First UnRAID Build Please Review

Hey Everyone!

So I am wanting to build my first unRAID server. I recently built an HTPC and I am slowly building up my media collection so I think a medium size unRAID server would be a perfect addition. I have been doing a lot of research the last few days and this is what I have came up with. Since this is my first build I was hoping you all could give me some feedback and make sure there isn't any glaring issues.

First, this is primarily going to be used as a Plex Media Server. It will have to be able to stream HD video and provide media to  2-3 clients concurrently. I will also probably use some other apps down the road as I become more familiar with unRAID.

Case: LIAN LI PC-Q2B http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811112339

Motherboard: AsRock B75m-ITX http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157310

PSU: Corsair CX430M http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139049

CPU: Intel Celeron G1620 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116888

Hard Drives: Seagate Barracuda 2TB 7200RPM (Parity) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148834

Western Digital 2TB Green (Storage Drives) http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=western+digital+2tb+green&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Memory: G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB DDR3 1333 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231275

I am thinking maybe going 3TB for the parity just so if in the future I want to upgrade it will be a little easier. I am also up in the air with getting a cache drive. I know it will improve performance, but my main focus is storage and streaming video and I don't think it is necessary in my case. I think I will benefit with more storage. I don't know what do you all think? I have struggled with this. I was just going to leave a drive bay open for now and see if I thought I would need it down the line. If not just fill it with another drive. Also, I am aware this board only has 4 on board SATA connections and will require an expansion card.

So overall is there any glaring issues with this build and do you all think this will do everything I have described?

Thanks!

Hey Jay-

I will leave a critique of your components to someone that knows more, but i will say that if I were you I would start with at a minimum a 3 TB parity drive to give you more options drive size in the future.

Yeah I was thinking the same thing should I ever need more space down the road all I got to do is pop a drive out and put in the new one.

Here's my $0.02.

First, I'd go with a board that has at least 6 on-board SATA ports.  Why have to add an expansion card when you can get a board that will handle as many drives as you can fit in the case.  Check the link in my sig for the board I used.  If you prefer ASRock boards, just get an ASRock board with at least 6 SATA ports.

You might want to think about bumping the RAM to 8GB.  If you are only running Plex 4GB should probably be fine, but if you are planning on running any other major plugins in addition to Plex (like sabnzbd, Sick Beard, CouchPotato, etc.) I'd suggest 8GB.

Will all of your media be direct played, or will you be relying on transcoding?  If it direct streamed you'll be fine.  If Plex will be doing any transcoding of HD content, the CPU you chose might be able to handle 2 concurrent streams, but probably not 3.

Like althoralthor I'd suggest at least a 3TB parity drive for future expandibility.  Go as big as you can afford for the parity drive.

Lastly, why not go with a Haswell build?  There's nothing wrong with Ivy Bridge (my server is Ivy Bridge) but why not go with the latest and greatest?  There's a very small price difference and the new Haswell CPU's idle at much lower power consumption, and your server will spend the vast majority of it's life at idle.

Also, I forgot.

As for the PSU, I'm not sure the modular version will fit. I use the non-modular version of the same PSU, and it barely fits in the case.  It also takes up the majority of the space in that case.  You're better off using an SFX PSU such as this one.  They are a bit more pricey, but they free up A LOT of room in that case, giving better airflow, among other things.

If you do stick with an ATX PSU, at least use the non-modular version of the Corsair CX430.

DEFINITELY agree with dirtysanchez's comments on the power supply -- you'll have a MUCH nicer build with the Silverstone SFX power supply.

I wrote a fairly extensive thread on builds with this case:

http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=29670.0

... but I'll be more succinct and summarize here:

=>  For a Plex server you want fairly high CPU capacity to allow for multiple simultaneous transcodes.    Since you're building from scratch, I'd use a Haswell motherboard and at least an i3 CPU (possibly even an i5).

This is an excellent choice for the motherboard:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132032

(and it has 6 SATA ports, so you won't need an expansion card to fill the case)

... and this i3 has over twice the processing power of the Celeron you were considering:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116945

4GB is "enough" memory, but I'd install 8GB to provide some headroom for when the 64-bit version of UnRAID is released:  http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820239613

There's no reason to buy a 7200rpm drive for parity if you're not using all-7200rpm drives.  But I'd definitely get a 3 or 4TB unit ... preferably a NAS-rated drive like the WD Red or Seagate NAS units.    Either of these are excellent choices:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178393

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236599

... or their 3TB "little brothers":

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236344

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178392

(I'd use a 4TB unit, however, so you're not limited in what size drives you can add)

I'd also buy NAS-rated drives for your data drives.  If you use a 4GB parity unit, then you could buy a single 4TB drive for your initial storage and still have 16TB of expansion capability 

You do NOT need a cache drive.

You do NOT need a cache drive.

