• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

*DEAD* Intel NAS Server w/ Intel Celeron 420 1.6GHz, DDR2 & eSATA - $135

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
LikeLinus said:
I'm not offended? I wasn't trying to sell anyone on anything. I was posting my results post-upgrade. Someone had asked for them. I'm seeing around 55-60 during typical transfers (4GB ISO and DVDs). That's using the Windows file transfer window though, not the Intel NAS test.

Do note though the test you provided is an Intel Atom machine with 1GB ram. I'm running a dual core 2.4GHZ at 2GB. I was running only 30's when I had the 1.6 chip in. So that makes some sense.

Elganja is showing mid 40's with peaks of 55MBps with only upgrading to 1GB of RAM. Sounds like RAM alone will give you a decent boost.
Click to expand...

Here is a little more info (Running EMC, 1GB RAM, 4 1TB WD RE3 Drives in Raid 5)
Writes (Writing large files and small files such as mp3's):
-Avg - ~45MB/sec
-Peak: ~55MB/sec

Reads (This was reading a few large files and small files such as mp3's):
-Avg = ~85MB/sec
-Peak: ~95MB/sec

CPU/Mem Usage (This is a snapshot of top while writing some files to the NAS... this was about the average I observed):
-CPU: 4% usr 27% sys 0% nice 30% idle 23% io 8% irq 8% softirq
-Mem: 897132K used, 9424K free, 0K shrd, 6312K buff, 844984K cached

I think I will upgrade to the e2220 CPU at the end of December after I get some more experience with the NAS as it sits now (that combined with the fact I have about 25 ebay bucks to use then).

All in all, I'm loving this NAS. Very easy setup with my components. Simple as plugging in the drives, turning it on, letting it build the RAID and creating folders. I was up and running in no time. Windows saw all the smb shared folders without a hitch too.
 
Last edited:
Elganja said:
Here is a little more info (Running EMC, 1GB RAM, 4 1TB WD RE3 Drives in Raid 5)
Writes (Writing large files and small files such as mp3's):
-Avg - ~45MB/sec
-Peak: ~55MB/sec

Reads (This was reading a few large files and small files such as mp3's):
-Avg = ~85MB/sec
-Peak: ~95MB/sec

CPU/Mem Usage (This is a snapshot of top while writing some files to the NAS... this was about the average I observed):
-CPU: 4% usr 27% sys 0% nice 30% idle 23% io 8% irq 8% softirq
-Mem: 897132K used, 9424K free, 0K shrd, 6312K buff, 844984K cached

I think I will upgrade to the e2220 CPU at the end of December after I get some more experience with the NAS as it sits now (that combined with the fact I have about 25 ebay bucks to use then).

All in all, I'm loving this NAS. Very easy setup with my components. Simple as plugging in the drives, turning it on, letting it build the RAID and creating folders. I was up and running in no time. Windows saw all the smb shared folders without a hitch too.
Click to expand...

Did you doing an specing before upgrading the RAM by chance? Curious as to the difference in performance (as I see it's apparently using all it can).
 
This is terribly tempting, but I'm going for the hot deal on the squeezebox instead. I can't seem to resist hot deal mania, only deflect it a bit😛
 
I'm getting around 50MB/sec for the most part but am seeing periodic drops to 0 then right back up on the Intel NAS analyzer... any ideas anyone as to why that is happening? Source system is a RAID10 box that should be able to provide ample xfer rates.
 
Doomer said:
Hmmmm, I wonder if this will work with the SS-4200. Never seen anything like it.

http://www.buy.com/prod/imo-7-inch-u...tml?adid=18007
Click to expand...

Well, the DisplayLink drivers *explicitly* check for Windows Server 2003 and refuse to install - folks on their forums report that older drivers worked. Now due to contractural requirements DisplayLink refuses to allow the drivers on Server O/Ss. There are some hints that the installer can be tricked, but I've not got a DisplayLink-based adapter to try it on. I was definitely unable to fool the installer itself, but *might* have another way to get things loaded.

Just d/l the latest DisplayLink drivers and try and run them - you won't even get to the first prompt before it tells you that your O/S is not supported and exits 🙁

Richard
 
rsolomon said:
Well, the DisplayLink drivers *explicitly* check for Windows Server 2003 and refuse to install - folks on their forums report that older drivers worked. Now due to contractural requirements DisplayLink refuses to allow the drivers on Server O/Ss. There are some hints that the installer can be tricked, but I've not got a DisplayLink-based adapter to try it on. I was definitely unable to fool the installer itself, but *might* have another way to get things loaded.

Just d/l the latest DisplayLink drivers and try and run them - you won't even get to the first prompt before it tells you that your O/S is not supported and exits 🙁

Richard
Click to expand...

Sounds like they don't need my business. 🙁
 
LikeLinus said:
What is a Sammy? I'm assuming it's some sort of Samsung NAS, but not sure. It's hard to tell you how they will compare when we don't have information about your system.
Click to expand...

A sammy is a short name for an intel Sossoman setup.
These guys are VERY cheap if you can find them. However most of them are kinda used.

But they are basically 2 laptop processor merom class cpu on a dual SMP board.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=200843

Given it wont be anywhere near as small as this unit, but im looking for a more efficient Torrent Box/NAS setup, which i felt this intel unit would do a fine job at.

But id like to see what difference the upgrades make, b4 i commit to anything.

