Server Specs

macally

macally

macally

Associate
Joined
9 Aug 2011
Posts
137
Hi all,

I've currently got a HP ML110 G6 Tower Server with a Quad Core Xeon X3430 2.4GHz processor in it. It's currently only got 3GB Ram in it and a 1TB hard drive but I'm looking at the possibility of getting a used rackmount server as an upgrade and could use some advice.

Having looked around, I can get the following rackmount servers:

1) IBM X3650 with dual E5440 2.8GHz Quad Core Xeons, 16GB DDR2 Ram (PC2-5300F ECC)
2) HP SE1102 with dual L5420 2.5GHz Quad Core Xeons, 24GB DDR2 Ram (PC2-5300F ECC)

Would either of these offer better performance than the HP ML110 G6 even though the processors are older?

I am looking to use the server for either (undecided at present) running Windows Server 2012 Essentials or FreeNAS.
 
According to http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php (which I use religiously to check whether an upgrade is worthwhile from the CPU point of view):

Intel Xeon X3430 @ 2.40GHz 3187
[Dual CPU] Intel Xeon E5440 @ 2.83GHz 7562
[Dual CPU] Intel Xeon L5420 @ 2.50GHz 6662

So the dual E5440 will give you slightly more than twice the processing power of the X3430. Bear in mind my Dell Latitude 6430U with Core i7-3687U (which is an ultra-low power CPU) has a PassMark score of 4359, so your alternatives are not all that powerful to begin with, and probably consume a LOT of power and generate a lot of noise and heat.

If all you want is a file server, then processing power is not the thing. You would be much better off with an HP MicroServer N54L, currently £79.95 after £100 cashback from HP (which expires at the end of June). For reference, this has a PassMark score of 1345.
 
Let me add that I have a MicroServer from two years ago, which is the N36L model, with a much lower PassMark score of 779, and with 2 GB of RAM, it runs Windows Server 2012 like a dream (booting off a 64 GB SSD). I couldn't be happier with it.
 
One more thing (just to round out my thoughts), the most powerful CPU currently on the CPU Benchmark site is this one:

Intel Xeon E5-2690 @ 2.90GHz 14498

Retail price of almost $2000 for the CPU, and it has 8 cores and 20 MB of L3 cache; a laptop CPU will generally have 2 cores, and between 1 and 4 MB of L3 cache, and a high-end desktop CPU will have 4 cores, and 4 - 8 MB of L3 cache.
 
Hi Rotor,

Thanks for your replies.

It's interesting to see the comparisons on CPUBenchmark so thanks for that.

I have asked the supplier about how much noise each server generates and they have not been very forthcoming with answers so still waiting on that. Noise would be a concern as we are in a one room office (albeit a big room) but the last thing we want is a noisy machine in the corner.

My main criteria is to get the best bang for buck and something that will be reliable. We have basically been offered £300 for our HP ML110 G6. The HP Server above is £300 and the IBM one is £250 so quite good with the amount of ram, etc and considering the performance boost.

I do like the look of the Microserver's (I used to have the N36L) and I am considering getting one as an iTunes server box for home but couldn't really rely on one for work.
 
My ML110 G7 has this processor:
Intel Xeon E3-1220 @ 3.10GHz 6256

Pretty powerful and it is very quiet. Not sure if they are still available though?

I *definitely* would not buy a rack-mount server for an office; they are extremely noisy, and it is a high-pitched noise that gets annoying very quickly.
 
Are all rackmount servers loud? Kinda disappointing if they are.

Can't get hold of ML110 G7's anymore and the G8's are way out of my price range
 
Yes*, they are optimised for high airflow in a hostile environment with lots of other servers. The shape of a rack-mount server (long and flat like a pizza box), means it requires very powerful fans to push the air through at high speed.

* Maybe not *all* (I'm only putting this here because some members of the forum don't like it when I generalise), but for all intents and purposes, all.
 
I think your generalisation is a reasonable one, rotor. I have never come across a rackmount server that didn't howl like a banshee. They're especially loud when you put them under a high load, as the fans will spin up to dissipate the additional heat.
 
Thanks for the replies. Ok, we'll give rackmount servers a miss :)

Will a Microserver be capable of working in a business environment? We're all Mac users so will probably just use it with FreeNas or something similar but obviously it needs to be reliable.
 
Saundie said:
What sort of workload will you demand from it? Is it just going to be a file and print server?
Click to expand...

Yeah, the most taxing thing it'll be used for will be our accounts database (we use Quickbooks Pro 2013). The other thing it's going to be used for will be FTP backups of our web server. We're undecided whether to use Windows Server 2012 Essentials or something like FreeNas at the moment.
 
rotor said:
One more thing (just to round out my thoughts), the most powerful CPU currently on the CPU Benchmark site is this one:

Intel Xeon E5-2690 @ 2.90GHz 14498

Retail price of almost $2000 for the CPU, and it has 8 cores and 20 MB of L3 cache; a laptop CPU will generally have 2 cores, and between 1 and 4 MB of L3 cache, and a high-end desktop CPU will have 4 cores, and 4 - 8 MB of L3 cache.
Click to expand...

We have a ton of these CPUs at work. They are insanely awesome, they don't half pump out some heat though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom