BUILD Proposed low-energy NAS

[Glorious1]

I've just been informed by Lian Li that the ASRock board would fit in the Lian Li PC-Q26:

Hi ,

It's compatible.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 9:48 AM
To: baron@mail.lian-li.com
Subject: USA - Message from website - Contact us form
Model name: PC-Q26
Message: I am interested in this new case for a server. I hope to use the
"Extended mini-ITC" board, ASRock E3C224D4I-14S,
http://www.asrockrack.com/general/productdetail.asp?Model=E3C224D4I-14S#.
It is 21.3 cm x 17 cm.

There is some speculation on your facebook page that it would fit in this
case. Can you confirm that? There are really no other good mini-ITC boards
that can reliably connect to more than 6 drives.

Thanks,
Jim

 

[Glorious1]

I'm getting a little discouraged with finding what I want for this build. The Lian Li PC-Q26 case and the extended mini-ITX board ASRock E3C224D4I-14S make a great combo that is compact and can handle a lot of drives.

But - my other criterion was low power. The integrated Atom processor on the original board I looked at was great because it is reasonably powerful and very efficient. Doesn't require a CPU fan. But it seems there is no low-power compatible Intel processor available for this board. When I went to the Ark Intel site and searched for the compatible processor families, socket, and TDP <= 25 W, only three showed up
Intel Xeon Processor E3-1220L v3 (4M Cache, 1.10 GHz) 13 W
Intel Xeon Processor E3-1230L v3 (8M Cache, 1.80 GHz) 25 W
Intel Xeon Processor E3-1240L v3 (8M Cache, 2.00 GHz) 25 W

Problem is, those processors are not really available for retail. Even if they were, these specs don't seem so great compared to the Atom C2550 or C2750.

(The SuperMicro MBD-X10SL7-F has the same processor requirements)

 

[Fraoch]

But - my other criterion was low power. The integrated Atom processor on the original board I looked at was great because it is reasonably powerful and very efficient. Doesn't require a CPU fan. But it seems there is no low-power compatible Intel processor available for this board. When I went to the Ark Intel site and searched for the compatible processor families, socket, and TDP <= 25 W, only three showed up
Intel Xeon Processor E3-1220L v3 (4M Cache, 1.10 GHz) 13 W
Intel Xeon Processor E3-1230L v3 (8M Cache, 1.80 GHz) 25 W
Intel Xeon Processor E3-1240L v3 (8M Cache, 2.00 GHz) 25 W

Problem is, those processors are not really available for retail. Even if they were, these specs don't seem so great compared to the Atom C2550 or C2750.

Going by TDP is deceptive. It does not indicate what the CPU draws at idle, merely what the heatsink must dissipate to keep the CPU die under the critical temperature under full load.

What's more telling is idle power draw, and in that respect, all Haswell CPUs are created equal. Haswell is very power-efficient. The entire assembly in my signature draws 40 W at idle, and that includes the hard drives of course. Getting an "L" processor won't help at all - the idle power will be the same, only the load power will be reduced. However it's so much slower than a regular CPU that it will spend more time at full power trying to accomplish a task, and it may end up being too slow to be useful at all (Samba will perform very poorly on those "L" processors, particularly the E3-1220L). A regular CPU will clock up to high power, get the job done, then clock back down to idle power, while an "L" processor will clock up a bit, spend a lot of time at full power trying to accomplish the same task, then clock back down to the same idle power as a regular CPU. On a timescale, a regular CPU might actually be more power-efficient because it stays at high power for a shorter time.

It's a lose-lose situation. Your idle power draw, where the CPU spends most of its time, won't be any lower, and you won't have the speed when you need it.

And yes, the "L" processors won't perform all that much better than a C2550 - they may perform worse than a C2750. The "L" processors are not designed for performance, they are designed for thermally-constrained situations.

A thought - do you really need a Xeon? The Core i3 handles ECC and can be used in those boards. It's powerful yet consumes little power because it's dual-core. It's pretty telling that Intel equips the Xeons, Core i5s and Core i7s with a heatsink with a copper core while the Core i3 ships with an all-aluminum heatsink - there's just no need for lots of heat dissipation because the Core i3 just doesn't consume enough power to get really hot.

I went back through your requirements and unless I missed something about transcoding, a Core i3 would work fine here.

 

[sremick]

The entire assembly in my signature draws 40 W at idle, and that includes the hard drives of course.

Interesting. I have 6 HDDs and idle around 60W. Can't be quite 10W/HDD though since that means my CPU is 0W. :p Forgot to do some power tests w/o HDDs before this unit went into use.

