athalon 5350 for freenas?

[GeneralBear]

wondering if it will be strong enough to do a zfs in freenas?

[AMICLG]

ZFS AFAIK is pretty CPU and RAM intensive so much actually the rule of thumb is 1 GB of RAM per TB of storage , I'd go for a fourth gen i3 as they support ECC then a M-ATX serverboard if you want to do a proper NAS.

[GeneralBear]

im looking 16gb ram and itx for a node 304 rig its eather that or a pentiuem duel core running ddr3 socket 775 due to budget

[GeneralBear]

ZFS AFAIK is pretty CPU and RAM intensive so much actually the rule of thumb is 1 GB of RAM per TB of storage , I'd go for a fourth gen i3 as they support ECC then a M-ATX serverboard if you want to do a proper NAS.

its only gonna be for a meada server so ones everytihng is copyed on mainly just playback just dont got a lot of money and no need to upgrade my other computers yet well cpu mobo

[AMICLG]

its only gonna be for a meada server so ones everytihng is copyed on mainly just playback just dont got a lot of money and no need to upgrade my other computers yet well cpu mobo

It doesn't really matter what your using it for as it has to be fast enough to run the ZFS file system let alone people accessing it.

[flibberdipper]

Save up more and get a fourth gen i3.

[GeneralBear]

It doesn't really matter what your using it for as it has to be fast enough to run the ZFS file system let alone people accessing it.

okay ive just herd of people using old c2 parts and athalon x2 am2 stuff thought this would be around eqivelent to them

[GeneralBear]

Save up more and get a fourth gen i3.

yeah that or a athalon x4 on fm2+?

[flibberdipper]

yeah that or a athalon x4 on fm2+?

Didn't think about that. A 760K has pretty good performance for the money, IMO.

[GeneralBear]

Didn't think about that. A 760K has pretty good performance for the money, IMO.

i want cheap thats why i brought it up but i dont want shit plan on starting out wuth 4x4tb seagate hdds 16gb ram

[AMICLG]

okay ive just herd of people using old c2 parts and athalon x2 am2 stuff thought this would be around eqivelent to them

I think FreeNAS can use other file systems besides ZFS but it migh not be "as fast".

[GeneralBear]

I think FreeNAS can use other file systems besides ZFS but it migh not be "as fast".

they can but zfs will alow me to add more drives without having to rebuild down the road

[flibberdipper]

i want cheap thats why i brought it up but i dont want shit plan on starting out wuth 4x4tb seagate hdds 16gb ram

You might just want to save, honestly. @alpenwasser might be able to help a little bit on this.

[alpenwasser]

@Vitalius should be able to provide some insight on FreeNAS.

 

I think FreeNAS can use other file systems besides ZFS but it migh not be "as fast".

 

 

they can but zfs will alow me to add more drives without having to rebuild down the road

 

 

You might just want to save, honestly. @alpenwasser might be able to help a little bit on this.

As for ZFS, I'm not really too familiar with the CPU you intend

to use, but I can provide some experiences with my own ZFS setup

which you should be able to use as a baseline, then go from there.

I'm currently working on setting up a home server with the following

specs:

CPU: 2 × L5630 Intel Xeon (Westmere, quadcore, hyperthreaded, 2.13 GHz)

RAM: 12 GB ECC (going to acquire more when funds allow)

I'm running the ZSF pools in dedicated virtual machines, each VM

having its own purpose (one for my dad's business stuff, one for

my personal data, and one for our media library).

I'm still working on optimizing my setup, which is why the configs

you see in the screencaps are not always identical (I assigned more

RAM and CPUs to the VMs at different points to see if/how it would

affect performance - it didn't really make a difference, at least

not yet).

These tests are on two of the VMs, both are running RAIDZ2 setups,

one with four disks, the other with six disks.

For these tests, compression was disabled since I was using /dev/zero

as my data source and enabling compression would have serverely

skewed the benchmarks (I'll demonstrate at the end).

Anyway, this is resource utilization on the VM when writing to the

pool:

 

All of these are for a single large file, I also did small-file tests,

but don't have anything presentable on that yet.

This is resource utilization when reading from the pool:

And with 10240 MB or RAM:

Write:

Read:

Got about the same patterns for six disks.