Im not mocking you guys, im seriously interested in the small form + low power aspect, but just curious, how powerful is it?

I figure it should be more powerful then an atom, but what is its limits?
 
aigomorla said:
I figure it should be more powerful then an atom, but what is its limits?
Click to expand...
I'll wager in and say that's a pretty subjective question. For what you're wanting to do (Torrent + NAS) even a single core Pentium M or Celeron M would be fine. Keeping in mind that this thing comes with a Celeron 420, it's a bit above that class clock for clock, and then the folks that are upgrading are adding in a second core and a bit of RAM. It's based on a low-end desktop platform that you see in the likes of Dell's bargain bin "home" machines, minus a video output.

As for what you can do with it, the real question is what do you want to do with it. For example, I took an old Dell D600 laptop at one point, and ran it with Server 2003 as a primary domain controller, exchange box, IIS box, SQL server and VM server, all on a Pentium M with 2GB of ram on an 80GB hdd. It had the balls to do it, but it wasn't the fastest thing on earth.

So what are you looking for it to do then? Torrents + NAS? Yeah, this unit will do absolutely fine for that.
 
Doomer said:
Sounds like they don't need my business. 🙁
Click to expand...

Just to be clear - virtually EVERY device you see with USB to Video like that is based on DisplayLink silicon, it's not just the device you linked to..... Ask if they support Server 2003 before purchasing! I've heard there's one competitor, but have no info on them.

I'm trying to snag a cheap displaylink and cheat it but don't hold your breath!

Richard
 
OctaneZ said:
Looks interesting, don't like the high power draw though.

Check out the SmallNetBuilder Review as well:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30482/75
Click to expand...
That would be my main concern. The celeron is probably a lot less efficient than an Atom CPU. The NAS's I've been looking at will run at ~25 watts idle. With WHS installed, I can have it set up Wake on LAN, for close to zero when idle. I've been thinking MSI Wind with or without dual core or possibly the Acer NAS, which supports more than a maximum of 2 HDs. All these use Atom processors. Maybe a couple of WD Green 1TB drives, and WHS for automatic backup solution for everything, including working data on the NAS and anything on my other systems that I want backed up.
- - - -
The foolish man seeks happiness in the distance, the wise grows it under his feet. -James Oppenheim
 
Elganja said:
got my NAS today... put 1gb RAM in, 4 WD 1TB RE3 Drives in (Used WD Utility to do the quick check and quick zero'ing), and I was up and running in no time. No issues at all. Can't believe how simple this was for me... maybe I got lucky (using EMC Lifeline Software)

edit: transfer rates have been great running RAID 5.... I would say my average is around 43MB/sec but have peeked at 55MB/sec plenty of times (writes). I will do some write tests after I finsih transferring over some stuff (~600GB stuff to transfer).
Click to expand...

Sounds pretty similar to my experience. It took me longer to clean off 3 Seagate 1TB drives I had to use in it than it did for me to get the thing up and running. It is working great out of the box with so I am just going to leave it as is.
 
Last edited:
My nas apparently died a few minutes ago. My wife messaged me saying she heard a loud pop and then the server was unavailable. My guess is a cap blew somewhere. I guess I'll be able to tell you guys about Legend's RMA policy.
 
Have installed two WHS SS4200 systems on one network with SBS 2008. It all works perfectly. The connector nicely asks for which WHS server you like to connect.
Working now on: Utorrent on WHS using WeB (not working yet), Synch between servers using SyncToy and Wake on Lan. Would be nice if I get this all to work! Anyone has Torrent and Wake on Lan working on SS4200?

SS4200 and WHS combined have incredible improved my home and business systems -- backup, redundancy, streaming to XBOX and PS3, etc.

Anymore ideas how to use these systems will be appreciated......
 
wouterkcs said:
Working now on: Utorrent on WHS using WeB (not working yet), Synch between servers using SyncToy and Wake on Lan. Would be nice if I get this all to work! Anyone has Torrent and Wake on Lan working on SS4200?

Anymore ideas how to use these systems will be appreciated......
Click to expand...

I assume you're following the WGS wiki?
http://wiki.wegotserved.com/index.php?title=UTorrent_on_Windows_Home_Server

Make sure to setup remote access - so you can get to your files from outside your home network *and* remote desktop into your home network! Mega-cool!

Richard
 
SunnyD said:
My nas apparently died a few minutes ago. My wife messaged me saying she heard a loud pop and then the server was unavailable. My guess is a cap blew somewhere. I guess I'll be able to tell you guys about Legend's RMA policy.
Click to expand...
Thorough inspection of all the caps on the mobo says they're intact. I'm guessing it's the +12v line in the PSU then, since the board is showing it has power, but it won't power on period.

RMA process was painless, called and Legend's support was pleasant. The only unfortunate part is my "hot" deal just got cooler, as I have to pay shipping to get it back to them for a replacement. 🙁
 
Doomer said:
what's the advantage to running uTorrent on a WHS?
Click to expand...

Personally I chose not to - for folks storing the d/l files on their WHS anyway, it saves a step and adds a degree of automation.... E.g. one drops the .torrent file into a directory and some time later the target file just appears in another directory on the server. I guess it's also just convenient if the WHS box is the only one you keep running? I never turn off my desktop machines so there's no real draw to it for me.

Richard
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top