 

[Fraoch]

I got a power meter specifically for this :). 40 W idle power, 67 W during intensive Samba writing tests. Initial tests with a temporary Linux distro on it showed:

38 W idle
52-56 W one core loaded
90 W full load

Funny enough, the standby power draw (USB on standby and IPMI up) is 9 W. So idle power might actually be 32 W without IPMI.

We have lower power prices than many here, although they are constantly rising. But still, 40 W equates to $35.74 per year. I may not be rich, but the bank won't take the house at that.

 

[Glorious1]

Great info, Fraoch, thanks for the thorough reply. I guess I was thinking a processor that generates more heat under load needs a CPU fan and more case fans, and all that takes power too. Guess I will look into the Core i3 family - any suggestions there? I think there is a ton of them.

Dumb question maybe, but those idle power figures - is that with the hard drives spinning? Is it necessary to keep the drives spinning when they're not doing anything under FreeNAS?

 

[Fraoch]

Great info, Fraoch, thanks for the thorough reply. I guess I was thinking a processor that generates more heat under load needs a CPU fan and more case fans, and all that takes power too. Guess I will look into the Core i3 family - any suggestions there? I think there is a ton of them.

You're welcome!

There are roughly 3 versions of Core i3s:

- Core i3 41XX with 3 MB cache
- Core i3 43XX with 4 MB cache
- "Haswell Refresh" Core i3-4160 and Core i3-4370

The 4 MB cache versions will be marginally faster than the 3 MB cache versions but mostly just because they're clocked faster. The Haswell Refresh Core i3s seem appealing, they were released over the summer when Intel's yields on Haswell increased to the point that they could ship faster processors for the same price as the older, slower ones. Unfortunately if you're going with a Supermicro board you'll have to stick with the "original" Haswell as Supermicro doesn't support Haswell Refresh on the server C222/C224/C226 boards. Perhaps that situation has changed - it would be good if it did, because I have a Core i3-4370 and it's surprisingly fast, especially single-threaded. Comes quite close to my desktop Core i7-4790K in single-threaded benchmarks, and does so while remaining cool.

The fastest "original" Haswell Core i3 is the Core i3-4360, which is clocked at 3.7 GHz, quite close to the 4370 (3.8 GHz). It ought to do quite well. Ericloewe is using a Core i3-4330, the first of the 4 MB cache Core i3s.

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/75025/4th-Generation-Intel-Core-i3-Processors#@Desktop

Dumb question maybe, but those idle power figures - is that with the hard drives spinning? Is it necessary to keep the drives spinning when they're not doing anything under FreeNAS?

Yes those are with all the hard drives spinning - WD Reds are good at idle power consumption as well. As for keeping them spinning, you'll find a great debate as to whether having them constantly parking or keeping them running will wear them out faster. From what I can see in SMART, my drives don't park all that much:

Code:

SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME  FLAG  VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE  UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate  0x002f  200  200  051  Pre-fail  Always  -  0
  3 Spin_Up_Time  0x0027  171  171  021  Pre-fail  Always  -  4425
  4 Start_Stop_Count  0x0032  100  100  000  Old_age  Always  -  26
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct  0x0033  200  200  140  Pre-fail  Always  -  0
  7 Seek_Error_Rate  0x002e  200  200  000  Old_age  Always  -  0
  9 Power_On_Hours  0x0032  099  099  000  Old_age  Always  -  1148
10 Spin_Retry_Count  0x0032  100  253  000  Old_age  Always  -  0
11 Calibration_Retry_Count 0x0032  100  253  000  Old_age  Always  -  0
12 Power_Cycle_Count  0x0032  100  100  000  Old_age  Always  -  26
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032  200  200  000  Old_age  Always  -  5
193 Load_Cycle_Count  0x0032  200  200  000  Old_age  Always  -  89

Notice the Load Cycle Count isn't too far off the Power Cycle Count, they hardly park. You can adjust this with WDIDLE, I see no need in my case, but if you go with WD Greens you might want to as many of them park excessively.

 

[Ericloewe]

You're welcome!

