View Full Version : Where do you guys get servers from?
jbiz718
04-26-03, 09:54 AM
Where do you guys get servers from.
Joe
thebyp2
04-26-03, 10:28 AM
Buy it all in component parts. don't buy servers specifically. well, i have a number of ibm's, but they are really specific for parts, which pushes prices up.
actually we get all of our systems from http://www.interpromicro.com
The systems always show up in good condition, packed well... and never had a problem with 1 yet.
interactive
04-26-03, 06:57 PM
Depending on what I want. Dell has been having some real good deals lately, so I've just been buying towers servers and moving them into rackmounts. But most of the time I just build them. Buy in quantity and price goes way down.
I've just bought a 1U system this week and my decision lay between these two guys:
http://colomachine.com
http://featuredservers.com
I ended up going with colomachine.com simply because the final amount was the least expensive, but I really think featuredservers.com is as cheap as it gets (for what you get).
Both worth checking out!
My first couple of servers were dedicateds, including my current one which, if I remember correctly, is an IBM. I got the parts for my new server (going to be colo'd) from Newegg and a couple different places on Price Watch. For the latter I made sure I could find evidence that they're trustworthy first of course.
IBM, Dell and Compaq all make good servers. I work for a company that has about 26 compaq's and 25-30 other servers. The compaq's are work horses and have been rock solid... I have also heard Dell makes really good servers, and has excellent support.
At work I can't say, but I am very satisfied with the barebone SuperMicro I used for my own server.
dynamicnet
06-23-03, 06:09 AM
Greetings:
HP for Compaq DL's 320, 360, 380.
We are also looking into SuperMicro.
Thank you.
Roberto
06-23-03, 06:18 AM
We build all of our servers.
interactive
06-23-03, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by dynamicnet:
Greetings:
HP for Compaq DL's 320, 360, 380.
We are also looking into SuperMicro.
Thank you.
Do you like those Compaqs? Do they make a pretty good 1u server? Thanks
1u servers are tough any way around... they just get so hot... it's hard to keep them well cooled. 2U servers are typically much easier to cool, and they have much easier expansion capabilities.
interactive
06-23-03, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by CDHost:
1u servers are tough any way around... they just get so hot... it's hard to keep them well cooled. 2U servers are typically much easier to cool, and they have much easier expansion capabilities.
You're correct. But for example my intel isp servers don't have any issues with heat. 2u servers take twice the space of what a 1u can do, and unless you have a big hd raid or something, it's not worth it to me anyways. Along with space at my colo provider is a premium. The more I can put into a rack, the better.
Understood, if you're colocating every inch (or U) counts! :)
We purchased some 1u (2 of them) from rackmountsetc.com and they have ran great so far, no overheating issues as I had been afraid of, and I can fit two of the cases I received back to back in 1u.
We buy dual xeon dell servers otherwise though. Although I'd like to look into building them instead, that's just not going to work out for a bit..
Originally posted by beley:
Understood, if you're colocating every inch (or U) counts! :)
Thats why in our infrastructure we deploy blade servers. I can get 336 blades per 1 42U cabinet. Plus the management for the blades is easier than standard 1Us.
s.h.a.zz.y
08-04-03, 03:18 AM
Blades are quite more expensive, I dont personally think they are cost-effective at the moment for serious deployment.
On that note, if you want to save U space, try the 14" rackmount you can get 90 per 48U rack.
Originally posted by s.h.a.zz.y:
Blades are quite more expensive, I dont personally think they are cost-effective at the moment for serious deployment.
Yes, blades as far as their own costs are more expensive up front. Most people only see the costs of the hardware and loose sight of the other costs that go along with the deployment of servers.
Without the use of a KVM it is possible to manage hundreds of blades from one central location. The ability to automaticly have a new server seen by the network is also a plus and does reduce overall costs.
I seem to be the only one who is deploying blades in our industry right now.
s.h.a.zz.y
08-04-03, 06:55 AM
Tony,
We tried the blades back near the end of 2002 and I agree they are good. Remote management, APC and network monitoring all comes as standard.
But when it came down to the "push and pull" it was more cost-effective to get 1U servers and add IPKVM as an additional option as needed.
I did spend a good three months researching "blades", I definitely think it has a BIG share of the market in the future but right now it’s pretty slim.
The new 14" rackmounts have added a slight concern for blade manufacture's especially when right now they are getting into the P4 speeds it is a long way off any acceptable speed range.
