I need to run 5 Counter-Strike: Source servers with the following setups:
A. 40slots 66tick.
B. 30slots 66tick.
C. 30slots 66tick.
D. 22 slots 100 tick.
E. 22 slots 100 tick.
What type of cpu and how much ram do you think I would need to run these?

Get linux since its more stable. ALOT OF RAM and ALOT OF CPU. That's all i can say.

That's quite a lot for a single server, I'd say Quad Core, 8GB ram to be sure, minimum. What OS do you plan on running, any control panel?

If I were you I wouldn't go with less than 10K RPM drivers for this number of servers.

To put in perspective, I used to run 4 Enemy Territory servers (2x 30slots and 2x34slots) off of 1 box (Core2 Xeon, dont remember the exact speed, 4GB ram) and it was handling it just fine. Also make sure you get a provider with Internap or Mzima to have your pings in check.

You would at the very least require a quad core with 4gb of ram and nothing less than a 10k drive.
Those 100tic servers are going to eat your resources.

To put in perspective, I used to run 4 Enemy Territory servers (2x 30slots and 2x34slots) off of 1 box (Core2 Xeon, dont remember the exact speed, 4GB ram) and it was handling it just fine. Also make sure you get a provider with Internap or Mzima to have your pings in check.
I am sure enemy territory uses way less resources than CSS server.
For i have in my lifetime , set up , BF2, css, enemy territory , SA, MTA , Quake 3 , COD , COD UO, Emulinker etc.. game servers, so can say what kind of resources one would use.
CSS i am sure is going to have some extra mods on it too ?
What here matters is not only good hardware, but a kickass uplink speeds of the server . 1000mbps minimum would be advised.
Cheers

1000mbps minimum would be advised.
Wow?.... Why would you want a 1000mbps uplink, other than attracting massive ddos attacks? The number of players that need to download new maps just can't be worth the costs and risk of a 1000mbps uplink... :crazy:

Wow?.... Why would you want a 1000mbps uplink, other than attracting massive ddos attacks? The number of players that need to download new maps just can't be worth the costs and risk of a 1000mbps uplink... :crazy:
Hehe 100 mbits means no ddos ? i dunno 1000mbps is not that expensive these days a difference of mere 10 dollars at softlayer :blush: . So why not ? If one worries about ddos attacks why not just go with 10mbit/s unmetered instead ? :blush:
I am sure OP will not want to spend extra bucks to get another box for maps downloads. And map downloads can do bw drain and possible lag for other players in another game on same server :blush: .
But thats just me, for lag = players disconnecting and not coming back :eek: for lots of other CSS boxes exists.

Wow?.... Why would you want a 1000mbps uplink, other than attracting massive ddos attacks? The number of players that need to download new maps just can't be worth the costs and risk of a 1000mbps uplink... :crazy:
Actually, if these any are popular fun pubs, I can see there easily being 100-150+ simultaneous file downloaders. Sometimes one map can contain maybe a hundred textures/sounds/mapfiles/etc.

If you're running CS Source servers, just make the download files (maps, sounds) on a different server. That'll save you from the 1000mbps link and the resources you need on the gaming server.

I would go ahead and perhaps get 2 servers and do what Otto said above. It would save you from having to get so much cpu and ram and also from having to get 1000mbps link.

Moved > Specialty Hosting and Markets.

I have had some success running either dual 10k , scsi, or sas drives at RAID 0. I know that spposedly you're an idiot if you run hosting stuff at RAID 0, but there are no DB's to mess with and if a drive dies then you just slap in, reload and carry an image on another server for quick setup.core 2 quad 6600 had about 75% cpu recources eaten up with 200MB out of 8GB of RAM and xeon did a bit better with about 50% load and 600MB of 8GB RAM with the same # of servers as you but slightly different specs across the board. SO it's definately do-able.