• rook@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 minutes ago

    I got an old server and it has a hardware raid card on it. I installed trueNAS on it. Shows 18tb raid right away (24tb 4tbx6). And it does not help that I’m new to this stuff.

    Is hardware raid any good for truNAS? should I just get a pcie to sata and connect drives individually?

    or

  • rose56@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    It also takes space and makes lots of noise. But for sure, with couple upgrades, it will work like a charm.

  • imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Nah. I dissagree. My dedicated NAS system consumes around 40W idling and is very small sized machine. My old PC would utilize 100W idling and is ATX-sized case. Of course I can use my old PC as a NAS, but these two are different category devices.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      I want to reduce wasteful power consumption.

      But I also desire ECC for stability and data corruption avoidance, and hardware redundancy for failures (Which have actually happened!!)

      Begrudgingly I’m using dell rack mount servers. For the most part they work really well, stupid easy to service, unified remote management, lotssss of room for memory, thick PCIe lane counts, stupid cheap 2nd hand RAM, and stable.

      But they waste ~100 watts of power per device though… That stuff ads up, even if we have incredibly cheap power.

      • oftenawake@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        I use my old pc server as a 50w continuous heater in my lab-shed which is a small stone outbuilding. Keeps it dry in there!

  • randombullet@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I used to have a 5700G system that I had to switch out to a 14600k system due to quciksync pass through.

    I got my 14600K down to 55w from 75w with everything else being equal. Insane how efficient some setups can be.

    My 16tb Pi sips at 13w max or 8w idle. But no encoding or enough storage for normal work. So it’s warm storage

  • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    12 hours ago

    My main application server is a middling office desktop computer from 2011. Runs dozens of services without a sweat.

  • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    15 hours ago

    And as usual everyone is saying NAS, but talking about servers with a built in NAS.

    I’m not saying you can’t run your services on the same machine as your NAS, I’m just confused why every time there’s a conversation about NASs it’s always about what software it can run.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The way I see it, a box of drives still needs something to connect it to your network.

      And that something that can only do a basic connection costs only a little less than something that can run a bunch of other stuff too.

      You can see why it all gets bundled together.

    • naticus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      At this point you’re just fighting semantics. Even a commercial NAS is reliant on the software too, like with Synology. They run the disk management but also can run Docker and VMs with their built-in hypervisor.

  • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    OK. Science time. Somewhat arbitrary values used, the point is there is a amortization calculation, you’ll need to calculate your own with accurate input values.

    A PC drawing 100W 24/7 uses 877 kWh@0.15 $131.49 per year.

    A NAS drawing 25W 24/7 uses 219 kWh@0.15 $32.87 per year

    So, in this hypothetical case you “save” about $100/year on power costs running the NAS.

    Assuming a capacity equivalent NAS might cost $1200 then you’re better off using the PC you have rather than buying a NAS for 12 years.


    This ignores that the heat generated by the devices is desirable in winter so the higher heat output option has additional utility.

    • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 hours ago

      This ignores that the heat generated by the devices is desirable in winter so the higher heat output option has additional utility.

      But the heat is a negative in the summer. So local climate might tip the scales one way or the other.

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      In the fall/winter in northern areas it’s free! (Money that would already be spent on heating).

      Summer is a negative though, as air conditioning needs to keep up. But the additional cost is ~1/3rd the heat output for most ACs (100w of heat require < 30w of refrigeration losses to move)

    • SirSamuel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I bought a two bay Synology for $270, and a 20TB hdd for $260. I did this for multiple reasons. The HDD was on sale so I bought it and kept buying things. Also I couldn’t be buggered to learn everything necessary to set up a homemade NAS. Also also i didn’t have an old PC. My current PC is a Ship of Theseus that I originally bought in 2006.

      You’re not wrong about an equivalent NAS to my current pc specs/capacity being more expensive. And yes i did spend $500+ on my NAS And yet I also saved several days worth of study, research, and trial and error by not building my own.

      That being said, reducing e-waste by converting old PCs into Jellyfin/Plex streaming machines, NAS devices, or personal servers is a really good idea

    • brrt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Assuming a capacity equivalent NAS might cost $1200

      Either you already have drives and could use them in a new NAS or you would have to buy them regardless and shouldn’t include them in the NAS price.

    • Armand1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      In the UK the calculus is quite different, as it’s £0.25/kWh or over double the cost.

      Also, an empty Synology 4-bay NAS can be gotten for like £200 second hand. Good enough if you only need file hosting. Mine draws about 10W compared to an old Optiplex that draws around 60W.

      With that math using the NAS saves you 1.25 pence per hour. Therefore the NAS pays for itself in around about 2 years.

    • Auth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      15 hours ago

      my gaming pc runs at like 50w idle and only draws a ton of power if its being used for something. It would be more accurate to consider a PC to be 1.75x more power than a NAS but then account for the cost of buying a NAS. I’d say NAS would probably take 2-4 years to pay off depending on regional power prices.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      … 100W? Isn’t that like a rally bygone era? CPUs of the past decade can idle at next to nothing (like, there isn’t much difference between an idling i7/i9 and a Pentium from the same era/family).

      Or are we taking about arm? (Sry, I don’t know much about them.)

      • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        All devices on the computer consume power.

        The CPU being the largest in this context. Older processors usually don’t have as aggressive throttling as modern ones for low power scenarios.

        Similarly, the “power per watt” of newer processors is incredibly high in comparison, meaning they can operate at much lower power levels while running the same workload.

      • Damage@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I think we need to qualify “idling”, my NAS runs bittorrent with thousands of torrents, so it’s never really “idle”, it just isn’t always doing intensive processing such as transcoding.

      • imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I got a Kill-A-Watt similar device. I have measured my old PC at around 110W. PC specs: i5-6600, 16gb DDR4 ram, 1060 3gb, 1x2TB hdd, 1x250gb sata ssd, 1x1tb m2 ssd.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Depends.

      Toss the GPU/wifi, disable audio, throttle the processor a ton, and set the OS to power saving, and old PCs can be shockingly efficient.

      • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        19 hours ago

        You can slow the RAM down too. You don’t need XMP enabled if you’re just using the PC as a NAS. It can be quite power hungry.

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Eh, older RAM doesn’t use much. If it runs close to stock voltage, maybe just set it at stock voltage and bump the speed down a notch, then you get a nice task energy gain from the performance boost.

          • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            17 hours ago

            There was a post a while back of someone trying to eek every single watt out of their computer. Disabling XMP and running the ram at the slowest speed possible saved like 3 watts I think. An impressive savings, but at the cost of HORRIBLE CPU performance. But you do actually need at least a little bit of grunt for a nas.

            At work we have some of those atom based NASes and the combination of lack of CPU, and horrendous single channel ram speeds makes them absolutely crawl. One HDD on its own performs the same as this raid 10 array.

            • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              17 hours ago

              Yeah.

              In general, ‘big’ CPUs have an advantage because they can run at much, much lower clockspeeds than atoms, yet still be way faster. There are a few exceptions, like Ryzen 3000+ (excluding APUs), which idle notoriously hot thanks to the multi-die setup.

    • Damage@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      18 hours ago

      So I did this, using a Ryzen 3600, with some light tweaking the base system burns about 40-50W idle. The drives add a lot, 5-10W each, but they would go into any NAS system, so that’s irrelevant. I had to add a GPU because the MB I had wouldn’t POST without one, so that increases the power draw a little, but it’s also necessary for proper Jellyfin transcoding. I recently swapped the GPU for an Intel ARC A310.

      By comparison, the previous system I used for this had a low-power, fanless intel celeron, with a single drive and two SSDs it drew about 30W.

      • lectricleopard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Ok, im glad im not the only one that wants a responsive machine for video streaming.

        I ran a pi400 with plex for a while. I dont care to save 20W while I wait for the machine to respond after every little scrub of the timeline. I want to have a better experience than Netflix. Thats the point.

        • Damage@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Eh, TBH I’d like to consume less power, but I mean, a 30-40W difference isn’t going to ruin me or the planet, I’ve got a rather efficient home all in all.

      • YerbaYerba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I have a 3600 in a NAS and it idles at 25w. My mobo luckily runs fine without a GPU. I pulled it out after the initial install.

    • leftascenter@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      A desktop running a low usage wouldn’t consume much more than a NAS, as long as you drop the video card (which wouldn’t be running anyways).

