building ubuntu box

[7h3kk1d]

I'm building a desktop mainly so i can have a permanent static IP somewhere and so that i can have a media/file server. I plan on installing linux on it and i want it to be able to run virtual box and stuff so here are the parts I'm ordering if anyone sees any problems with it please tell me.

Case - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...9-160-_-Product

Motherboard - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16813131621

Processor - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16819115215

RAM - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16820145260

Video card - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16814127368

Power Supply - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16817341019

I'm going ot find some cheap cd/dvd combo online but I don't know what HD to get so some advice would be appreciated thanks.

[taiyed14]

if you are serious about running virtual box, absolutely get more the most RAM you can afford. 4GB but if you have the cash for 8GB+ do it. Same thing with the processor. Go Core i7.

[RogueSpear]

if you are serious about running virtual box, absolutely get more the most RAM you can afford. 4GB but if you have the cash for 8GB+ do it. Same thing with the processor. Go Core i7.

Couldn't agree more. I went from a Penryn w/ 4GB to a Core i7 w/ 8GB for my desktop at work. Now I'm running two virtual servers and two virtual clients each with 1GB RAM all at the same time. I can't even explain how awesome it is to be able to have an entire simulated network available for testing.

My old system was obviously two core. But the new system is quad core with hyperthreading, show it shows as 8 core. And of course you can never have enough RAM.

[7h3kk1d]

I will eventually upgrade to either 8 or 16 gigs of ram but right now I can't afford anything more than that above. Same with the processor I would love an i7 and i may get one next year but I am a college freshman so money is definitely an object.

[foo]

just a side note 64nd. i've had misc problems with corsair xms2 & certain asus mobos in the past. you may want to be sure (through researching) that the xms3 works flawlessly with that asus mobo. i'm sure it's fine, but i've had the strangest shit happen with the corsair/mobo together

[h3%5kr3w]

Personally, my opinion is since it is a media/file server for personal use, I this looks just about right except I wouldn't go with that high priced case and mobo. I would go as cheap as I could for the case, and go with a mobo with less options (because since it's going to be a stand alone server your not going to use most of it anyways), and just stuff it with as much ram as you can afford.

The speed of a core i7 or higher end i5 just doesn't overshadow the price difference for this application.

Also I would go with gskill ram. (but that's just personal preference + cheap)

***ALSO*** I would go with a smaller slimmer case, and upgrade the video card a tiny bit with one that can do 1080p + HDMI so you can use it as an htpc, while also using it as a file/media server (and thus integrate it and hide it away)

[7h3kk1d]

@foo I just checked the newegg reviews and a techgage article and both used the xms3 with the same mobo thanks a lot because that would've sucked.

@h3%5kr3w Well I thought about that but since it will be my main linux box and only desktop.(main computer is a macbook pro and otehr laptop is a old HP) I figured it would be nice to have something that could grow for a long time and eventually be used as a gaming machine and all-around dekstop. Next semester I will finally have a job so i will be able to afford upgrading the ram to 12 gigs and then 16. I think I will get the gskill ram then. As soon as I get my first paycheck I'll buy a new video card and hopefully a modem and router.

[7h3kk1d]

I should definitely use the 64-bit version of ubuntu right?

[dr0p]

I should definitely use the 64-bit version of ubuntu right?

Yes.

[7h3kk1d]

thanks, i just ordered everything. Wish me good luck

[RogueSpear]

Here's a recent article benchmarking Ubuntu 32-bit vs. 64-bit

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=arti...m=616&num=1

[Netshroud]

thanks, i just ordered everything. Wish me good luck

Good luck.

[h3%5kr3w]

man that article is OOOLLLDDD.. It would not be comparable to today's linux kernel. With how fast the kernel grows and transforms, there is just no side by side comparison with today's 32 and 64bit kernels.

Surely though the thought process (or at least mine) should present a difficult conundum, but one that can be explained and finalized on the issue..

32 bit kernels should be faster because of the amount of code processed at one time (32bits or 1/2 the amount of data per clock) is half that of a 64 bit code. However, that really depends, because theoretically, the only way it WOULD be faster is to take say, in a quad core 64 bit system and make 4 more virtual cores to compensate for the fact that 32 bits would only be using 1/2 the processor, and of course a processor only works at the speed in which it is set at. It is not variable upon single lines of code. But a 64bit processor running 64bit code, may not be able to work as fast, BUT works double the efficiency which in turn could translate to a faster running processor.

As far as I can tell though, 64 bit windows platforms perform just a tiny bit faster than a 32 bit windows platform.

