Quote:
Originally Posted by borked
It's friday evening for me and I'm in a mischievous mood.... I'm not at all selling this, just saying what can be gotten. So no, I'm not hijacking.
|
Regardless, it's in poor taste.
Quote:
Originally Posted by borked
Ehm, that would be two x quad dual core processors, yes like you said, dual quad dual core. Was that difficult, you figured it out?
|
I don't claim to be the most knowledgeable about anything so I'll just come right out and say that this still doesn't really make sense. Are you saying there are two physical sockets, each of which are actually octocores, such as the Beckton series L7555 or X7550? If so, your way of wording it is still very cryptic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by borked
These are 7200 NLSAS drives. In fact let's cut to the chase and eliminate your other points trying to negate the server - they are Dell Powervault MD3200 servers.
|
Again, trying to keep it humble here and not assume too much, but I believed the PV MD3200 series is actually a DAS unit, not a standalone server. So I emailed my Dell rep who wrote me back - verbatim:
==
Das…..but two controllers on the unit that include ( raid, memory, battery,proc). 8 ports….4 redundant. The md3200i is considered an entry level San ( Iscsi version…connect through a switch and not directly to servers)
==
This was in response to me asking:
==
Is this a DAS or a real server? Does it take CPU's and RAM?
==
Again, I'm not assuming anything here, but my feedback from my Dell rep doesn't match up with your specs+model number, and I have deployed PowerVault units before and in my experience they again were usually DAS units using external SCSI back to a main server - usually a PowerEdge.
Furthermore, 1TB NLSAS drives are still every expensive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by borked
10gbs IS important, when you have a private LAN infrastructure... *that* is the importance.
Well, it is 128Mbs w/ $18/mbs overage 
And if you think it's crap bandwidth, give me a server in eg San Diego or New York, and I guarantee I can max out your connection on a download from one of these servers in Paris. And the traceroute will show only 6-8 hops. Guaranteed quality bandwidth, since they have a DC dedicated to these high quality servers.
--edit, I'm wrong, it's 123Mbs burstable to 10Gbs. That clarifies it :P
Well, sorry to bring it to you, but this is from one of Europe's largest providers, so there goes your debunk. Unless of course, anything outside the US is second quality. |
So, 123mbps, burstable to 10gbps, with overages at $18/mbps? Did I read that right? You're paying for a 120mbps commit (which at a very very competitive price of $2/mbps is still $240 of the $400 you mentioned), but you need to be able to burst up to 81.3 times higher than that 123mbps? At the rate you mentioned, if you actually used even half of the 10gbps you can burst up to, you would be looking at an $87,000 bandwidth bill.
In conclusion, aside from my feelings that your comments in a thread where BP was merely citing his satisfaction with us, I do not see the economics of how such a server could be offered to you for such a price. Even if the bandwidth commit of 123mbps was only in at $1/mbps, you're still looking at eating $123/month out of your $400/month claim.
Furthermore, even if that was in place, you're claiming that the remaining $277/month is getting you a server that - from what I can tell - is a DAS unit (which is still a kickass machine, but it needs a real server to piggyback onto), and whose value would likely eclipse $20k. Even with the $4300 setup you mentioned, anyone can do the math on the ROI on such a deal. This does not even get into the value of the IP space.
So, as much as it is tempting to use more colorful expression once more as to your claim, I will just pass the ball back to you by saying that your statement does not add up to me, but please feel free to correct me if I am confused here.