Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 6 Jan 2002 13:31:37 -0500
From:      "Andrew C. Hornback" <achornback@worldnet.att.net>
To:        "FreeBSD Questions" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: Parts I recommend (formerly "Workstation and server-market")
Message-ID:  <004101c196e0$6031c640$6600000a@ach.domain>
In-Reply-To: <20020105170230.636999bb.matthew@starbreaker.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Matthew
> Graybosch
> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 5:03 PM
> To: J.S.
> Cc: FreeBSD Questions
> Subject: Parts I recommend (formerly "Workstation and server-market")
>
> On Sat, 5 Jan 2002 19:55:36 +0100
> J.S. <johann@broadpark.no> wrote:
>
> > Where do I go for the most reasonable, well-equipped and good-looking
> > workstations and servers, which are decently compatible with FreeBSD?
> >
> > I thought I'd go and look a bit further than dell.com -- I'm also a bit
> > interested in building my own boxen, where do I go for that?
>
> Name-brand OEMs build their machines to run Windows. Unix compatibility is
> incidental to most of them, despite IBM pushing Linux on its servers.
> Basically, any machine that can run Linux can probably run FreeBSD just as
> well. Here are the parts I recommend (also the parts I used)

	There are some basic differences in hardware compatibility.  In my
experience, Windows supports everything and the kitchen sink (no hardware
manuf. is going to pass up the opportunity to sell their widgets to the
biggest market going, especially to people that aren't as technically savvy
as users of other operating systems tend to be).  Linux is right behind as
far as hardware compatibility, as lots of folks in that camp want to use the
trinkets produced for Windows.  FreeBSD seems to be third, supporting a good
deal of hardware and supporting it quite well (recent kudos go out to Mike
Smith and the SCSI/RAID driver development team).  Last on the list is
generally Solaris (but the x86 push over there is trying to get more
hardware supported, I wish them luck).

> --AMD Athlon CPU. A single 1 GHz CPU is adequate for a workstation unless
> you're doing heavy 3D graphics work. If you are, then consider a pair of
> Athlon MP CPUs and build an SMP rig (you'll need a custom kernel
> for SMP so
> RTFM). For a server, you'll almost definitely want SMP.

	Common misconception.  A server does not REQUIRE SMP.  As stated earlier in
the thread, most servers are I/O bound, not processor bound.

	As far as bang/buck goes, AMD looks like the way to go.  However, if you
must go SMP, I'd be remiss by not recommending an Intel-based solution.  I
have found nothing out there that compares to the silky-smoothness of
ServerWorks chipsets, and as far as I know there are no ServerWorks chipsets
that work with AMD's processors.  If that changes, that may be the way to
go.

> --If you're doing a single Athlon, then you can choose between ABit, Tyan,
> and DFI motherboards. I've heard that ABit and Tyan are best for
> Athlon, but
> the guy I buy parts from swears by DFI (Diamond Flower), and I haven't had
> any problems with the DFI board I installed 18 months ago. For SMP using
> Athlon, I think your choices are limited to Tyan boards. Check Tom's
> Hardware for further info.

	For Athlon, I'd definately put Tyan first, Asus second, and anything else
in the trash.  That sounds elitist, but those are the only boards that I'd
recommend for an Athlon or Intel (Intel would also get a nod to SuperMicro).
Not looking to start a flame war here, I just know from experience what
brands I've had work without a hitch, failure or incompatability.

> --For a workstation I recommend at least 256MB of DDR SDRAM. If
> you can get
> DDR, then get PC133. If you have to choose between 512MB of PC133 RAM and
> 256MB of DDR, then go with the 512MB of PC133. I recommend
> favoring capacity
> over speed, especially for servers. For a server, I'd suggest at
> least 512MB
> of the fastest RAM with error checking/correction that you can
> afford. For a
> heavy-duty server, get at least a gig of RAM. You don't want to use swap
> except as a last resort.

	If the machine is going to be doing anything of any use (i.e. not a
games-only machine), ECC is highly recommended.

	Find the specs on the motherboard and use ONE DIMM of the largest size that
it can handle.  Watch your memory usage, and if you begin to hit the swap
file under a light load, add another DIMM.  That way, you have room to
expand and haven't wasted money on a DIMM that you'd have to replace to max
out the board anyway.

> --For a workstation or a server, you should have at least a
> 17-inch display.
> 19-inch is preferable, and if you can afford a 21-inch display then GO FOR
> IT!

	Server with a 17"?  On what planet?  A cluster of servers with a 17" and a
central console for administering all of them at the same time might be a
good idea.  I use an old IBM 12" 8512 on my server (when I have the need for
putting a monitor on it), but most of the time it runs headless.

