i run a thin client over gigabit lan without jumboframes, takes around
2-6% cpu from 3ghz server with adaptec 2400a and raid5 hw

6% is with very heavy file usage.

hope this helps you.

On 2006-09-07, NoStop wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 September 2006 11:18 am, Jack Snodgrass had this to say in
> comp.os.linux.hardware:
>> not sure what comp.os.linux.* group this question should go to...
>> I want to build a dedicated, gigabit NAS box for my home network.
>> I know I can go out and buy one, but I want to build one myself.
>> I don't have to have the fastest.... I just want fast and cheap.
>> I'm thinking that I need a
>> motherboard, cpu, memory
>> gigabit lan card ( or two ) that support jumbo frames
>> hard drives
>> plus a few more ods and ends.
>> I've done some inital tests and it seems like a gigabit
>> attached device is almost as fast as a local drive. The
>> disk i/o delays are longer than the network transfer
>> speed ( when using gigabit ). I would have expected that
>> to be the other way around, but it's not.
>> I will be using this for large ( 20+ gig ) files.
>> My basic question on this project goes to sizing of the
>> CPU and memory. If all the box is going to be doing is
>> moving data off of the gigabit card to the disk and
>> vica-versa... what speed CPU ( x86-ish ) and how much
>> memory can I get away with using?
>> I've got a EPIA M600 motherboard that is not doing anything
>> at the time. Will that CPU keep up with the disk i/o and
>> network i/o?

> I built a NAS box using this mobo for a friend who has attached to it 4
> (250GB) USB2 external hard drives that store his MP3s. He runs Windoze and
> access the shares on the NAS through a samba server. Works very well for
> him and he hasn't reported it being slow in any way.
>> What about a celeron 400? I've got several
>> parts just laying around doing nothing. I may have all the
>> parts I need to get this going... just wanted to know if
>> anyone had any opinions on how fast a processor I'd need
>> before I started putting things together.
>> also... I'm just going to go with IDE or SATA. I know
>> that SCSI used to be the way to go for stuff like this,
>> but I think that is in the past. I think that a couple
>> of 300 - 500 gig drives with 16meg of cache will do
>> just fine.
>> Would appreciate any info / thoguths that you guys care to
>> share.
>> Thanks - jack