There are roughly 3 versions of Core i3s:

- Core i3 41XX with 3 MB cache
- Core i3 43XX with 4 MB cache
- "Haswell Refresh" Core i3-4160 and Core i3-4370

The 4 MB cache versions will be marginally faster than the 3 MB cache versions but mostly just because they're clocked faster. The Haswell Refresh Core i3s seem appealing, they were released over the summer when Intel's yields on Haswell increased to the point that they could ship faster processors for the same price as the older, slower ones. Unfortunately if you're going with a Supermicro board you'll have to stick with the "original" Haswell as Supermicro doesn't support Haswell Refresh on the server C222/C224/C226 boards. Perhaps that situation has changed - it would be good if it did, because I have a Core i3-4370 and it's surprisingly fast, especially single-threaded. Comes quite close to my desktop Core i7-4790K in single-threaded benchmarks, and does so while remaining cool.

The fastest "original" Haswell Core i3 is the Core i3-4360, which is clocked at 3.7 GHz, quite close to the 4370 (3.8 GHz). It ought to do quite well. Ericloewe is using a Core i3-4330, the first of the 4 MB cache Core i3s.

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/75025/4th-Generation-Intel-Core-i3-Processors#@Desktop


Yes those are with all the hard drives spinning - WD Reds are good at idle power consumption as well. As for keeping them spinning, you'll find a great debate as to whether having them constantly parking or keeping them running will wear them out faster. From what I can see in SMART, my drives don't park all that much:

Code:

SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16
Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME  FLAG  VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE  UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate  0x002f  200  200  051  Pre-fail  Always  -  0
  3 Spin_Up_Time  0x0027  171  171  021  Pre-fail  Always  -  4425
  4 Start_Stop_Count  0x0032  100  100  000  Old_age  Always  -  26
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct  0x0033  200  200  140  Pre-fail  Always  -  0
  7 Seek_Error_Rate  0x002e  200  200  000  Old_age  Always  -  0
  9 Power_On_Hours  0x0032  099  099  000  Old_age  Always  -  1148
10 Spin_Retry_Count  0x0032  100  253  000  Old_age  Always  -  0
11 Calibration_Retry_Count 0x0032  100  253  000  Old_age  Always  -  0
12 Power_Cycle_Count  0x0032  100  100  000  Old_age  Always  -  26
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032  200  200  000  Old_age  Always  -  5
193 Load_Cycle_Count  0x0032  200  200  000  Old_age  Always  -  89

Notice the Load Cycle Count isn't too far off the Power Cycle Count, they hardly park. You can adjust this with WDIDLE, I see no need in my case, but if you go with WD Greens you might want to as many of them park excessively.

They do support Haswell Refresh CPUs, but, like all older motherboards, need the 2.0 BIOS.

 

[Glorious1]

They do support Haswell Refresh CPUs, but, like all older motherboards, need the 2.0 BIOS.

Actually, the board I'm currently targeting is ASRock E3C224D4I-14S, because it fits in a smaller case and has everything else I need (I think). Their CPU Support List is confusing to me as all the i3s have (C0) after them, although they all say Haswell and some say Haswell-R. The don't list i3-4160 or 4370. They do list i3-4360.

 

[Fraoch]

Actually, the board I'm currently targeting is ASRock E3C224D4I-14S, because it fits in a smaller case and has everything else I need (I think). Their CPU Support List is confusing to me as all the i3s have (C0) after them, although they all say Haswell and some say Haswell-R. The don't list i3-4160 or 4370. They do list i3-4360.

The C0 probably indicates C0 stepping CPUs. I'm not sure if they've been revising steppings on Haswell as they go but this sort of in-depth data can only be found by actually having a box in front of you - I believe you can look it up by the sSpec number, which you can only find printed on the CPU heatspreader or on the box. This sort of minutiae shouldn't matter but it indicates which actual one they tested.

However if they do not list the Core i3-4160 or the Core i3-4370, you probably shouldn't go with those. The board might boot or it might not and if it doesn't, you might not get any technical support until you switch to a supported processor.

 

[Ericloewe]

The C0 probably indicates C0 stepping CPUs. I'm not sure if they've been revising steppings on Haswell as they go but this sort of in-depth data can only be found by actually having a box in front of you - I believe you can look it up by the sSpec number, which you can only find printed on the CPU heatspreader or on the box. This sort of minutiae shouldn't matter but it indicates which actual one they tested.

However if they do not list the Core i3-4160 or the Core i3-4370, you probably shouldn't go with those. The board might boot or it might not and if it doesn't, you might not get any technical support until you switch to a supported processor.

All Haswell and Haswell Refresh CPUs are stepping C0. Devil's Canyon excluded.

 

[DKarnov]

However if they do not list the Core i3-4160 or the Core i3-4370, you probably shouldn't go with those. The board might boot or it might not and if it doesn't, you might not get any technical support until you switch to a supported processor.

