Results 1 to 22 of 22
Thread: Colo vs Dedicated Server
-
08-09-2012, 12:53 AM #1Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 75
Colo vs Dedicated Server
How do you decide to colo your own server vs rent one from a dedicated server provider? Understanding that I am only looking to host 1 server.
Seems the cost to rent 1U of space is about the same as renting a dedicated server, but without the cost of purchasing the hardware.
What the the pros/cons of colo vs dedicated?
-
08-09-2012, 01:00 AM #2Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Location
- Ohio
- Posts
- 393
Pros of collocating is that you own the hardware, you can get much better collocating costs as well, and is much cheaper in the long term. Cons are that when your hardware fails, you have to pay to have it fixed. Parts + remote hands.
Pros of having a dedicated server is that you don't have to worry about expensive hardware replacement costs if anything fails. Cons are it is normally more expensive monthly with barely any buydowns.
-
08-09-2012, 01:27 AM #3Attack The Day
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Location
- NYC
- Posts
- 835
I would say that with colocation you will be looking at more responsibility and up front cost. When colocating a server you will need to pay to buy the server, pay every month to colocate the server in a datacenter, for spare parts in case any parts die, and remote hands if needed.
With a dedicated server you just need to worry about paying the bill to the provider. Everything is covered by the provider (well should be at least).
For a single server I would recommend just renting one from a provider unless you are looking for a complex setup.NewYorkCityServers.com - Specializing In Dedicated Servers and Financial Hosting
True Enterprise Service, Tier 3 Manhattan Datacenter, 100+ Gbps Network, 100% Uptime Guarantee, 24x7 Support - Email, Tickets, Phone and Live Chat
Bandwidth Graphs, Remote Power Control, Automated OS Re-installs, Secured IPMI+KVM Included With Every Server
-
08-09-2012, 09:10 AM #4WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Posts
- 119
From the financial perspective for 1 server:
more expensive hardware and less b/w usage (enterprise email server) go Colo
less expensive hardware and b/w hungry application (download forum or something like that) go dedicated.
-
08-09-2012, 09:35 AM #5Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- Ten1/0/2
- Posts
- 2,529
If you have tried several dedi providers and never been totally satisfied, go colo
Dedicated if you do not plan on keeping the server for at least 18 months.
Co-Lo if you know you will be keeping the server for more than 18 mths and that the server will still do what you require of it in 2-3 years time.CPanel Shared and Reseller Hosting, OpenVZ VPS Hosting. West Coast (LA) Servers and Nodes
Running Linux since 1.0.8 Kernel!
Providing Internet Services since 1995 and Hosting Since 2004
-
08-09-2012, 09:50 AM #6Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- BC, Canada
- Posts
- 776
I prefer to colo my own gear, and doing it locally. I know exactly what is in the server, and I will often stress test the gear before I install it. If anything goes wrong I just hop in my car and drive to the datacenter.
|| Higher Intellect || Half a million documents and climbing.
|| OMGWTFBBQ || Nothing of value here.
-
08-09-2012, 10:08 AM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Location
- Alabama
- Posts
- 1,449
From my experience, the big advantage to colo is the quality of hardware. You know exactly what you have. I've found many of the low-cost dedicated providers, and even many high-end dedicated providers will use very low quality hardware, particularly disk drives, so they tend to fail a lot.
As also mentioned, when looking for only a single server you will not see much cost savings by choosing colo, but if you expand to multiple servers, the more you add, the more savings you'll see.
-
08-09-2012, 02:19 PM #8Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 23
Depending on your objectives, there are a lot of variables which could help your decision making process. Like everyone else said, there are a lot more personal involvement/cost with colo.
If the objective is to just have a server online, I'd go ahead and get a server from Hurricane Electric. They generally charge you a one time $350 for the server and only $150 MRC for a 100 Mbps connection. Now you don't have to worry about other potential issues that may arise. Good thing about that is you don't pay for the server any more, on the downside you don't own the server even though you paid $350.
I've got plenty of servers structured this way and couldn't be happier! Support is just outstanding.
-
08-10-2012, 12:03 AM #9Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Posts
- 75
Where can I find this server from Hurricane Electric?
-
08-10-2012, 02:10 AM #10Attack The Day
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Location
- NYC
- Posts
- 835
You can request a quote here for the configuration you need: http://he.net/cgi-bin/dedicated_quote
NewYorkCityServers.com - Specializing In Dedicated Servers and Financial Hosting
True Enterprise Service, Tier 3 Manhattan Datacenter, 100+ Gbps Network, 100% Uptime Guarantee, 24x7 Support - Email, Tickets, Phone and Live Chat
Bandwidth Graphs, Remote Power Control, Automated OS Re-installs, Secured IPMI+KVM Included With Every Server
-
08-10-2012, 09:58 AM #11Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 23
-
08-10-2012, 12:10 PM #12Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Ashburn, Virginia
- Posts
- 653
In the end, it always comes down to your specific needs and requirements.