As for the compression thing, I did a later test on that. The actual

CPU utilization is the red part of the bar, they grey part is the CPU

waiting for I/O.

Resource util without compression:

And transfer speed:

And with compression (you can see that it does use quite

a bit of CPU, but not an insane amount):

And you can see that the transfer speed has jumped to almost

one Gigabyte per second. While awesome, not exactly representative

of actual write performance on the disk side):

In any case: This is not the most scientific test ever, but it should

give you some idea of what you could expect if you compare your CPU

to mine. Then you can go from there. I'm still not yet done with doing

my benchmarks and analysing results, which is why I don't really have

a more presentable dataset for you at the moment, sorry. Still, hope

this is of some use at least.

[Vitalius]

wondering if it will be strong enough to do a zfs in freenas?

Yes. 

I own a FreeNAS system with an Phenom II X4 955 (2009) and it is pretty good imo. Before I started running Plex Media Server and Transmission (Bit torrent client) on it, I actually disabled 2 of the cores and underclocked it to 2.0GHz and I saw no performance decrease in terms of file transfers with ZFS. 

So I believe that will be plenty for FreeNAS and ZFS. In fact, on the official FreeNAS Forums, i3's are usually recommended for their power efficiency (NAS are usually on 24/7), so I'm sure the 5350 being roughly in the same ball park would be good enough. Though more power usage (probably).

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.

[GeneralBear]

Yes. 

I own a FreeNAS system with an Phenom II X4 955 (2009) and it is pretty good imo. Before I started running Plex Media Server and Transmission (Bit torrent client) on it, I actually disabled 2 of the cores and underclocked it to 2.0GHz and I saw no performance decrease in terms of file transfers with ZFS. 

So I believe that will be plenty for FreeNAS and ZFS. In fact, on the official FreeNAS Forums, i3's are usually recommended for their power efficiency (NAS are usually on 24/7), so I'm sure the 5350 being roughly in the same ball park would be good enough. Though more power usage (probably).

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.

the 5350 is a 25 tdp so less power and yeah i was tihnking of doing a plex possibly on it but for now just basicle file server

[GeneralBear]

@Vitalius should be able to provide some insight on FreeNAS.

 

 

 

 

 

As for ZFS, I'm not really too familiar with the CPU you intend

to use, but I can provide some experiences with my own ZFS setup

which you should be able to use as a baseline, then go from there.

I'm currently working on setting up a home server with the following

specs:

CPU: 2 × L5630 Intel Xeon (Westmere, quadcore, hyperthreaded, 2.13 GHz)

RAM: 12 GB ECC (going to acquire more when funds allow)

I'm running the ZSF pools in dedicated virtual machines, each VM

having its own purpose (one for my dad's business stuff, one for

my personal data, and one for our media library).

I'm still working on optimizing my setup, which is why the configs

you see in the screencaps are not always identical (I assigned more

RAM and CPUs to the VMs at different points to see if/how it would

affect performance - it didn't really make a difference, at least

not yet).

These tests are on two of the VMs, both are running RAIDZ2 setups,

one with four disks, the other with six disks.

For these tests, compression was disabled since I was using /dev/zero

as my data source and enabling compression would have serverely

skewed the benchmarks (I'll demonstrate at the end).

Anyway, this is resource utilization on the VM when writing to the

pool:

 

All of these are for a single large file, I also did small-file tests,

but don't have anything presentable on that yet.

This is resource utilization when reading from the pool:

And with 10240 MB or RAM:

Write:

Read:

Got about the same patterns for six disks.

As for the compression thing, I did a later test on that. The actual

CPU utilization is the red part of the bar, they grey part is the CPU

waiting for I/O.

Resource util without compression:

And transfer speed:

And with compression (you can see that it does use quite

a bit of CPU, but not an insane amount):

And you can see that the transfer speed has jumped to almost

one Gigabyte per second. While awesome, not exactly representative

of actual write performance on the disk side):

In any case: This is not the most scientific test ever, but it should

give you some idea of what you could expect if you compare your CPU

to mine. Then you can go from there. I'm still not yet done with doing

my benchmarks and analysing results, which is why I don't really have

a more presentable dataset for you at the moment, sorry. Still, hope

this is of some use at least.

thanks for the info man i dont know much about doing vm and server's basicly just use vm to test sketchy programs and to fool around with os's

[alpenwasser]

thanks for the info man i dont know much about doing vm and server's basicly just use vm to test sketchy programs and to fool around with os's

NP.

