Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1

    Colocation VS Dedicated

    I'm just curious why many provider give colocation and dedicated server with same price or just little bit different.

    Dedicated should be more expensive because they rent the server and space on the rack.

    Do you have any answer for it?

  2. #2

    The colo should be cheaper because you buy the hardware.

    Regards - Windows Web hosting information and resources.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Wilkes-Barre, PA
    First off, a $800 server is only $17/month over 4 years. The largest cost factors in a datacenter are power and labor.

    Generally, it's a larger pain for the provider to setup and manage colo clients. The manpower costs of dealing with colo clients is just as much as buying the server. A lot of time, there are hidden expenses along the way that the colo client doesn't account for that the DC might just absorb.

    I'd much rather manage a rack of 42 servers that I own than 42 individual colo clients servers in the same rack.
    Last edited by Encrypted; 11-08-2013 at 01:33 AM.
    NEPA Fiber
    AS 394868 - Wilkes-Barre, PA
    █ Fiber Internet, Dedicated Servers, Colocation, Cloud
    100% Uptime SLA - 24/7/365 Support

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    The most expensive part of both services is the professional IT environment: power, cooling, backup power, blended internet.

    It depends on how many U you purchase when comparing the price. If you're just looking for a couple U, you don't achieve any economies of scale using their environment. Normally, you have to purchase at least a half rack to start saving in colo vs dedicated. This break even is from the client's perspective, BTW.

  5. #5
    Colocation is not the same as renting dedicated server. Please check this: it might help you.

  6. #6
    There are many variables that go into pricing for both colo and dedicated. All specs being equal, your monthly bill on colocation will usually be cheaper since you are only paying for power & pipe rather than power, pipe and hardware. That being said, there are plenty of circumstances where colo can cost more per month.

    Example 1- You want a server with unmetered bandwidth. The way bandwidth is billed with colo is often at 95th percentile and each Mbps costs anywhere from $1-$65+ depending on which data center you are looking at. I can assure you that you can rent a dedicated with 100Mbps or 1Gbps unmetered for less than $65 per Mbps usage.

    Example 2- You want to colo some white box tower server that takes up 4U of space. Even though it has the same guts as a 1U server you can rent for $99 it may cost you more to colo because it takes up more real estate in the data center.
    Steve Eschweiler- Hivelocity- Director of Operations
    Bare Metal Servers. Colocation. Private Cloud.
    Customers in over 130 countries. Privately owned and operated data centers.
    Limited Supply Outlet Server Specials

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Dhaka, Bangladesh.
    renting server is better than colo i think. colo have so many xtra problems.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Portugal - My Paradise
    Colo is better is you have a POWER SERVER.
    Renting a server is better if you have a low end.
    ▄▀▄ Offshore Dedicated Servers
    ▄▀▄ Keep your privacy!
    ▄▀▄ Europe Servers with DDoS Protection
    ▄▀▄ / [email protected] / SKYPE:

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    It is best to Rent a dedicated server instead of COLO, colo have some dis-advantages.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Encrypted View Post
    First off, a $800 server is only $17/month over 4 years. The largest cost factors in a datacenter are power and labor. Generally, it's a larger pain for the provider to setup and manage colo clients. The manpower costs of dealing with colo clients is just as much as buying the server.
    Well I'd not enter into arguments as you are not wrong . Just to add that server hardware depreciates for less than 4 years... at least different providers have different business models. AS far s for the remote hands and other management work, Colocation customers pay for this, while the Dedicated don't. When it comes to Dedicated Hosting, the provider must virtually double the costs in order to keep replacement parts on stock in case of faulty hardware component... or just to replace a server. So I think that it is not reasonable to offer dedicated servers at a level close to the cost of Colocation. When a company sends Dedicated servers, it has more liabilities by TOS/SLA.
    Host Color Cloud Servers & Dedicated Hosting & European Infrastructure Hosting
    U.S. Data center 90 miles from Chicago
    Network ★ AS46873 Level 3, Cogent, Hurricane Electric,, Midwest Peering
    24/7 Support 1-574-367-2393; Skype: HostColor

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Walnut, CA
    for dedicated servers rental, you're renting a machine individually to use; you do not own these machines. While co-location, you're renting the space (rack, circuit, network, etc.) to place your own machines.

    co-location you're looking at a few hundreds to over a thousand a month on rental alone, with no servers. co-location will save you on cost if you have; or am yourself, a professional IT that can take good care of your servers.
    :::Psychz Networks:::
    24/7 On-Site Support - Multi-Homed Network -
    ★Los Angeles, CA Premium Network & Dedicated Servers
    ★DDoS Protection Included with every server

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    depends what your trying to do, and how deep is your pockets.

    need speed then is best build up your server and go colo, a good dedicated server with good pipe will cost you

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-07-2009, 07:05 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-02-2009, 09:10 AM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-12-2006, 05:45 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-13-2005, 11:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts