Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

So does anyone think that a via board like: would make a good server where I need a lot of storage and wanted to Raid 0+1 4 x 1TB drives?

I dont know a lot about VIA. Are they fast or slow? How do they compare to an Intel Atom or a Core 2 Duo?

I see it says this board only goes up to 1gb ram, I wonder if that is an old spec of it I could really put at least a single 2gb Dim.

Would CentOS be ok with this board?

share|improve this question
You should use RAID 1+0 over 0+1. The performance is the same, but 1+0 is more fault-tolerant in larger sets. The fault tolerance is the same in a 4 disk set, but if you ever plan to grow it, you are at significantly higher risk. Also, rebuild times are much lower in a 1+0. – MDMarra Dec 17 '09 at 16:17

I have 3 VIA eden machines running as servers (services, web/app, nas) at home. They are generally lower in power consumption but do not expect them to beat the Core2 on performance. The ones that you have selected should fly on encryption/decryption work though as they come with Padlock, which is a hardware AES accelerator. So, if you want to build a NAS with encrypted storage, you will benefit more from the VIA than any of the others.

share|improve this answer

I have a Via C3 motherboard that I've used with both Windows XP and Ubuntu. It works well enough and is completely x86 compatible but is very under powered and also doesn't support much memory. For the price of the board you mentioned, IMHO, you would be better off with an Atom 330 and raid card.

share|improve this answer

Depends a lot on your usage. As other answers have noted, WinXP and Linux should both support this board fine. You probably won't be able to use a 2GB RAM stick in the board (although you can certainly try). This board will require less power than a Core 2 Duo, but more than an Atom. On the other hand, it'll probably be a little faster than an Atom for some applications.

One major advantage to a board like this is the on-board dual NICs, 6x USB ports, and 8x SATA ports. You could build a great home file-server on a board like this. It wouldn't be good for an HTPC, or a terminal server, because of the low RAM capabilities and lack of graphics and audio expansion (there is a single 32-bit MiniPCI, so you could add audio, but it's not the best solution for an HTPC)...

If all you need is a fileserver, or you're looking to build a file-server + minimal webserver, this is not a bad board to start with.

share|improve this answer

The processor is fine for a fileserver. An Intel Atom might be more power efficient and perform roughly the same -- it may come down to price as the tie-breaker.

The big thing you want is to use RAID 1+0 over RAID 0+1. They perform almost exactly the same, but in an array larger than 4 disks RAID 1+0 is more fault tolerant and rebuild times are shorter. This won't make a huge difference with a 4 disk array, but planning for the future shouldn't hurt.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.