RLX is offering dual Xeon 3.0GHz blades with up to 8G of ram. We are going to be deploying 3 of these boxes and offering them up as VPS solutions.
We did research for about a year and just decided to go that route. It works for us.
s.h.a.zz.y
08-04-03, 07:21 AM
Tony,
w00t, I didn’t know they had hit them speeds yet.
One of the suppliers we tried was RLX and they were saying a good 6 months for the P4...
Seems like they have progressed better than they anticipated.
However saying that I haven’t looked back into blades for over 6 months now.
Chicken
08-04-03, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by tranz:
I seem to be the only one who is deploying blades in our industry right now.
I'm not sure about you being the *only* one, but certainly there aren't as many of you as traditional servers. I spoke with someone who looked at replacing a rather large amount of traditional servers (many thousands) with blades, and they just couldn't get the numbers to work out, plus there were other problems. I'm sure it's progressed since then (a few years ago).
yeah, I must admit they have come along way.
RLX were the first out of the gate with the blade solution. The big guys then followed. The only thing most of the big guys except Dell have done is taken a 1U and placed it verticaly within a 6U or sometimes larger case. In most cases they are still using their old server management software.
The one problem that is there is that RLX has gone from a 1.2GHZ box directly to a 2.8 and 3.0GHZ Dual Xeon. They have skipped over a large portion of the market that uses servers in that midrange area.
I will have a mini half cabinet of RLX blade server at the Atlana Host Industry Summit next year. I have already spoken to them and it will be there. I have also been told that by then pricing will even be further reduced on blade servers.
ghpickjr
09-07-03, 11:06 PM
Dual Xeon Dells, but get a good support package. We've had very few failures, but when we did, we had quick onsite support when necessary.
If i had a budget to purchase a server then i would deffinetly have a talk to the nice people at Dell about their business servers. Otherwise i would just purchase the hardware seperately and setup my own system.
regards,
Spencer
09-19-03, 08:08 PM
I went with Dell, because of their warranties. They'll fix anything for FREE and within like 12 hours with the plan I ordered.
I steel feel %99 of the p4 servers are overpriced. As opposed to paying $1200 for a p4 2.2.ghz i would prefer to pay $400 for a dual 900mhz P3.
We are looking to add another server, colo it in a DataCenter (No PM Offers Please!!! ) and have decided to purchase the components and build the server ourself.
Robert, what will you do when there is a hardware failure? Will you also purchase some extra parts to keep at the data center or are you going to place the server in a datacenter that is local to you? This is an issue we've thought of before... and we decided that building a server is economical but when you think of having extra ram, hard drive, and motherboard as a backup it's not that economical anymore.
Spencer
09-25-03, 06:33 AM
Originally posted by beley:
Robert, what will you do when there is a hardware failure? Will you also purchase some extra parts to keep at the data center or are you going to place the server in a datacenter that is local to you? This is an issue we've thought of before... and we decided that building a server is economical but when you think of having extra ram, hard drive, and motherboard as a backup it's not that economical anymore. That's why Dell rules. They're expensive as hell, but they'll replace anything.
Build it yourself or get one with full supptr ie. Dell.
Two extremes, imo the latter is the best option to go.
We almost always go for IBM. Expensive...YES - but full support as well as redundant, hot swap fans on the 1U boxes make it worth while
Spencer
09-25-03, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by Andrew:
We almost always go for IBM. Expensive...YES - but full support as well as redundant, hot swap fans on the 1U boxes make it worth while I'm assuming you compared IBM to Dell, and when I did this I came out with Dell being better. Why did you go with IBM?
Originally posted by Olternit:
I'm assuming you compared IBM to Dell, and when I did this I came out with Dell being better. Why did you go with IBM?
Hi Olternit,
Good question. We used several criteria when making our decision (in order of importance):
Support
Standardization of componants (a machine you order today will have the same componants as one you order next week)
Remote Manageability Capabilities (Dells standard offering is no where near the IBM director software that comes free with every server)
Redundancy of componants (particularly fans, power supplies)
IBM sells Dell all of their older technology
Brand (IBM vs Dell) - this may be wrong, but we just have the perception that IBM is superior
Let me know what criteria you used to determine Dell was the better choice - we could def save money with Dell and would be interested in doing so if the solution is a better fit for our business.
Velostream
11-04-03, 12:29 AM
Out of curiousity, where do you purchase your server supplies for those who build them? Do you build 1Us?
