Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1

    Which Server Spec Is Better?

    Hi All,

    I'm currently in dilemma to choose from 2 servers with different specs. I hope to get experienced opinions from you all so that my decision would be a little easier.

    Here goes the 2 servers :

    1.
    DUAL Intel Single-Core XEON, 2x (2.8Ghz, 512KB L2)
    2GB DDR2 RAM
    2 x 250GB SATA HDD in Hardware Raid1
    2000GB Bandwidth on a 100Mbit port
    CentOS4
    $177/month

    2.
    Single Intel Core2Duo E4500, (2.2Ghz, 2M shared L2 Cache)
    2GB DDR2 RAM
    2x 120GB SATAII HDD in Hardware Raid1
    3300GB 10MB Unmetered Bandwidth
    CentOS4
    $110/month + $110 Setup

    My doubts are :

    1. Which package is better cost wise in long term?
    2. Which package is better spec wise?

    What do you think?

    Thanks for reading.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    314
    Well it really depends what your plans are for the machine? The recommendation either way would have to be based on the type of motherboard they are using, and what's the max upgrades it can handle in terms of CPU & RAM. That way, if you had to get better performance or required more resources from the machine, you would be able to upgrade the server rather then moving to a different physical server package all-together.

    Others may have a differing opinion, but that is perhaps how I would see it.

    Hope it helps.

    All the best.
    Intellitech I.T. Solutions Ltd.
    Intellitech Hosting - Dedicated Servers in Atlanta, Tampa, Dallas, Washington, Seattle (USA), London (UK) & EU
    Server Load Balancing, Hardware Firewalls, MPLS Connectivity

  3. #3
    So, according to your view I would assume server 2 is better upgradeable wise because it has newer CPU then server 1, right?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,078
    From my personal opinion and experience I would reccomend the Core2Duo E4500 as theres the power of 2 cores coming from 1 proccessor instead of having to utilize 2 physical single core servers. The Core2 is also a newer chip. Also having an unmetered 10mbit port means you dont have to worry about running up overages as it just wont happen.

    Also the Core2Duo has more cache and this will also generally make it more effecient at handling applications/websites etc.

    This is my personal opinion but id reccomend the Core2Duo.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    314
    Quote Originally Posted by gzola View Post
    So, according to your view I would assume server 2 is better upgradeable wise because it has newer CPU then server 1, right?
    From a CPU perspective Yes, but you have to check with the provider, what the Motherboard can support (in case you need to upgrade it in the future)
    Intellitech I.T. Solutions Ltd.
    Intellitech Hosting - Dedicated Servers in Atlanta, Tampa, Dallas, Washington, Seattle (USA), London (UK) & EU
    Server Load Balancing, Hardware Firewalls, MPLS Connectivity

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,403
    There are not much upgrade options for server# 1 cause it is very old. While server#2 is much faster and probably upgradeable to Quad-Cores. So it definitely server#2 is better, cheaper for the long term!
    Tommy Tran - tommy @ vinax.net ::: VINAX, LLC ::: http://vinax.net ::: Since 2004
    Premium Dedicated Servers and Colocation in downtown Chicago (350 E. Cermak Rd)
    Premium Bandwidth, 100% Network & Power Uptime SLA, 24/7 Prompt Tech Support

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Jose, CA.
    Posts
    1,622
    Can option #1 use DDR2 memory? All of mine are DDR.

    2000GB Burstable, vs 10Mbps unmetered is a more important difference only you can decide on tho.
    Daved @ Lightwave Networking, LLC.
    AS1426 https:/www.lightwave.net
    Primary Bandwidth: EGIHosting (NLayer, NTT, HE, Cogent)
    Xen PV VPS Hosting

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Lightwave View Post
    Can option #1 use DDR2 memory? All of mine are DDR.
    The host quoted me DDR2 memory. By the way, how do I check?

  9. #9
    I get the feeling that server option one is ?perhaps? two servers because the specs use two single cores- which i've never seen before in a single server. I could be wrong. If right, that means that the other specs would be spit also, which could be better if you want redundancy and better chance of uptime but would be bad if you want performance. It depends if both options are really each "single" servers...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kusadasi, Turkey
    Posts
    3,273
    I would choose the second server, both CPU and HDD are better. And much cheaper!

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Harzem View Post
    I would choose the second server, both CPU and HDD are better. And much cheaper!
    What if the company is rather young in dedicated server business?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kusadasi, Turkey
    Posts
    3,273
    Quote Originally Posted by gzola View Post
    What if the company is rather young in dedicated server business?
    If "what if"s are considered, noone can make a suggestion. We are making suggestions based on the given information.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,403
    How long have they been in business? By looking at the server configs and the pricing, they are trying to have you pay $110 setup.
    Tommy Tran - tommy @ vinax.net ::: VINAX, LLC ::: http://vinax.net ::: Since 2004
    Premium Dedicated Servers and Colocation in downtown Chicago (350 E. Cermak Rd)
    Premium Bandwidth, 100% Network & Power Uptime SLA, 24/7 Prompt Tech Support

  14. #14
    3-4 months old, tommy.

    Yes, I do agree the $110 is more like a setup cost too.

Posting Permissions

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