quiet, good system, low heat
I need to replace a dell 2.8 512M ultra slim.
It is quiet but runs hot.
I have dell sc 420 poweredge, also runs pretty hot.
The poweredge 2600s servers are loud.
The poweredge 1850 rack servers are like airplane engines.
Can someone recommend a reliable system that doesn't throw enough heat to cook my breakfast and isn't so loud as to cause me to need ear protection. This is ridiculous.
-gsgi
It is quiet but runs hot.
I have dell sc 420 poweredge, also runs pretty hot.
The poweredge 2600s servers are loud.
The poweredge 1850 rack servers are like airplane engines.
Can someone recommend a reliable system that doesn't throw enough heat to cook my breakfast and isn't so loud as to cause me to need ear protection. This is ridiculous.
-gsgi
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
I read that the ibms are loud and that the 2100 from sun has usb problems among other issues.
I am trying to keep machine cost to between 2 and 3k. 2k for the single HD units and 3k for the raid units with more HDs.
I was once under the impression that raid 5 with 3 or more drives would continue to boot and run even if 1 of the drives failed,
and that in a mirrored senario, the data was safe, but if the boot drived died, the system would not boot until you flipped
the "boot" drive to the 2nd disk, and maybe broke the mirror. (that sound suspiciously like software raid.)
Anyway, that goes back to like 1995. I also read in Storage on EE that SCSI raid 5 with > 3 disks is *still* going to beat SATA.
In throughput; I think they we saying that the SCSI backplane can move (or caches) more data than a SATA raid controller.
This was last year, perhaps before SATA went 10k. Do we know that SATA raid will run as well as and for as long as SCSI raid?
How about a small SAN - any of you using one?
Rindi: & nobus: Thanks for the info! What do you do to keep heat down?