< 50W Linux Server - Possible?

[silenceseeker]

I would like to buy or build a modest linux based file server. With the stuff I am planning for it it must have at least 1GB RAM running a CPU of at least 1GHz and having a DVD-RW for nightly backups of selected data.

Is it possible to achieve such a system consuming less than 50W?
(no display connected)

What would be the most cost effective hardware for this:
1. Laptop ?
2. Mini-ITX system ?
3. P3/P4 based system (underclocked) ?

Of course, it also needs to be as silent as possible, hopefully completely fanless.

Any tips, ideas or thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Sam

[Torajirou]

You don't have to aim at an old Pentium to do the job (especially not a P4). AMD has a line of cheap Athlon 64 X2"energy-efficient" CPUs that don't dissipate more than 45W (this one for instance). A file server shouldn't ask much from it anyway.

With such low consumption, you might want to take a look at the PicoPSU (reviewed by SPCR).

Also, take a modest motherboard with basic integrated graphics chip (this one for instance)

If you want to go fanless, give the Scythe Ninja a try for your CPU

Just make sure that your case is not completely sealed. I would install a 120mm, low-RPM, silent exhaust case-fan just to be on the safe side (Noctua, Nexus...). If you let SpeedFan or your BIOS control it, it might even never spin !

As for the case, I've just finished installing my Antec Solo, and I'm in love with it so I can do nothing but advertise it. If you have up to 4 disk drives, you can use the rubber grommets mountings. If up to 3, the included rubber suspensions are even better. You can add more drives by making DIY suspensions in the 5"1/4 bays.

All this shouldn't cost your more than $400 (drives excluded).

[jessekopelman]

I would like to buy or build a modest linux based file server. With the stuff I am planning for it it must have at least 1GB RAM running a CPU of at least 1GHz and having a DVD-RW for nightly backups of selected data.

Is it possible to achieve such a system consuming less than 50W?
(no display connected)

Easily, as long as the number of 3.5" HDD isn't too high. If You only use one or two 3.5" HDD or go with all 2.5" drives, you are golden

What would be the most cost effective hardware for this:
1. Laptop ?
2. Mini-ITX system ?
3. P3/P4 based system (underclocked) ?

Two good choices are going with the Intel D201GLY and a mini-ITX case to your liking or a Shuttle SD11G5 and a used Pentium M bought off of eBay. If you search for either of these things on the forums here you will see plenty of discussion and advice. The only downside with either choice is not much room for internal HDD. If you need a lot of drives, go with a cheap AM2 µATX motherboard (so you can use any ATX case) and an AMD Sempron. The BE23xx Athlons are all well and good, but overkill for this application and relatively expensive. The Semprons have more than enough power for file serving and when undervolted draw only around 30W. Before HDD, but including RAM and optical drive, all the solutions I listed will run you < $300.

[jaganath]

The Semprons have more than enough power for file serving and when undervolted draw only around 30W.

with a deep undervolt (e.g 800Mhz/0.8V) they can draw single-digit watts. (<10W)

[andyb]

I have:

Seasonic S12 330W PSU
AM2 3500+
Asrock ALiveNF6G-DVI
2x 512MB DDR-2 667
1x Samsung 2.5" SATA HDD
No fans

~30W - 31W at idle.

viewtopic.php?t=35686&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

A <50W system is easily done with standard components nowdays, the problem is going to be down to your HDD needs. Single platter Seagate 3.5" drives use 5-6W at idle compared to 1-3W for 2.5" drives, I would guess that 3.5" Samsung drives would be comparable (and much quieter), so you could fit a few of those in and still fit into your bracket. If you put everything into a Solo using a Ninja you would be a happy Sam indeed.


Andy

[silenceseeker]

Thank you all who responded. I need to digest your answers before I can post intelligent questions (or thoughts).

AMD has a line of cheap Athlon 64 X2"energy-efficient" CPUs that don't dissipate more than 45W (this one for instance).

In the meanwhile, I would just clarify that by saying "less than 50W" I meant for the entire system (including motherboard, memory, ethernet NIC and a single hard drive), not just the CPU.

It's OK if it exceeds 50W when writing to the DVD-RW, since this would take less than an hour nightly. Also, 50W is with no display (or display turned off).

I was just thinking of perhaps re-using my old ThinkPad 600e (PII 300MHz) for that purpose, but than I discovered that its power supply is rated at 16V/3.75A which is basically 60 Watts! 60W - and still cannot satisfy the minimum requirements (1GHz CPU / 1GB RAM)...

Interestingly, no one mentioned (yet?) a VIA C7 based solution. Do I correctly understand from this that VIA's EPIA mini-ITX series is not recommended? If so, why?

Thanks,
Sam

[ddrueding1]

VIA EPIA systems are nice, I use them for a lot of firewall installations, and I tried a file server install once. They are really slow. Generally, I've heard that a 1Ghz VIA EDEN is about the same as a 500Mhz P3. I think that sounds about right.

