Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I say 2012 as we'll likely be buying last year's hardware. We're non-profit (a two-man operation), and this purchase isn't on project funding, so we're cost-restricted, but I always advocate for long-term investment rather than the quick fix. We make do with what we have otherwise...

This is a simple Windows fileserver (5-10 clients) for storing large .TIF images. The transfers are part of the daily workflow (no matter how much we queue batches after hours, it ends up being a poor workaround). When even two clients are pushing/pulling concurrently, I notice the server CPU usage is solid at 100%.

Recently upgraded our 10/100 switch to a gigabit smart switch and hope to implement NIC teaming. I know there will always be a bottleneck somewhere, but it's clearly obvious the bottleneck now is the server CPU.

Looking for a mATX MoBo+CPU to upgrade in-place, either desktop-able (for when we get a 'real' fileserver), or future-ready.

current setup (hardly a 'server'):

old Acer MoBo

AMD Athlon 64 3500+ (socket AM2)
PC2-6400 2x1GB (running @ 368.3 MHz ?)
Windows XP Pro 32-bit
a somewhat 'hefty' PCIe RAID card that isn't running RAID yet (readying our collections for cloud storage first, then will probably go RAID-5)

I see people saying CPU isn't important for a fileserver, but my first thought after seeing the 100% usage was that even simply upgrading to a modern multi-core DDR3 system (such as a 'Bundle Deal' from NCIX) would be a great start, but then I wonder if I'm paying for features I don't need.

Intel i3 good enough? AMD Bulldozer a better bang/buck? Focus on modern bus speeds rather than multi-core capability? There's a relatively cheap Intel Mini-ITX 'server' board with dual LAN controllers ( ), but then we're talking about ECC 'server-grade' RAM and a Xeon CPU (it also takes i3, but then why don't I just grab the current weekly i3 bundle deal?)

Basically, we're losing valuable productivity to hardware that can't keep up with the competing workflows.

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Magellan, Michael Hampton, EEAA, MadHatter, faker Jan 19 '13 at 23:18

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

possible duplicate of Can you help me with my capacity planning? – MadHatter Jan 19 '13 at 23:00
up vote 0 down vote accepted

There's no single recommendation that works in all cases. I'd seriously look at an entry-level HP ProLiant or Dell server that either comes with a Windows server license or is verified to work with it. On the HP side, a ML or DL 100-series is good. Buy a unit with enough RAM and a real hardware RAID controller/solution. Any modern CPU will have the requisite horsepower for this task.

I'd scrap the idea of building anew. The packaged servers are so inexpensive that it doesn't make sense.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.