I'm using the E3C224D2I with an i3-4160 and it works fine. That isn't a E3C224D4I-14S but the hardware is very close and the latest BIOS revs are the same point release on the same day, so I'd have high confidence the CPU support is the same.

 

[Glorious1]

Thanks to all the help on this forum, my plan is completely different and more expensive than what I started with :)

Case: Lian Li PC-Q26 ($190, high I know, but it's brand new and unique)
Board: ASRock E3C224D4I-14S ($290)
CPU: Core i3-4160 ($125)
RAM: Crucial 8GB x 2, DDR3 PC3-12800 Unbuff. ECC 1.35V CT5550265 ($206)
PSU ??

This case is pretty cool. It's certainly bigger than other mini-ITX cases. It has room for ten 3.5" drives and one 2.5" drive. It comes with three 120 mm fans in front and one 120 mm exhaust fan, with spaces for two more. You could cool a small nuclear power plant in there. And it accommodates a full ATX power supply.

I still have some questions of course, with more to come I'm sure ;)

1. The board has four RAM slots. For 16 GB, is it better to do 2 x 8 or 4 x 4?
2. Power supplies are mysterious to me. The case specs say it takes an ATX PSU. There is 190 mm between the back of the case and the drive cage, so that is the space for the PSU and wires sticking out the back. Is there such a PSU that could be coerced into providing power for up to 11 drives? Is it OK to put Y's on those things to increase the number? As sold, there is a hot-swap backplane for two of the drives. It has a single 4-pin power connector (molex?). You can buy more of the backplanes. If I put them in for all 10 drives, that would mean five x 4-pin connections needed (plus the SATA power connector for the 2.5" drive. I would just like to set it up for possibly filling all the drive slots someday. Needless to say I'm looking for a reliable, efficient one.

 

[pjc]

2X8.

Then you can add another 2X8 later.

 

[Ericloewe]

Though a bit tight, you can fit a Seasonic G-Series in there.

 

[Fraoch]

If you get a modular PSU, check that you can get more 4-pin Molex cable sets if the included ones don't have enough plugs.

 

[Glorious1]

Though a bit tight, you can fit a Seasonic G-Series in there.

1. Those appear to be modular, and 160 mm long, so I guess that leaves 3 cm for the connectors plus the bend. Does that seem doable?
2. Those G-Series (at least the 450+W ones) have 5 "peripheral 4-pin" connectors and 6 SATA. Would I need those 4-pin connectors for anything else, like fans? If so, I guess I could leave out the backplane for two of the drives, freeing up one 4-pin. Does that make sense?
3. Finally, holy cow, I just tried 4 power supply calculators. Two gave maximum wattage requirement or recommended PSU size as 240-280. One said my idle power would be 107 W (I hope not!) and max load would be 199. The one on Newegg said I need a PSU with capacity of 1246 W!! (I had to pick a video card though, maybe that threw it off). So . . . what size should I go for? I understand if you go too big you lose efficiency.

 

[Fraoch]

Those G-Series (at least the 450+W ones) have 5 "peripheral 4-pin" connectors and 6 SATA. Would I need those 4-pin connectors for anything else, like fans? If so, I guess I could leave out the backplane for two of the drives, freeing up one 4-pin. Does that make sense?

You probably don't need 4-pin Molex for anything but those backplanes. Fans use small 3-pin or 4-pin and can usually be directly connected to the motherboard. Check the case manual to see how the fans connect to power - it could be through a fan splitter or controller (that might need a 4-pin Molex), they could be intended to connect directly to the motherboard, or they could be equipped with a 4-pin Molex Y-cable pass-through - this means that plug is still available.

Of course if the power supply is modular and you can find compatible 4-pin Molex cable sets, you can use another one in addition to the provided one.

Finally, holy cow, I just tried 4 power supply calculators. Two gave maximum wattage requirement or recommended PSU size as 240-280. One said my idle power would be 107 W (I hope not!) and max load would be 199. The one on Newegg said I need a PSU with capacity of 1246 W!! (I had to pick a video card though, maybe that threw it off). So . . . what size should I go for? I understand if you go too big you lose efficiency.

Ehh, they're all over the map. Go with what the hardware sticky recommends.

 

[Glorious1]

Thanks, unfortunately the case manual is one page and doesn't reveal anything about fan hookups. Guess I'll deal with that when I see it.

Ehh, they're all over the map. Go with what the hardware sticky recommends.

What hardware sticky?

 

[Ericloewe]

3cm is doable, but requires some elbow grease.

As for sizing, I typically recommend 60W+30W per drive.