I forgot to address this.  Technically garycase is correct in that you do not need a cache drive.  That said, since you are running Plex I'd suggest that you use one. 

Plex needs a place to store its library and temp files, and Plex is very "chatty".  What this means is that whatever disk you use to store the library and temp directories will never spin down due to constant access from Plex.  While you can store those directories on an array disk, the constant writes mean you will have 2 disks that never spin down (the data disk and the parity disk).  Using a cache drive means only 1 drive, the cache drive, will be spinning 24/7.

Good point r.e. the drive utilization of Plex.  You could use an SSD for the cache (so it's not spinning at all) ... or perhaps a larger hybrid drive like this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178380

By the way, with a cache drive, that's an even-better reason to use a 4TB parity drive and 4TB data drives, as you only have space for a total of 4 data drives [granted you could do a bit better with an add-in card -- either one more 3.5" drive or 2 more 2.5" units]

One counterpoint to the cache drive for Plex ... note that if you use an array drive for the Plex storage, then it has the benefit of UnRAID's fault-tolerance; whereas a cache drive is not protected from any drive failures.

A minor point ... and it's certainly debatable whether the added fault tolerance is worth the slower write speeds ... but just something to consider in deciding on the architecture.

Personally, I'd probably use an array drive to set everything up; and if you felt Plex as "struggling" due to the slower writes, THEN I'd add a cache drive.

One counterpoint to the cache drive for Plex ... note that if you use an array drive for the Plex storage, then it has the benefit of UnRAID's fault-tolerance; whereas a cache drive is not protected from any drive failures.

 

A minor point ... and it's certainly debatable whether the added fault tolerance is worth the slower write speeds ... but just something to consider in deciding on the architecture.

 

Personally, I'd probably use an array drive to set everything up; and if you felt Plex as "struggling" due to the slower writes, THEN I'd add a cache drive.

Good point.  I use a cache drive for Plex (and other plugins for that matter), but resolved the "no fault tolerance for the cache drive" issue another way.  I wrote a script to stop all the plugins, rsync the cache drive apps directory to the protected array, then restart all the plugins.  The script is scheduled to run weekly via a cron job.

As for your "minor point", IMO Plex wouldn't suffer in any way at all by having slower write speeds to its library.  I think the array write speed would still be sufficient for what Plex needs to do.  That said, for me, the decision to not use the protected array to directly host the library and temp directories was not speed related but was to keep from having 2 drives spinning 24/7.

Good point.  I use a cache drive for Plex (and other plugins for that matter), but resolved the "no fault tolerance for the cache drive" issue another way.  I wrote a script to stop all the plugins, rsync the cache drive apps directory to the protected array, then restart all the plugins.  The script is scheduled to run weekly via a cron job.

Would you mind sharing your script?  I have occasionally backed up the apps directory on my cache drive manually, and your automated solution sounds much nicer.

Would you mind sharing your script?  I have occasionally backed up the apps directory on my cache drive manually, and your automated solution sounds much nicer.

See here.

Let me just say awesome feedback guys! Ironically, you hit on every issue I have been struggling with over the last few days. So here is what I have decided.

My original build was actually using an i3-3240 CPU, but I thought that would be overkill so I downgraded. However, now I know it isn't and I am loving the suggestions you all made. I also love the suggestions by garycase so I think I am going to take his advice and use the ASUS board with the i3-4330.

As for the power supply, I originally went with the power supply I did because I read multiple times that people have gotten it to fit in the case I am using. Again, this is my first build so I am going to take the advice here and use the Silverstone one that was suggested.

I was also originally thinking about WD Red drives, but switched to green drives because they were cheaper and a few people say they would work for storage, but may not be the best for a parity (why I went with the Seagate for parity). I am going to go back to my original plan and use them in my array and upgrade to the 4TB version.

I also am going to upgrade to DDR3 1600 for my memory. Probably to this Kingston HyperX Blu.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820104262

This brings me to the cache drive. I have done a lot of research on a cache drive for this build and I will admit I still don't really understand cache drives completely and how they work (Probably why I can't decide if I want one). So forgive me if I make a fool of myself in these coming sentences.  I was originally leaning on getting one for the same reason dirtysanchez has one. I am not so much worried about the increased write speeds as I am not having drives spinning 24/7. I understand that it won't be protected from drive failure, but this is easily solved by rsyncing the drive regularly. I just like the idea of not having 2 drives spinning 24/7.

So if I do decide to do a cache drive does it matter on the size?

Again guys thank you so much for all the feedback!!

So if I do decide to do a cache drive does it matter on the size?

So this was kind of a stupid question on my part. I just read the wiki and the size really depends on how much data you plan to write. If you try to write more data than you have cache it will fail. I guess this is because it is going to cache the data. Thus, theoretically giving you faster writes. At least I think that is how it works.

So a 120GB ssd should be more then plenty right? Or maybe 320GB?

