PDA

View Full Version : What Processer Would Suit Running A Station?


Dean Saliba
20th October 2006, 22:29
This is just a quick question.

What kind of processer would be best to run a station with?

I've been using an 433MHz Intel Celeron but the poor thing is dying now so I'm looking to upgrade. I can barely listen to an mp3 on Winamp without it coughing and spluttering. :(

What do you guys use?:)

RadioRevolt
20th October 2006, 23:21
a 2.4ghz p4 or equivalent should be good. Also try and use a gig of memory.

fc*uk
21st October 2006, 00:38
shit man. A P1 with a wee bit o ram can krank out a server.

One of mine runs off a pentium pro 133 with 512 meg of ram. Had 50 people jacked in and there were no problems.

Bandwidth is what is important.

soulful1
21st October 2006, 02:35
I agree with fc*uk you really don't need to have that much going on. My source machine is nothing more than a pentium III 497 processor with only 128 MB of Ram. Been doing the trick for some time now.

Jay
21st October 2006, 05:56
Actually memory and bandwidth is really all that is important to host larger servers.

RadioRevolt
21st October 2006, 14:19
im not saying an old slow cpu can't just that I would rather trust my station to something a little newer, that and my station box runs sam3 along with multiple other programs.

but KXRM is right, memory is the big story on the hardware side of things.

fc*uk
21st October 2006, 14:33
RadioRevolt --- I agree with you. However, for me running a box 24/7 I would want to look for something that eats the least amount of power. Slower boxes suck less watts.

Plus, if you are running 24/7 most people would want to dedicate a box where that is the only thing that it does. Therefore, not much extra bling is needed.

Dean Saliba
21st October 2006, 17:31
Thanks for the replies guys.

This computer would be soley for the station.

So the processer is not that important, it is how much ram it has that counts?

I currently have 512mb of ram at the moment.

The weird thing is that this computer handled XP waaaaaaay better than it is currently handling Windows 98.:weird:

hackerdork
21st October 2006, 18:02
ram doesnt matter.

bandwidth does.

Sieben
21st October 2006, 21:24
I'm running the server off cable using a G4 Sawtooth. And it's running very smooth. For the hell of it I used Redhat 4.0 on a 166 MHz IBM running a P1 processor, and even it runs fine. So agrees ram doesnt matter that much. As the IBM machine used only 64 MB RAM. And it was hosting 40 people on a 64 kbps stream. And I was in a visual chat room talking to over half those people. And they noticed no problems.
The main computer its running on is my 400 MHz G4 Sawtooth, with 1 Gig RAM running OS 10.4.8.

dotme
21st October 2006, 21:39
Processing power "may* matter... if you are encoding on the machine too. The more elaborate your encoding, the more horsepower you'll need. Load up SAM Broadcaster with 5 encoders, 5 band audio processing and AGC, compression and limiting, and you'll probably be needing some decent CPU power.

On the other hand, Winamp and the DSP with one encoder running wouldn't require much at all.

If you're currently a SAM user, and you're going after new and not used machinery, I recently deployed SAM3 on its own dedicated 2.8GHz P4 machine with 1GB RAM. I use dual band processing, run 5 encoders (all MP3).

With that configuration, RAM use never exceeds 40MB, and CPU hovers around 20-25%

I hope this helps :)