NEXCS-Chris
11-18-03, 03:08 AM
I haven't seen them mentioned yet, so I'll put in a plug for QSol (http://qsol.com).
We've been getting servers from qsol.com for a while now and they are great. They are more expensive than most (except the big names) but have very good service/support, which we've used on more than 1 occasion. Talk to Joe and he'll take care of you.
Chris
Originally posted by beley:
Robert, what will you do when there is a hardware failure? Will you also purchase some extra parts to keep at the data center or are you going to place the server in a datacenter that is local to you? This is an issue we've thought of before... and we decided that building a server is economical but when you think of having extra ram, hard drive, and motherboard as a backup it's not that economical anymore.
Kind of old thread and musta missed you reply. No the datacenter is in Austin, Texas where my system administrator is. Should there be any hardware failure, it will be his responsbility to quickly determine the issue and find a replacement (temporary or permanently).
ats-tech
11-18-03, 04:54 AM
Originally posted by dynamicnet:
Greetings:
HP for Compaq DL's 320, 360, 380.
We are also looking into SuperMicro.
Thank you.
The DL380's are nice machines. At the office we run about 15 of them. Rock solid. (not witholding the a HD going bad every so often)
Wel after reading this because im thinking of making the move, i went to a posted link..
featuredservers (http://featuredservers.com)
and i wonder is this hardware you get to keep? and the leasing is that also keeps once paid?
the server is yours to keep once you purchase it.
octagonhost
01-04-04, 06:23 PM
i am also looking for the cheapet possible server- it is fine if it has celeron ect. but it needs at least 2.0 ghz and 256mb and a windows operating system (or could someone tell me how to connect to the internet with linux ect.) below $450.00
octagonhost
01-04-04, 06:25 PM
the server doesn't need to be 1u or 2u ect.i got space it can be a damn tower....
elkhost
01-13-04, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by jbiz718:
Where do you guys get servers from.
Joe
Hi,
I got mine from Rackshack.
Elkhost
Chicken
01-14-04, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by octagonhost:
i am also looking for the cheapet possible server- it is fine if it has celeron ect. but it needs at least 2.0 ghz and 256mb and a windows operating system (or could someone tell me how to connect to the internet with linux ect.) below $450.00
It's cheap, but you might want to check out http://www.colomachine.com -they uaually have a couple of servers for under $450 (1U) though at the moment they seem to be out of them. For $400, you can't go too wrong, and they have some inexpensive beefier machines as well (that people have gotten and told me are great). I've never ordered from them personally, ths is just what I've been told by others.
octagonhost
01-18-04, 06:07 AM
thanks - :D -
we do supermicro only for intel machines, we buy from a distie.
paul
I like those coolkmachines.com servers... I love the thin look. I was wondering, if i took their $449 server, the CM-55, how well would that run off a DSL connection?? LOL.. cause i want a sevrer, and i dont have anything better than DSL. Im sure that i could get a better connection when i get a jopb, but now, im in college and my hosting company is just starting...
So, would it be enough to run 2 or 3 sites off a DSL connection? would the throughput be acceptable? Seriously, i am a noob when it comes to servers, but i am a computer freak, so dont worry about laughing at my question. :P
Chicken
03-01-04, 02:20 PM
A colomachines server would run fine off a DSL connection, assuming your provider permits you to run servers off your DSL connection (which many don't). A DSL connection is enough to run 2-3 sites, until it isn't. There's no magic forula, just a data speed threshhold which, when crossed, results in slow serving (not to mention non-redundancy if the line goes down).
Ahh... Chicken, are you the owner? i like these forums.... Anyways, thanks for your inpout here, and the other threads, your helping me alot.... Nowim not going to run sites off DSL... Imma run my server (as im sure you know of from the other thread)... And my ISP does let us run servers.... We get unlimited upload/download, and stuffs... Some areas they dont care, as long as they stay within like 10 GB.... My friend lkives 2 or 3 cities over and has a limit, but i dont....
Chicken
03-01-04, 04:20 PM
Yes sir, and glad you like it :D
I used to run sites off of a 64Kbps colo connection (OK, so it was burstable, but...) -these tiny sites never went above that need, and it works, for as long as it does but eventually as sites grow, it won't. I once ran some test sites off errr... I think it was a dailup connection, and the few users who tested the pages didn't notice. Again, it's fine for small stuff. I'm not sure what you have in mind, but aside from the connection being a bit on the non-redundant and iffy side, it does work OK. :D
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.