How expedient is it to take a regular PC (only more powerful) for a server?

Question

Iron

There is a task to deploy some services on the network. Type AD, folder access, GPO, RDP, Firewall, Proxy, well, recording from video cameras, etc. It is possible to buy just a relatively powerful PC for all this. But as far as I know, these PCs are not very adapted for non-stop operation. And what configuration to take a PC is not very clear. Please tell me which one?

Answer 1

There is a task to deploy some services on the network.

Nichrome yourself you have services.
Of course, it is absolutely inappropriate.
They are quite designed for uninterrupted operation, it's just a matter of reliability and performance.
The server is, first of all, reliability and you need to understand this as soon as possible. In some circles, servers on non-server hardware get hit hard in the ass.
And yes, you were not going to raise it on one server, were you?

Answer 2

Kroilovo leads to popadalov
Here, in the right way - at least two hosts with hypers and migration, plus Mikrotik for the firewall, plus a shelf for backups. And at least four virtual machines for the whole thing, naturally with a separate machine for video surveillance - although I think that synology does a good job with this.
A BU server will cost less than a powerful desktop (in which there are a lot of goodies that are completely unnecessary for the server). And the server means 24x7 work in not the best conditions, remote administration without the need to drag the monitor along with you, replacement of wearing parts (screws, coolers, PSU) without turning off the server.
However, everything is usually decided by the budget :)