Then again, what are you using this for? That might be enough for you. What hard drives are you going to use? It wouldn't be difficult to build a <20W machine if lots of storage isn't required.

[andyb]

Torajirou wrote:
AMD has a line of cheap Athlon 64 X2"energy-efficient" CPUs that don't dissipate more than 45W (this one for instance).

In the meanwhile, I would just clarify that by saying "less than 50W" I meant for the entire system (including motherboard, memory, ethernet NIC and a single hard drive), not just the CPU.

The 45W CPU's are the MAX they can consume, and is more of an indication of worst case scenario than of real usage, which will be <40% CPU usage @1GHz 90+% of the time.

Thats why I quoted the specs and power draw of my PC, because it rarely gets above 40% @ 1GHz, and is usually <20% which is where I measured its power usage in the low 30's (Watts), and thats with a single core 65W (MAX) CPU.

VIA mini-ITX systems are great for some uses, but their lack of performance is what made me build my PC that is low power, cheap, and has enough performance for any of the tasks I have given it so far, such as watching 1280*720 video, which is something that the top end VIA systems struggle with.

The way to look at it is, your actually buying a low power 1GHz AMD system, that also doubles up as a performance PC when needed. You will also get 4 SATA channels, 1 PATA channel and Gigabit ethernet, which most VIA systems dont have, you will also save a fortune (which will take years to save back in power usage if you get a VIA machine). The only drawback is the size of the system, but if you need storage, you also need 3.5" drives which would need a larger than mini-ITX system anyway.


Andy

[Flandry]

Here

[jessekopelman]

Interestingly, no one mentioned (yet?) a VIA C7 based solution. Do I correctly understand from this that VIA's EPIA mini-ITX series is not recommended? If so, why?

You asked for most cost-effective, not lowest power draw. Solutions based on Intel or AMD can easily get you bellow 50W and cost $100+ less than Via. You have to ask yourself if the money you save from lower draw will make up for the higher entry price. Let's say the Via saved you 10W. At 20 cents/KWhr and 24X7 utilization, that equals $17.52/yr. This means it would take 6 years for a part that costs $100 more to be worthwhile. That may well be longer than the useful life of your components! If Via comes out with a C7-based motherboard for < $100, it will be well worth considering. Until then, Intel and AMD solutions are far more cost effective.

BTW, my laptop has a 70+W PSU, but at idle it only draws 12W! So, don't assume that the size of your laptop's PSU is telling you anything about what it's average draw will be for your application. The downside of reusing your laptop is that you will need to use external USB HDD enclosures, which can get messy if you need more than one.

[protellect]

you might take a look at my file server; its @ around 60W, but with three 3.5" hard disks.

[ddrueding1]

Cost effective server? How does 5W strike you?

500Mhz
256MB RAM
Compact Flash -> IDE built in
DC-DC PSU built in, takes 12V
$140

Not up to the requirements you set, I know. But even a cluster of these would be under your power and cost requirements.

[andyb]

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:00 am Post subject:
Cost effective server? How does 5W strike you?

500Mhz
256MB RAM
Compact Flash -> IDE built in
DC-DC PSU built in, takes 12V
$140

Not up to the requirements you set, I know. But even a cluster of these would be under your power and cost requirements.

Now if I could only think of a use for such a PC

Seriously though its performance is going to suck badly, even web browsing will suffer with a spec that low (flash only, html will be fine).

And as a server - no way, as a tiny cheap PC though it is very interesting.


Andy

[ddrueding1]

Now if I could only think of a use for such a PC

I'm learning Linux command-line stuff, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was enough horsepower for a small company's web/e-mail/file server.

[djkest]

Look at the article on the Shuttle SD11 box. It used about 40W at idle using a 2.0 Ghz Pentium M. You can get a 1.5 GHz pentium M for less than $20 on ebay, and that would use less power. If you aren't worried about cost, there is an 8Watt Pentium M out there. The advantage of this setup is it comes with an efficient pico PSU.

"The processor line has models running at clock speeds from 1.0 GHz to 2.26 GHz as of July 2005. The models with lower frequencies were either low voltage or ultra-low voltage CPUs designed for even better battery life and reduced heat output. The 718 (1.3 GHz), 738 (1.4 GHz), and 758 (1.5 GHz) models are low-voltage (1.116 V) with a TDP of 10 W, while the 723 (1.0 GHz), 733 (1.1 GHz), and 753 (1.2 GHz) models are ultra-low voltage (0.940 V) with a TDP of 5 W."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_M

I believe 1 stick of ram uses less power than 2. (1x 1GB vs. 2x512MB)

A laptop hard drive would cut down power usage by a lot.

Also look into mobile on desktop motherboards (MOD)[/i]