have had to stream to more than 2.

I don't store the media just ripped, all the movies and series we have are .mkv or .mp4 of about 2GB per hour for 720p and 2'5 or 3GB per hour for 1080p (not really picky on quality as long as it's good enough). So I suppose that it will be easier for the CPU to transcode those, wouldn't it?

If so, it looks like the i3 being up to the task.

I expect the server to serve a couple 720p streams simultaneously very often, but more than 2 simultaneous streams are going to be rare.

Thanks again.

 

[ggadrian]

Well, I thing that I've decided the final specs. I've rises the budget a little to make it smaller, and finally opted for the i5 (having the double of cores for 40€ extra is a good deal).

-i5 3330 3 GHz
-MoBo Asrock B75M-ITX
-1x 4GB Kingston ValueRAM 1600 Cl9
-1x HGST 2'5 5400rpm 500GB (OS drive) (I already have it)
-2x seagate 7200.14 3TB RAID 1
-Fractal Design Node 304 (pretty cool server mini-ITX case)
-Corsair VS450

I know that the i5 is going to be under-used, but it gives me piece of mind, and provably laters in the year I'll throw an extra 8GB of RAM to the server and use it to virtualise some machines, so the extra power will be helpful.

I was thinking in a 80+ power supply, but I've been doing some numbers and I'll start saving money after 4 years of use. Given that the PSU's are "prone to fail" and they only have 2 years guarantee I don't think that it's worth the investment.

If no-one has anything to say I'll be ordering the parts this week, so I'll be able to put it together during the holidays.

 

[mfenn]

That looks OK to me. A Haswell would idle lower, but whether or not you should get one depends on the price premium.

 

[ggadrian]

That looks OK to me. A Haswell would idle lower, but whether or not you should get one depends on the price premium.

Im looking at 25€ more for a Haswell i5 and mobo. The price per KWh is 0,1303€, that means that if it saves 5W at idle it would take me about four and a half years to start saving money, I don't think it's worth it. Plus I'm paying for the server but not for the electricity, so no more money to save a few watts, I think that it's power efficient enough.

 

[ggadrian]

I've already ordered the parts. I'll post some photos and impressions of the system.