• 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.

NAS or cheap PC?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
NAS versus Server... just depends on how much time you want to fool with the thing. A PC acting as a server will take more time to setup but will be more versatile. I use an intel itx mobo with an atom cpu and its great for a file server, plus very low powered. Use it also for remote access, torrents, etc.
 
well, i've pretty much decided to bail on NAS, cool tho it looks, for a cheap PC, which i think i can do cheaper than NAS, get more flexibility, and it's something i already know. so the question becomes, what PC? Staples has an Acer Aspire AM1202 on sale for $250. Seems hard to beat, but it's probably slow - running a Athlon LE-1640 cpu. Will this be good enough to stream audio and data across my network? Not worried about HD video content; don't have any.

Going the PC route, I have a couple of requirements: quiet, and small foot print (one of the things I really like about a NAS box). The Aspire probably doesn't meet those. So, I could roll my own mini box. The price needs to be competitive with the Aspire (ie, $250 or less) and performance would ideally be better. The smaller the better so I can shoe-horn it into my office somewhere.

Suggestions?
 
The few $$ nmore or less right now is neglegible as compare to the real need of Home Sergfer NAS.

One very important consideration in NAS the adding of drive space in the next few years without the need to start from scratch.

That means a case than can easily accommodate few drives, and an arrangement that allow adding drives to the current pull without a need to touch the existing drives.
 
Originally posted by: joecool
Going the PC route, I have a couple of requirements: quiet, and small foot print (one of the things I really like about a NAS box). The Aspire probably doesn't meet those. So, I could roll my own mini box. The price needs to be competitive with the Aspire (ie, $250 or less) and performance would ideally be better. The smaller the better so I can shoe-horn it into my office somewhere.
Click to expand...
Which is why JackMDS and I are both recommending the Acer WHS box. It's super-small, super-quiet, doesn't need a monitor or a mouse, comes with a 1TB disk, and you can add three more disks to the storage pool in a minute or two. And it's only $100 more.
 
The Acer box does indeed look very cool and I'm sure it would meet all my needs and them some .... BUT it is the most expensive of all the solutions - more than the Netgear NAS duo, more than a cheap PC. In fact, its nearly $150 more than the Acer PC I can get at Staples. And right now that $150 is significant. So I think I'm gonna have to save the $ and go the cheaper route. Thanks for all the advice and education tho ... it's good to know what's out there, especially for future reference. I can always count on the AT crowd ... !
 
Originally posted by: joecool
The Acer box does indeed look very cool and I'm sure it would meet all my needs and them some .... BUT it is the most expensive of all the solutions - more than the Netgear NAS duo, more than a cheap PC. In fact, its nearly $150 more than the Acer PC I can get at Staples. And right now that $150 is significant. So I think I'm gonna have to save the $ and go the cheaper route. Thanks for all the advice and education tho ... it's good to know what's out there, especially for future reference. I can always count on the AT crowd ... !
Click to expand...

That is OK.:thumbsup:

Let me get you on a little secret. :light:

I always try to Help the OP, but of equal importance are the many that might be too shy to post, but they read tread the threads and get the help/education that they need.

This thread was clicked on 384 times.

Many clicks were done by the participants but many more read it. :thumbsup:
 
well, hey, cool, glad to be of help! that is one of the cool things about at is how much info you can find here. and thanks again for your expertise. some day i'm sure i'll upgrade to one of the more appropriate solutions.
 
I love my ReadyNAS. It will cost you $250+HD and I saw on Hot Deals someone has 1TB drives for $60. So you could get 2x 1TB drive for $120 for a total of $370. Not a bad deal.

WHS is definitely the geeky option and offers more options down the road, but the ReadyNAS is plug-in and forget which I really like.
 
Guys, I have spec-ed out a desktop-based storage system, and I was wondering if you could offer your insight into a pros/cons of my setup vs buying a turn-key NAS box

Here's the topic

Thanks!
 
Originally posted by: paulney
I'm planning to install Fedora 11 on it and do a software RAID 10. Yes, it's not as cool as hardware RAID, but the MB or dedicated RAID 10 card cost a ton!
Click to expand...
How about buying two 1 TB disks? Use one for storage and one for data backup.

You are much less likely to lose data using backups than with RAID 10. And it'll take four disks to build a RAID 10 array, which isn't that easy to recover if it ever fails, and you still won't have backups. For the type of work you are doing, RAID 10's extra speed seems like overkill. It'll be lost on the network transfers, anyway. RAID 10 is mostly useful if your work is done on the PC that contains the RAID 10 array.
 
Originally posted by: RebateMonger
Originally posted by: paulney
I'm planning to install Fedora 11 on it and do a software RAID 10. Yes, it's not as cool as hardware RAID, but the MB or dedicated RAID 10 card cost a ton!
Click to expand...
How about buying two 1 TB disks? Use one for storage and one for data backup.

You are much less likely to lose data using backups than with RAID 10. And it'll take four disks to build a RAID 10 array, which isn't that easy to recover if it ever fails, and you still won't have backups. For the type of work you are doing, RAID 10's extra speed seems like overkill. It'll be lost on the network transfers, anyway. RAID 10 is mostly useful if your work is done on the PC that contains the RAID 10 array.
Click to expand...

I work with photos on a local disk on a desktop. RAW files are so huge, that indeed network transfer kills it. So, what I really want from the storage is redundancy and capacity. If RAID10 isn't the best choice, than maybe RAID 5 would be better?