Excellent choices.  It'll basically be a Haswell version of my Ivy Bridge build.  You'll be very pleased with it.

The size of the cache drive isn't too important.  It just needs to be big enough for what you want to use it for.  Personally I use the cache drive solely as an apps drive, I do not use it to cache write to the user shares.  I prefer to have writes directly to the array so they are fault tolerant immediately.

How you plan to use the cache drive determines how big it needs to be.  Basically it needs to be as big as the amount of data you expect to write in a 24 hour period, assuming you are using it for write caching.  If you are using it solely as an apps drive, then only the amount of data the apps will store really matters.

To give you an idea, my cache drive hosts the apps directory for Plex, SABnzbd, SickBeard, and CouchPotato.  My apps directory is around 15GB, most of it Plex, and that's for a Plex library of over 700 movies and 1000's of TV episodes.  I'm using a 320GB spinner that I happened to have laying around.

So if I do decide to do a cache drive does it matter on the size?

 

So this was kind of a stupid question on my part. I just read the wiki and the size really depends on how much data you plan to write. If you try to write more data than you have cache it will fail. I guess this is because it is going to cache the data. Thus, theoretically giving you faster writes. At least I think that is how it works.

 

So a 120GB ssd should be more then plenty right? Or maybe 320GB?

Again, it depends on whether you plan to use it solely as an apps drive, or you wish to use it to cache writes also.  Either way a 120GB SSD should be plenty unless you plan on writing more than that to the array every day.

If you use it to cache writes (speeding up writes to the array) the data is actually written to the cache drive.  A job runs every night (at 3:40am I believe) and moves all the cached writes to the array. 

Also, if the cache happens to be full, AFAIK the write doesn't fail, it is just written to the protected array instead.

I don't have a cache drive, as (like dirtysanchez) I want all writes to my array to be fault tolerant immediately.

But if you want to use one as an apps drive, I'd think a 120GB SSD would be plenty ... and dirtysanchez's experience supports this (15GB apps directory).    If you want to be extra-cautious (with LOTS of room to expand for any future apps) you could go with 180GB or 240GB.    Newegg has had some excellent sales recently on 240GB SSDs ... subscribe to their "Shell Shocker" e-mails and watch & you'll likely see one within a couple weeks.

You could get a cache drive and keep all of your SATA ports for storage/parity with an mSATA SSD and one of these:

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/PCIEACCELM/

I've got one in my own AMD FM2 build and one in an Haswell that I put together for a buddy of mine. I won't make any guarantees, but for me they were totally plug and play with no setup beyond the usual unRAID cache drive stuff.

The down side is cost: $32 for the card and mSATA drives are usually a little spendier than their 2.5" cousins.

Okay guys after all your great advice I have finalized my build. Here it is.

Case: LIAN LI PC-Q2B http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811112339

Motherboard: ASUS H87I-PLUS http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132032

PSU: Silverstone ST455F http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817256063

CPU: Intel i3 4330 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116945

Hard Drives: Western Digital Red Drives (The parity drive will be 4TB) I am not sure yet if the data drives will be 3TB or 4TB seems smarter to just go ahead and spend the extra money now and just get the 4TB drives

Memory: Kingston HyperX Blu 8GB DDR3 1600 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820104262

I realized I have an extra 120GB SSD drive laying around so I am going to use that exclusively for an app drive and eliminate having 2 drives spinning 24/7. It will also make my writes fault tolerant immediately like you guys were talking about.

Thank you so much guys can't wait to start buying the stuff to build this!

Excellent choices. You'll love the build.

If you can afford the extra dough right now, go with all 4TB drives. It will pay off in the long run.

Agree -- that will be a VERY nice system.

... and definitely use 4TB NAS-rated drives

Excellent choices. You'll love the build.

 

If you can afford the extra dough right now, go with all 4TB drives. It will pay off in the long run.

I probably will just go ahead and buy 4TB drives. There is no since in buying 3TB now and then down the road buy a 4TB. It will definitely be cheaper to just go ahead and buy the 4TB drives now.

Thanks again guys!

Anyone have any news on the 5 TB drives?  If they are coming out soon, I would expect the 4 TB drives to come down in price.  Of course, you could ALWAYS wait a little longer, but then you will never pull the trigger.

WD is always VERY silent on their new drive releases.  Even though they had announced that they would be available "in 4th qtr 2013", they've made NO announcement since then after they missed that target.

I don't expect any announcements either -- they'll just "show up" one of these days.

Hopefully SOON !! 

As for pricing ... my expectation is they'll be at least $50/TB initially ... perhaps even a bit higher.    At that level they won't have too much downward pressure on the smaller units -- look at the current /TB costs of 2TB and 3TB drives ... they're not much less than the 4TB units.    But I agree there may be a small drop as the /TB cost of the 5TB heads down to the $40/TB range (which it will undoubtedly do).