Cheap Server Setup?

massahwahl

massahwahl

VIP Member
How affordable or expensive is it to put together a server pc? I really just want to be able to host a couple webpages off of it and use it as a media server. Ive heard that it is fairly cheap to do. If so, what price range would I be looking at and if you could, please recomend some parts. I would def use linux on it if that helps.
 
Last edited:
For minimal use u can do this by setting it on the same desktop u use. It's easy to configure ur system as a web server. Just google it out.
 
i just made my best mate's old piece of crap dell from 2000 a home media server. i just threw a 500GB HD and a gig of ram in it, not to mention i put XP on it instead of windows ME.....it makes me shudder, just thinking about windows ME.
id say just build a crappy celeron server.
 
jimkonow said:
i just made my best mate's old piece of crap dell from 2000 a home media server. i just threw a 500GB HD and a gig of ram in it, not to mention i put XP on it instead of windows ME.....it makes me shudder, just thinking about windows ME.
id say just build a crappy celeron server.
Click to expand...

Or a crappy Dual Core Celeron server :P

E1200 is a great processor for a budget.
 
jimkonow said:
OMG. i just realized i said the C word...NEVER EVER EVER USE A CELERON!!! NUUUU~~
Click to expand...

The Celeron Dual Core's architecture is based off the Core 2 Duo architecture, not the NetBurst architecture ;)

Saying that the Dual Core Celeron sucks is like saying the Core 2 Duos and 45nm's stink.
 
no its not :3
celeron = suck.
P4's kick the shit out of netburst Celeron's, why shouldnt that be true now?

besides, its mostly about the L2 cache anyways :P
 
P4's kick the shit out of netburst Celeron's, why shouldnt that be true now?
Click to expand...

Cause P4's are made outta NetBurst architecture, and Celerons are decapitated Pentiums.

It's the same thing with the AMD Athlon and AMD Sempron. Sempron is the decapitated Athlon.
 
exactly, thank you for proving my point: celerons are mediocre compared to their non-decapitated bigger brothers :)
 
jimkonow said:
exactly, thank you for proving my point: celerons are mediocre compared to their non-decapitated bigger brothers :)
Click to expand...

So what you mean to say is that NETBURST Celerons stink, but the new Core 2 Duo - based Celeron is much better.

(If you even compared the best Celeron to the E1200, the E1200 would blow it away).
 
mhmm. youre right, so thanks for proving my point that celerons suck, especially celeron M's.
celeron = crap.
comparing an Exxxx series processor to a celeron is like comparing a Geo to a Ferrari :3
 
jimkonow said:
mhmm. youre right, so thanks for proving my point that celerons suck, especially celeron M's.
celeron = crap.
comparing an Exxxx series processor to a celeron is like comparing a Geo to a Ferrari :3
Click to expand...

... Anything based offa the NetBurst architecture sucks.

Anything based off the C2D Architecture is great. So the Exxxx Celeron Processors are wonderful ;)
 
okay, youre not seeing this the way i am :P
think back in time, youre using a p4 with netburst cache....not so magical times, but what ever ;)
some guy comes up to you and says "my netburst celeron is better than your netburst p4".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

now youre back to now.
some guy comes up to you and says
"my C2D architecture celeron is better than your C2D architecture Exxxx"

see what i mean now?
 
jimkonow said:
okay, youre not seeing this the way i am :P
think back in time, youre using a p4 with netburst cache....not so magical times, but what ever ;)
some guy comes up to you and says "my netburst celeron is better than your netburst p4".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

now youre back to now.
some guy comes up to you and says
"my C2D architecture celeron is better than your C2D architecture Exxxx"

see what i mean now?
Click to expand...

So basically you're saying that although the Celeron is indeed better, you think that no one will believe that it is better?
 
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/01/16/daily-wibble-16jan2008

You can OC it over 100%, 1.6GHz to 3.4GHz...

Although Celeron processors have long been of no interest to computer enthusiasts, who regarded them as a temporary “socket cap”, the new dual-core Celeron processors seem to be able to change the situation dramatically. The thing is that this processor is based on Core micro-architecture (even though its core is manufactured with not the very latest 65nm process), which implies that it may perform and overclock pretty decently.
Click to expand...

- http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/celeron-e1200.html

It may wear a similar $60 to $70 price tag, but the new Celeron E1200 has absolutely nothing to do with the single-core Celeron processors; it's based on the Core 2 architecture. But those expecting to buy a Core 2 Duo at a Celeron price will also be disappointed, as Intel has made sure that the new CPU will not be competing with its higher-priced Core 2 lines.
Click to expand...

As I said... :rolleyes:

The Celeron E1000 series is no different; some benchmark tests treat it like a 1.6GHz Core 2 Duo, while others fill the L2 cache and ask for seconds -- or even thirds. Besides taking a back seat to the Core 2 Duo, the E1200 trails even AMD's low-cost Athlon X2 models. Once Intel moves above 2.0GHz, it could be a different story, but the combination of a 1.6GHz clock and pint-sized cache simply does not translate into blazing speed.
Click to expand...

And seeing as it can OC to 3.4GHz levels...

- http://www.sysopt.com/features/cpu/article.php/3722891
 
"Besides taking a back seat to the Core 2 Duo"


thats all im trying to prove...and besides, clock speeds arent everything. sillypants.

yes, i know, i read everything. im thinking of the future of things, not the past, know what i mean? older programs rely on clock speed, while newer programs will rely on architecture and L2 cache; why else would intel make CPU's with 12MB l2 cache?
 
thats all im trying to prove...and besides, clock speeds arent everything. sillypants.
Click to expand...

You assume I didn't know that? :eek:

"Besides taking a back seat to the Core 2 Duo"
Click to expand...

I was never trying to prove that it was better than the C2Ds. Just that it's much faster than the NetBurst Celerons. :confused:

why else would intel make CPU's with 12MB l2 cache?
Click to expand...

So Intel could have another reason why people should buy it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top