Originally Posted by bonami2
dont try to explain me how minecraft work i run it on a stupids pentium m 730 with 512mb ram and 1 mbit upload with 6 people without problem about 1 years ago on buckit with some mod
that sempron destroy 2x the pentium m and if i unlock it it more than capable ( if i can unlock it )
but anyways im looking at used cpu right now
and the plan is the buy the sempron to test the mobo and run it until i drop my fx 6300 in it that have 10x more power than i need
and intel mobo cost alot and are crap in low end
while the am3+ micro atx i see have heatsink 4+1 vrm 4 ram slot integrated ati 3000 and IDE support and usb 3.0 i think my choice is easy
I'm not telling you that you can't use it, just that it would be seriously limiting for Minecraft hosting. I'm basing that off personal experience with a CPU that benches higher than the Sempron, an Athlon 64 X2 4200+. I've hosted a server for about 2 years and without pregenerating the map, the Athlon I used constantly got overloaded when multiple people explored terrain which was not before seen or when people played with TNT as OP.
Once the terrain is generated, you can host MC on the Sempron fine but you will still experience overloads with most world editing/TNT.
The reason for upgrading a MOBO/CPU would be for better performance per dollar, just compare the performance of the Sempron and those Celerons I suggested. They can be had for the same price.
Sempron $40 - http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Sempron+145&id=403
Celeron $40 - http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+G1820+%40+2.70GHz&id=2129
Sempron - 811
Celeron - 2657 (1500 single-threaded)
Buying a Sempron is kind of a bad deal, unless you get it really cheap and already have the motherboard for it.
Since RAID0 is only really beneficial for sequential stuff, and RAID1 isn't always faster for reading, I don't think RAID in any form should be a requirement for the motherboard for this build if it's just for Minecraft server hosting.
Even an H81 motherboard would do fine for reaching this goal, and those can be had for real cheap.
Integrated graphics aren't important for server hosting, and the Celerons come with Intel HD graphics, which the H81 chipset allows the use of.
As far as I know, the Intel HD also beats the ATI3000. See below.
Radeon 3000 http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+3000
Intel HD Graphics http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+Family&id=37
...both suck, and even if these are perfectly accurate scores, they're both going to suck but they're going to do the job well enough for sending a display to the monitor. You'll be hosting on this setup, not playing it so the GPU is not important.
The higher you have the server settings, the more bandwidth and CPU it will use.
I've reached overloads with the view distance being 5 and 6 people online exploring. The nether was also quite brutal on map generating loads.
Server.properties view distance setting
(2x, +1, Squared = Total Server Rendered Chunks)
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
3 - 49 Chunks (2x setting, +1, squared)
4 - 91
5 - 121
6 - 169
7 - 225
8 - 289
9 - 361
10 - 441
11 - 529
12 - 625
13 - 729
14 - 841
15 - 961
Let's say you have 4 people on the server. They're all playing together building a town. Two players decide to go mining in different directions, they won't affect server performance much at all but if when they return they decided the 4 of them should split into two groups of 2 and explore in different directions, you would double the number of chunks being processed by the server instantly as soon as they all move 15 chunks away from each other.
If your server can handle 6-15 people on near the spawn, it's not a safe bet at all to assume the server will maintain that performance.
One person online at 15 view distance is about the same CPU load as 20 players online in different locations on the map at a view distance of 3. (961 vs 980).
Server performance is only important to the point where it can achieve it's goal, beyond that it can be considered wasted resources but going over can never hurt because it allows for growth, and unexpected loads.
You did not tell us anything about those 6-15 people you expect. Are they expected to be the total number of players, or the daily load on at the same time? Are they friends(likely to stick together), or random people (likely to wander alone randomly)?
While I was hosting, I hosted for two weeks on my i7 rig instead of the Athlon and people quickly told me it made quite a big difference. The Athlon was doing "OK" but it did sometimes cause some noticeable lag when people explored. I then generated a 10kx10k map, and hosted on the Athlon and didn't get a single complaint other than when World Editing was taking place or if people left a mob trap unattended for hours. Both of those can be avoided, by world editing when less people are on, editing smaller sections, and telling people to add deactivation switches for their mob traps, make a point to not let it gather thousands, or using a plugin to auto-kill hostile mobs spawned by a trap every hour or so.