LionLink Networks
Ashburn Data Center Colocation, Infrastructure Solutions, and Premium Optimized Connectivity
Infrastructure and Colocation Solutions For All Sizes - Managed Services - Dedicated Servers - Data Center Consulting - Now POP'd @ RagingWire! | www.lionlink.net | sales@lionlink.net | (844) DATA-CENTER | Ashburn Colocation
-
08-13-2012, 03:16 PM #13Disabled
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
- Location
- England and Wales
- Posts
- 31
It purely depensd on where you are going to colocate..
I believe US colocations are too expensive if we want to compare them with dedicated servers offers (by mean of bandwidth)
unlike Europeans who might offer great bandwidth, but power is another factor you will need to take into account before thinking about Europe..
In my opinion, it also depends on the work you are going to do..
Virtualisation, hosting, game server?
A friend of mine said when you see dedicated servers offer starting from teens of euros, thinking about colocation is something incompetetive pricewise..
Good luck though
-
08-14-2012, 01:59 AM #14Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Virginia
- Posts
- 1,314
Yup. If it's only one server without anything fancy, you'll be fine with a dedicated.
If you're doing something totally unique with hardware or networking, you might look to colo.
If you thinking long-term with at least a couple of servers, then I would definitely suggest colocating. Then again, there are downsides as well.
Comparing apples and oranges won't work. Use the right fruit for the job (or craving? It's late ).
-
08-14-2012, 08:39 PM #15WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Posts
- 165
For example, we use Colo over dedicated because our servers are someone special in that they have hardware raid cards and 12 disks in a two u supermicro chassis. Weve gotten many quotes for many providers and for a dedicated server with these specs, it always ends up being very expensive to the point where after 1.5 years Colo comes out cheaper including initial costs. (usually 2-400mbit bw also per server/colo)
Also with Colo you need a factor in high-quality shipping from your location to the Colo, for 2 U server this normally ends up costing d $150-$200 and we request that the entire package is double boxed with bubble wrap or peanuts in between the double boxes. (from USA to USA..intraUSA destination or source for shipping doesn't seen to change the shipping cost much, so have it packed very well)
-
08-14-2012, 11:12 PM #16WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV
- Posts
- 101
Whether you are talking one server or 100, the "do it yourself" path is almost always cheaper if you have the experience and time to invest; however, the question becomes is it worth it to you to do the work or is your time better spent elsewhere, say on sales and marketing? Is it more efficient to have a service provider do it as opposed to hiring an engineer? Most people underestimate the cost of doing it themselves, and when you are talking a single server, you are only going to save pennies, so what's your time worth and what's the trade off? It's a simple cost assessment.
Everett Thompson, CEO - "Largest list of data centers on the planet." Strategy, Design, Brokerage, Finance
US Data Center List
International Data Center List
-
08-14-2012, 11:36 PM #17WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Posts
- 132
I'd have to say before I got in the business I was a client and my decision was weighed between upfront costs of buying a server, shipping, setup and remote hands costs to save on the MRC as opposed to a higher MRC.
Another thing is privacy. If you rent a dedicated server you don't own hardware. If a drive fails they'll replace it but who knows what they'll do with the drive or the information on it. Lots of people don't care but its something to consider.
-
08-15-2012, 09:05 PM #18Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- Canada
- Posts
- 33
if you are just hosting some regular site, use dedicated server. if you need more crontrol on data or hardware, use colocation
-
08-16-2012, 12:06 AM #19New Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 3
For one server, go with dedicated, unless you need a high-spec/odd config.
-
08-16-2012, 11:37 PM #20Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Posts
- 14
Dedicated 100%. Its better is almost every scenario. If you only use it short term (you never know) then nothing lost as you didn’t invest in the equipment. If you use it long term you can upgrade whenever you need and don’t lose money in the outdated or upgrading hardware. If the hardware has a problem it’s not your problem. I mean the only reason you buy a house is it will be worth something later to sell. Not the case with a server as it will be worth nothing in 6 months – 1 year.
-
08-16-2012, 11:41 PM #21Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Virginia
- Posts
- 1,314
-
08-17-2012, 08:06 AM #22Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 9
Why not try Cloud!
Similar Threads
-
dedicated server +colo ?
By tynman in forum Dedicated ServerReplies: 4Last Post: 09-30-2010, 03:01 AM -
Colo vs dedicated server
By Michael123 in forum Colocation, Data Centers, IP Space and NetworksReplies: 6Last Post: 12-15-2004, 01:51 PM -
Colo vs Dedicated Server
By eil1 in forum Colocation, Data Centers, IP Space and NetworksReplies: 10Last Post: 05-26-2004, 06:04 PM