 
Originally posted by: paulney
Hey guys, I am currently considering the same problem, and after much consideration, I've decided that a personally built storage box would be the way to go for me.

Here's my background and my needs:

- I shoot quite a few photos
- I have a large archive of said photos (approaching 150 Gbs right now)

What I need:
- a storage box with redundancy (would hate to lose all of these because of an HD failure)
- I also want to ssh into this box occasionally for various shell needs and to manage files (ftp just doesn't cut it some times)

I've been able to put together the following shopping cart on NewEgg:

- Case: COOLER MASTER Elite RC-332-KKN1-GP Black SECC ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - Retail (no PSU, because I already have one from the current linux server standing in the garage)
- HDD: SAMSUNG HD502HI 500GB 5400 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM X4
- RAM: CORSAIR 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop
- MB & CPU: ECS GeForce6100PM-M2(V3.0) AM3/AM2+/AM2 NVIDIA GeForce 6100 Micro ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail

All of this comes down to $381.92 + Shipping + Tax

Way cheaper than a good hardware NAS even without the drives!
I'm planning to install Fedora 11 on it and do a software RAID 10. Yes, it's not as cool as hardware RAID, but the MB or dedicated RAID 10 card cost a ton!

What do you think?
Thanks.
Click to expand...

It's really not way cheaper than a NAS. It's a good build and offers a lot of options, but you can get a ReadyNAS and TWO 1TB drives for about the same price. What you built only offers 500GB. Plus with only 1 drive you have no RAID where with 2x1TB drives in a ReadyNAS you have the option of RAID1. Not saying a NAS box isn't a better option for some, but the cost argument doesn't really work.
 
Originally posted by: paulney
I work with photos on a local disk on a desktop. RAW files are so huge, that indeed network transfer kills it. So, what I really want from the storage is redundancy and capacity. If RAID10 isn't the best choice, than maybe RAID 5 would be better?
Click to expand...
Before you go further, I suggest you:

1) Create a new topic in the Memory and Storage Forum. It's best to not post a new question in somebody else's topic.
2) Remove most of your post here and refer folks to the new topic. You don't want to have answers running across two different threads.

Thanks,
RebateMonger
 
Originally posted by: joecool
I've finally decided I can't get by just sharing files from one of my computers, and am ready to take the NAS plunge. I'm really digging the Netgear ReadyNAS duo - seems to do everything I need and then some. However it ain't cheap - $250 bare, plus whatever I spend on hds - could be $400 with a pair of 500GB drives.

Now over the weekend I see two desktop boxes for less than $300 at Staples or Omax or somebody, and it occurs to me that a dedicated PC as file server isn't a bad way to go - more flexible than the NAS since it's a full-on PC, and cheaper! But I'm still kinda stuck on the NAS - I like the much smaller form factor, the fact that I don't need to hook a monitor and keyboard up to it (yeah, i've got a kvm, but i use that for other stuff), the fact that it, in theory, will be easier to maintain.

anybody have any thoughts on this? any experience? what's the best way to share files across your home network, and especially, back up your critical data?
Click to expand...

WHS has nice backup built into it, they say it's great. If you don't need processing power, an Atom based NAS will run at far lower power usage than a PC, maybe 4 to 1 or even 6 to 1 (as little as 25 watts idle). Plus WHS supports Wake on LAN. Haven't done it, but seems like the way I want to go. Meantime, I'm using one of my laptops as a file server. Sure better than the sneaker net I was running.
 
Originally posted by: JackMDS
Originally posted by: RebateMonger
Windows Home Servers make excellent file servers, as well as offering automated daily backups for all your PCs

They do automated backups, super easy file and PC recovery, selectable folder redundancy, a web server, remote PC and file access, and extremely simple expandability.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:


At the moment the aboe is the best cost effective NAS, and much more.

In Giga environment it is also the fasted.


http://www.ezlan.net/WHS.html
Click to expand...

You call this the "aboe?" What is that? Is that the Acer linked above?
 
Originally posted by: Muse
Originally posted by: JackMDS
Originally posted by: RebateMonger
Windows Home Servers make excellent file servers, as well as offering automated daily backups for all your PCs

They do automated backups, super easy file and PC recovery, selectable folder redundancy, a web server, remote PC and file access, and extremely simple expandability.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:


At the moment the aboe is the best cost effective NAS, and much more.

In Giga environment it is also the fasted.


http://www.ezlan.net/WHS.html
Click to expand...

You call this the "aboe?" What is that? Is that the Acer linked above?
Click to expand...

Yeah, aboe is a typo for above. 🙁

I was referring to the Acer deal.
 
well i'm still waivering. picked up the acer pc and it's slick for $250, but it's big and, guess what, it won't connect to my network! never had this problem plugging many many machines in - it knows there's something out there, but won't get an IP address. tellingly the acer support page specifically addresses problems w/vista not connecting to a home network. nice. their one suggestion (reinstall the drivers) didn't help. i have a spare nic i'm gonna try, but i'm back to wondering about a SMALL, dedicated device. one thing mentioned above worried me - is it try that the NAS devices use proprietary file systems, and so you have to use the same device to read a drive (ie, can't be read by ANYTHING else)? that's a deal killer for me - if i have a problem w/the nas i wanna be able to drop the drive into another system and just go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top