The performance I get on the VMs is pretty much the same I get on

the host machine directly (tried it out), at least after correctly

configuring the VMs. The VM just has fewer cores, but the overhead

seems to be very low.

[Vitalius]

the 5350 is a 25 tdp so less power and yeah i was tihnking of doing a plex possibly on it but for now just basicle file server

Ah, I don't know CPUs very well, so yeah, definitely less power usage. 

I wouldn't worry about it personally. The 5350 was released in 2013, so it's a more efficient architecture than my X4, so 4 of the 5350's cores at 2.0GHz > 4 cores of my X4 at 2.0GHz and it does just fine. 

FreeNAS' recommendation for a CPU is a dual core 2.0GHz (for ZFS) IIRC, so a 5350 should be more than enough for it. It may even be able to handle Plex too. Although encoding video on the fly (what Plex does) is always intensive, my CPU handles it fine. The only time it stutters is due to network bandwidth issues (over WiFi) and the CPU load is usually around 25-50% (according to FreeNAS' reporting). 

[GeneralBear]

Ah, I don't know CPUs very well, so yeah, definitely less power usage. 

I wouldn't worry about it personally. The 5350 was released in 2013, so it's a more efficient architecture than my X4, so 4 of the 5350's cores at 2.0GHz > 4 cores of my X4 at 2.0GHz and it does just fine. 

FreeNAS' recommendation for a CPU is a dual core 2.0GHz (for ZFS) IIRC, so a 5350 should be more than enough for it. It may even be able to handle Plex too. Although encoding video on the fly (what Plex does) is always intensive, my CPU handles it fine. The only time it stutters is due to network bandwidth issues (over WiFi) and the CPU load is usually around 25-50% (according to FreeNAS' reporting). 

thanks do you just use single gig eath? or do you have a duel card as ill have to use the pci-e slot for sata ports i will have to run a single eath

[Vitalius]

thanks do you just use single gig eath? or do you have a duel card as ill have to use the pci-e slot for sata ports i will have to run a single eath

Single Ethernet. 

I was using a single 4TB Seagate drive so there's no way I would get anywhere near 125 MB/s (or 1Gb/s). I had 8GB of non-ECC RAM with it, and was running Plex+Transmission+Domain Controller functionality, so my speeds started to tank after the system was rebooted (due to RAM being full, 4TB = 4GB of RAM needed + 4GB for the OS + 2-4GB for the DC), so I average about 5-10 MB/s with that setup. 

Now that I've moved to a dual CPU 4 core at 3.0GHz (older Xeons) with 32GB of DDR2 FB-DIMM ECC RAM, I get 8MB/s max. I know that sounds terrible, and it's because it is. 

I really feel like either my OS install is messed up (changing the hardware somehow messed with the DC), or my HDD is bad in terms of performance because the RAM and CPU both report low usage when transferring files. I haven't had the time to fix it, so yeah. One of these days.

It should be known that this transfer is occurring over Powerline (500Mb/s at least) and that it's coming from my OS SSD.

[GeneralBear]

Single Ethernet. 

I was using a single 4TB Seagate drive so there's no way I would get anywhere near 125 MB/s (or 1Gb/s). I had 8GB of non-ECC RAM with it, and was running Plex+Transmission+Domain Controller functionality, so my speeds started to tank after the system was rebooted (due to RAM being full, 4TB = 4GB of RAM needed + 4GB for the OS + 2-4GB for the DC), so I average about 5-10 MB/s with that setup. 

Now that I've moved to a dual CPU 4 core at 3.0GHz (older Xeons) with 32GB of DDR2 FB-DIMM ECC RAM, I get 8MB/s max. I know that sounds terrible, and it's because it is. 

I really feel like either my OS install is messed up (changing the hardware somehow messed with the DC), or my HDD is bad in terms of performance because the RAM and CPU both report low usage when transferring files. I haven't had the time to fix it, so yeah. One of these days.

It should be known that this transfer is occurring over Powerline (500Mb/s at least) and that it's coming from my OS SSD.

im thinking duel eathernet for transfulling to multaple systems? i did find a am1 mobo with 4 sata 3 on it so i could use the pci-e slot for a duel nic http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157491