	A workstation definately needs a good bit of video real-estate.  17" is a
good starting place, with 19" being a bang/buck upgrade.  21" is nice, 36"
is a bit nicer.  *grins*

> --Video cards... Hmmm... This one's kinda iffy. If 3Dfx was still in
> business I'd say that no one do voodoo like they do, and heartily
> recommend
> them. I loved my Voodoo3 adaptor until I screwed it up and had to replace
> it. These days, the major video card people for Linux and FreeBSD
> seem to be
> ATI, Matrox, and nVidia. I'm using a Hercules card based on nVidia's
> GeForce2 MX chipset, for which XFree86 provides 2D acceleration.
> If you need
> 3D acceleration as well, then you should probably get an ATI
> card, or try to
> find a 3Dfx Voodoo card.

	Matrox and ATi seem to be the leaders in the *nix arena as far as support
goes.  The Matrox G series and the ATi Radeon series look to be the best
supported cards on the planet.

> --A server probably doesn't need a sound card, but a workstation
> definitely
> does. I've never had any problems with a good Creative Labs card. Get an
> Ensoniq (es1371 chipset) or a SoundBlaster Live! (emu10k1
> chipset), and make
> sure to recompile your kernel with a "device pcm" line in your kernel
> config. I'll send a copy of mine if you want.

	SoundBlaster Live! would be the hands down winner between the two cards.
Creative seems to be the only company producing sound cards anymore, and
they've got a good history of making good products.  I still have a couple
of SB AWE 32s in service (including in my "toy" 98 machine).

> --Disk space? The more the merrier. Especially for a server, and
> especially
> if you're doing a http/ftp server or running an RDBMS. I recommend a bare
> minimum of a 7200RM disk with 20GB capacity. For a workstation, you can
> probably get away with ATA100 disks, but with a server you need SCSI or a
> RAID configuration.

	I prefer SCSI in both environments.  You can hang more devices (and more
diverse devices) on a SCSI channel than you can on an IDE channel.  You can
get a single 2 channel SCSI controller for peripherals and mass storage and
only use a single IRQ.

	This comes into play with the idea that the less hardware in the box, the
more room for air to move, so it's cooler.  Also, you have a lower chance of
hardware conflicts, since you're not loading the PCI bus up with
peripherals.

	For a server, I'd go with a nice RAID controller (AMI/LSI Logic, personal
pref.) and a 3 pack of drives (mirror with a hot spare) for the OS
installation and whatever you like for data/applications.  This is basically
what I'm doing with my personal high performance workstation.  The OS
installation pack keeps you from losing functionality of the machine even in
the event that two of the HDDs in that RAID pack fail.

	In the area of drives, IBM's Ultrastar drives are the way to go, IMHO.
Seagates Cheetah and Barracuda lines aren't bad either.

> --You'll also need a backup device. For a server, you probably want a
> high-capacity tape drive. Ask around the list for recommendations; I've
> never used or installed a tape drive (I use CD-RW for backup).

	DAT seems to provide the low end bang/buck in this arena.  Until the new
technologies get sorted out (LTO, AIT, etc), I wouldn't recommend any of
them.  DLT would be a nice backup solution, but it's a bit more spendy than
DAT.

> --You'll also need a good ergonomic keyboard. *Equips asbestos trenchcoat
> and casts NulBlaze* I like the Microsoft Natural keyboard; it
> makes for very
> comfortable typing.

	I guess some folks like the "Natural" keyboards.  Personally, the times
that I've used them, I've ended up with sprained wrists.  Just not ergonomic
for my usage.  I like the older NMB keyboards (the Dell "clicky" and the SGI
quiet keyboard).  These can generally be had at auction for relatively cheap
and are built quite sturdily.  Not as solid as the old IBM 84 key XT
keyboards, but strong enough.  The Dell 'board that I use every day has been
with me since roughly Thanksgiving of 1993.

> Also, if you plan on heavy X use, get a good optical
> mouse. I myself use the MS IntelliMouse Optical, which has 5 buttons and a
> wheel. If you use it, let me know and I'll tell you how to make X talk to
> it.

	I'm a former fan of Microsoft mice... up until I had an Intellimouse with 3
months of use on it go bad on me for no reason at all.  Now, I'm moving more
towards Logitech mice (would love to find one of the OLD clear Logitech
mice, special Christmas edition from WAY back).  Way I look at it, if it's
good enough for SGI, it's good enough for me.  *grins*

--- Andy



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?004101c196e0$6031c640$6600000a>