Network server AND workstation with XP

[telegramsam]

This may be the incorrect forum...if so, sorry..

Anyway, my office server crashed. I managed to save the hard disk, and put it in my workstation machine, which is:
Intel DG946GZIS
Intel C2D E6300
1G DDR2 667 Patriot Ram
Seagate 7200.9 SATA 3.0 HDD
WinXP Home

The server was a Pentium 4 1.6Ghz with an MSI motherboard and W2K. This is strictly a LAN environment, with no outside connections allowed, aside from third party remote desktop apps.

I have these options:

I would LIKE to add a second SATA drive to my workstation and just use that drive to serve files. I would double the RAM to 2Gb if I were to do that. The problem I see is that XP, especially Home, is not really suited for server duty. Although I was able share the folders on the old server HDD and map network drives, etc. Right now everyone is being productive. My bosses, of course will opt for this route since the cost is substantially less than a new server.

The other option is to replace the server, in which case I would re-use the Win2K OS and build some sort of dual core machine.

My actual question is: Will the first option be ok in the long run? Seems like the speed of the network (when opening a pretty intensive program that we frequently use) is a bit slower. If I use this setup, are user accounts necessary in the XP server box? None of our software requires it, we just use mapped network drives, and we don't have security issues inside our LAN.

I'm pretty sure it's advantageous to build a new server, but will this option suffice? Sorry for the question carpet bombing. Just want to make sure I'm not doing something stupid...Not that it would be the first time!!

[Ob1]

how many employees will be accessing this server?


you might want to look at getting an entry level server say from dell and use a actual server platform windows 2003, maybe take a look at the small business edition as its only $400 for the standard and you get 5 CAL's included plus you get exchange, sharepoint, etc

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...NE&N=0&Ntk=all

[telegramsam]

We would have 5 boxes connected to this server/station.
The bosses aren't exactly thrilled about getting SBS2003. For us, that's a lot of functionality that we would almost certainly never use.

If we were to purchase a server I would think that building a standard box would be sufficient...I don't particularly like getting machines pre-loaded with all of HP/Dell's "stuff". That's not to say that this option is ruled out, but I'd like to avoid that if possible.

[Ob1]

the servers dont come with endless amounts of crap loaded on them, they are designed for business so the only come with the OS if you choose to get one with there servers. you only get all that crap with home pc's.

you can definitely throw another drive in your pc add more ram and share folders out for everyone to connect to, you might notice your pc being a little sluggish depending on how many people are accessing files, especially if its all at the same time. worst comes to worst, go that route and if its not working out, talk to the bossman and try and convince him to go the server route. and get a machine with xp pro on it if getting a Server OS is overkill, that way you can apply security to certain folders if you need to but now that i look back you say security is not an issue on your lan.

[glc]

Don't even try to use XP Home for a server. You need 2000 Pro or XP Pro with simple file sharing disabled. That can handle up to 10 concurrent connections. With simple file sharing disabled, XP Pro uses user-based security just like 2000 Pro. Users are required to have passwords unless you make a tweak in group policy - by default it limits users with no passwords to console (local) logon only.

[telegramsam]

Thanks for the advice guys.

I think we'll go ahead and build a new server. Then I can put W2K back on it, and not have a server that is being used for internet and all kinds of other stuff.

So, for a server box, the basic parts I'm looking at are:
ASUS A8N-VM CSM
AMD Athlon 64 3800+ Socket 939
2GB Kingston ValueRam DDR 400
Seagate 7200.10 Sata HDD

Reload Win2K Pro

+ a good quality PSU (would 400 watts be sufficient?)

I chose these parts because they're good quality and reasonably priced as far as I can tell. Any thoughts on those. This would be a giant upgrade from our crummy old P4 1.6Ghz system with 512MB of DDR266 ram...

Thanks again for your input.

[arix]

Well eighter way, You can purcase a dell server or build your own...
Now, the processor you selected is not ment for this kind of aplications (server) running 24/7...
If you are buildidng your own i recommend getting something like: (dual or single AMD Opteron, Intel Xeon) supported with 2+gb of ram (4+gb Recommended) with a good mobo, Here are some MOBO examples... http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...&Go.x=0&Go.y=0

[Ob1]

although i agree on purchasing a server from dell without an OS installed and just installing your W2k on it, i dont think he needs dual xeons or opterons for only 5 a workstation environment. thats overkill here.

[telegramsam]

What's the difference between the Opteron and the Athlon that makes them better suited for servers?

I see that I can get Opterons in the same price range as the Athlons. I'm just wondering what makes them different...

I was just put off when I looked at the Dell entry level server and found that it had a Celeron in it. I just got done getting all of the Celerons out of my life!! That was a $449.00 machine. I figure for another $100 or $200, I can build something that performs circles around a Celeron or Sempron....

[Ob1]

opteron is the AMD equivalent of the Intel Xeon which are both made specifically for servers.
http://www.devx.com/amd/Article/27340

[telegramsam]

...Don't mean to be a pest, I just want to understand this...

Ok, so if I'm understanding this article correctly, the difference is essentially in how the processor interacts with RAM. Obviously, the MOBO would have to support this sort of operation. (Am I correct?)

I think that since I can get a single core Opteron and a motherboard for a comparable price to what I suggested above, I'd be much better off choosing the Opteron.

So how would that compare to Conroe C2D setup with an mid-grade ASUS or Intel board for server duty? That option is on the table too.

[glc]

I would recommend Intel on Intel for server duty. A C2D 6300 on an Intel DG965WHMKR would be as stable and reliable as it gets. 400 watts is more than enough power - go for reliable brand, not wattage. I'd use a FSP ATX 2.0 300 watt or better. Get ram off Intel's tested list, 667 is plenty fast enough. Win2K is fully supported with that board.

You can use workstation grade components for small servers like this no problem. You may want to consider enterprise grade SATA drives though - like the WD RE or the Seagate Barracuda ES. They are designed for 24/7 operation. Get a pair and put them in RAID 1 unless you want to go whole hog and put 4 of them in RAID 5. In addition, get an external drive and use Acronis True Image to set up a backup system. I like the Apricorn aluminum housings.

[Ob1]

G- wouldnt he need a raid controller card though to setup RAID on win2k pro?

[glc]

Why would he? The ICH8R Southbridge on that motherboard has RAID. That's why I suggested it over the cheaper DG965RYCK with the ICH8.

[telegramsam]

Cool--I'll pitch it to the bosses!

Thanks for all your help!