      Take only that extra and you probably have a few years usage before additional electricty costs overrun NAS cost. Where I live that’s around 5 years for an estimated extra 10W.

      • Damage@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        as long as you drop the video card

        As I wrote below, some motherboards won’t POST without a GPU.

        Take only that extra and you probably have a few years usage before additional electricty costs overrun NAS cost. Where I live that’s around 5 years for an estimated extra 10W.

        Yeah, and what’s more, if one of those appliance-like NASes breaks down, how do you fix it? With a normal PC you just swap out the defective part.

        • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Most modern boards will. Also there’s integrated graphics on basically every single current CPU. Only AMD on AM4 held out on having iGPUs for so damn long.

    • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I have an old Intel 1440 desktop that runs 24/7 hooked up to a UPS along with a Beelink miniPC, my router, and a POE switch and the UPS is reporting a combined 100w.

    • ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      I’m still running a 480 that doubles as a space heater (I’m not even joking; I increase the load based on ambient temps during winter)

      • thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I am assuming that’s a GTX 480 and not an RX 480; if so - kudos for not having that thing melt the solder off the heatsink by now! 😅

        • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          The GTX 480 is efficient by modern standards. If Nvidia could make a cooler that could handle 600 watts in 2010 you can bet your sweet ass that GPU would have used a lot more power.

          Well that and if 1000 watt power supplies were common back then.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I somehow doubt that.

    My last desktop PC has been retasked as an HTPC. The CPU in it requires a graphics card for the system to POST, it’s currently mounted in a SFF case with barely room for two 2.5" drives, so it would either make for a shitty, difficult to service, bulky for what it does, power inefficient NAS, or I’d have to buy a new case and CPU.

    My current machine is in an mATX mini-tower, there’s room for hard disks and the 7700X has integrated graphics so I could haul the GPU out, but it’s still kind of bulky for what you’d get.

    So I’m gonna keep my Synology in service for a little while longer, then build a NAS from scratch selecting components that would be good for that purpose.

    • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I operate my hard drives totally external to my old PC’s case with a 3D printed holder keeping them together (with a little space between each drive for ventilation). It’s a little ugly, but it lives in a closet so I don’t really care how it looks. More importantly with my old Neatgear NAS I didn’t realize just how much speed I was missing out on. I guess with a modern Synology unit with a SSD cache you’ll likely get similar performance, but it’s so convenient to be able to run Docker containers and VMs on the same machine.

    • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      My UnRAID server is an HP desktop machine from 2011. More than capable of running dozens of services without tons of storage.

  • ashenone@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    I started my media server in 2020 with an e-wasted i7 3770 dell tower I snagged out of the ewaste pile. Ran jellyfin, audiobookbay, navidrome, calibre-web and an arr stack with about a dozen users like a champ. Old hardware rules if you don’t use windows

  • blinfabian@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    nah i tried to use my old pc for a nas, but it has almost no SATA ports. (it was a prebuilt)

    • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I’ve got a 12VDC Mini PC as my NAS/Jellyfin server with 6 SSD’s and no monitor that idles around 30watts and runs entirely off solar. It ain’t fast but it does everything I need it to do and costs zero dollars to run.

      • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Those are good. I got tired of dealing with the unique trouble that comes of having drives attached with a USB JBOD. Also it was just a celeron and kinda melted doen if I ran motion detection with Scrypted.

      • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Idle. Under load a bit more. It’s a mobile chipset, so it is efficient. Not as powerful as a desktop for sure but totally handles my basic workloads.

        • lectricleopard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Ok. R5 3600, rtx 3070, and 4 spinning drives. Idles at 62W. 80W under normal load (2 concurrent streams). This is a hilariously over specced NAS. This is all 2nd or 3rd life pc parts (outside of the spinning rust), so financially speaking I’m happy with the result.

          The long term goal is to use it as a homelab separate from anything I need to work all the time. I want to try running some LLMs locally and use it to control some home automation stuff. That’ll stress it.

          Edit: so yeah its double yours.

          • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            That’s pretty good though! I kept reading about it how much power video cards draw. I need to get some measurements in under various load with mine. The big part is obviously drives.