BLAH! My brain hurts now :X

[VaKo]

There is no point using a 32bit OS on 64bit hardware, unless you have very specific requirements for a specific application or driver. Look at MS, you can't buy a 32bit version of Server 2008 R2 and its likely that Windows 7 will be the last 32bit desktop OS from MS. The only reason I can see Linux continuing provide 32bit support for considerably longer is due to Linux being run on much older hardware.

[RogueSpear]

man that article is OOOLLLDDD..

Woops...

They did just have a 32 vs. 64 article in the last month or so that presented some pretty surprising results (to me at least). I didn't look at my search results closely enough. I have the site in Google Reader and sort of figured the search wouldn't result in a 4 year old article.

Man did I just now have a hard time finding it too:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=arti...final&num=1

Ok it's not strictly a 32 vs. 64 article, they had OSX in there too. And it is older than I thought - November 18th. Anyway, I was surprised at some of the differences between the two archs. In my own testing, I've noticed some difference with Handbrake encoding. Not a ton, but I'll take whatever I can get.

[RogueSpear]

Sheesh.. no sooner than I finally find the proper article, they go out and post a brand new benchmark for 32 v 64:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=arti...2_pae&num=1

Looks like there's no reason to stick with 32-bit unless you simply can't live without a particular application that refuses to work under 64-bit.

[Sparda]

Sheesh.. no sooner than I finally find the proper article, they go out and post a brand new benchmark for 32 v 64:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=arti...2_pae&num=1

Looks like there's no reason to stick with 32-bit unless you simply can't live without a particular application that refuses to work under 64-bit.

Which includes:

• 16bit applications
• Applications that use unsigned drivers

These problems can be worked around by running such software in a virtual machine.

[h3%5kr3w]

Which includes:

• 16bit applications
• Applications that use unsigned drivers

These problems can be worked around by running such software in a virtual machine.

Yes, this is true. I don't believe there is ANY reason not to run a 64bit os at this point, especially because almost all (if not all) apps are ported by this time, and if it's one particular app that is not, then you should just find another app to do the same work anyways.

[7h3kk1d]

thanks does anyone know of software to notify you(email) and shut down if computer overheats

[Netshroud]

Generally the BIOS will handle that and just shut it all down.

[Sparda]

Generally the BIOS will handle that and just shut it all down.

Unless it's the CPU, I think the CPU 'tells' the BIOS to power off if it over heats. Also graphics cards, they will turn them selves off but leave the system other wise running (of course the operating system won't be happy by the sudden disappearance of a graphics adapter). Also hard disks... they just turn the selves off or slow them selves down.

Actually, the only over heating that is probably to be handled by the BIOS is the chipset. Every thing takes care of it's self except the CPU which relies on the BIOS to turn the computer off.

More over, don't rely on this 'protection' to prevent damage, some things do not have there temperature monitored (RAM, PSU, voltage regulators).

[RogueSpear]

thanks does anyone know of software to notify you(email) and shut down if computer overheats

For Windows I believe SpeedFan can both send email and shutdown based on temperature readings, fan RPMs, voltage readings, etc. from both the CPU and GPU (depending on the hardware support of your video card).

For Linux I don't know of a real turnkey system but you could probably rig Conky to do all that with a little elbow grease.

[7h3kk1d]

cool thanks

[5ive]

There is a ton of old hardware out there that simply will not work with 64bit. I have a customer running a 10 year old canon copy machine that canon is no longer making drivers for. I can get it to work just fine in windows 7 32 bit however it is impossible to print to this thing in win7 64 bit outside of a virtual machine. Canon never made a 64bit driver for it, for any OS. This was such a big deal for my customer that he had me downgrade his computer to 7 32bit.

Also if you want to run Boxee, imho the best HTPC software out there, it will only work on 32bit (linux/windows, it might work on the new 64bit osx not sure) For this reason all of my HTPC's are still running 32bit OSes.

Another thing is ppl with older copies of quicken/quickbooks who don't want to fork over the money to upgrade - they are out of luck on 64bit. These examples could go on and on...

On a side note, I realize it's too late and you already order the parts. But Micro center has been selling the i5 750 for 149 since it's release. They are always quite a bit cheaper then anyone else for CPU's. Only downside is that it's an in-store only deal so if there isn't one in your area it's a mute point. I have purchased 6 i5's thus far for customer builds.

http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/6c764a63#/6c764a63/1

[VaKo]

There is no point using a 32bit OS on 64bit hardware, unless you have very specific requirements for a specific application or driver.