I need help choosing a server for the workplace

[BruHawk]

Hey guys,
I've been put in charge of chossing a server for my company. We're a small company with just over 20 employee, and we're looking for a server to satisfy our needs and have the option to expand when the company grows. Our plans is to make a domain to host all programs and whatnot, so that's something to consider. I chose to talk to Dell since that's where we get most of our office computers from. They quotes me on a system with the following components:

PowerEdge 2900 III:
-Quad Core Xeon Processor E5405, 2x6MB Cache, 2.0Ghz, 1333MHz FSB
-4GB 667MHz, Dual Ranked Fully Buffered DIMMs
-3 x 146GB 15K RPM SAS 3Gbps 2.5in HotPlug Hard Drive
-PERC6/i SAS RAID Controller Internal With Battery
-Embedded Broadcom NetXtreme II5708 Gigabit Ethernet NIC
-RD1000, Internal SATA Drive Bay
-Non-Redundant Power Supply

Now, these question have come up on our end that Dell has not effectively answered:

1) If we are planning on having a domain, and expanding in the future, can we be assured that the CPU is fast enough to handle the load, or should we step it up to perhaps a 2.5 or 2.66GHz CPU?

2) The hard drives chosen by Dell are rahter low capacity with high performance (15K RPM). Right now we have a 250 GB "Common" drive thats is 160GB full. Should we go with maybe a higher capacity lower performance (Maybe 500GB 7200RPM) and then upgrade to a higher performance HS when the time comes to do so?

3) For the size of our company, and what we intend to do with our server, what version of Windows 2003 Server is recommended?

4) Are there any other issues that you can see with the system that we should consider?

 

[JackMDS]

You making mistake by taking a ?gamer hardware approach? to decide on a server. In most cases the variables that you mentioned are Not really so important.

The size of the Drives depends on the actual storage size that is needed they should not be part of performance equation.

Very High performance of server is a must only under very specific type of usage (like maintaining and searching huge SQL data base). Otherwise it is not really a big factor.

Windows 2003 SBS is the cheapest one and has a very good packing that includes exchange server and few other perks.

Windows SBS support up to 75 clients. However there sometimes a company might have less that 75 computers but have topology demands that are Not supported by Windows 2003.

You should log to Microsoft look for the comparison charts and make sure that Windows SBS support any other demands beside the numbers of computers.

http://www.microsoft.com/windo...r2003/sbs/default.mspx

http://www.microsoft.com/windo...tion/faq/prodinfo.mspx


P.S. it is hard to see any other issues because besides the mentioning of 20 computers you did not give any other information that can be translated to technological variables.

 

[accguy9009]

Get quotes for and HP and IBM as well. Whatever you do get the service plan. You can get same day four hour on site service for a reasonable cost. Down time is costly.

 

[jdkick]

I would suggest that you dig into any design/planning and server sizing/scaling documents re: the applications/services this server will support. While such documents don't necessarily reflect the real world 100%, it can be a good starting point.

Unless disk I/O performance is really important, i'd opt for 10k SAS drives and either save some $$$ or put that $$$ towards components that are targeted to your requirements. Since you have future growth in mind, understand your options to grow your storage capacity.

Is the non-redundant power supply acceptable? If the power supply fails how long can this server of offline? How long will it take to get a replacement? Depending on the answers to those questions, you may want to opt for redundant power supplies.

 

[BruHawk]

If we were to go with Windows 2003 SBS, we'd have to obviously purchase CAL's. If we initially only use the server as a storage space for files to be kept and backed up, do we still need CAL's to access that? Or do CAL's only become necessary when you set-up a domain?

In terms of the technological variables, what information were you referring to?

Thanks Again!

 

[BruHawk]

Originally posted by: jdkick
I would suggest that you dig into any design/planning and server sizing/scaling documents re: the applications/services this server will support. While such documents don't necessarily reflect the real world 100%, it can be a good starting point.

Unless disk I/O performance is really important, i'd opt for 10k SAS drives and either save some $$$ or put that $$$ towards components that are targeted to your requirements. Since you have future growth in mind, understand your options to grow your storage capacity.

Is the non-redundant power supply acceptable? If the power supply fails how long can this server of offline? How long will it take to get a replacement? Depending on the answers to those questions, you may want to opt for redundant power supplies.

This server doesn't need to be running all the time, if the power supply does fail, it's not a big deal if it is down until we get a replacement.

The only problem I see with 10K and 15K hard drives is that besides the cost being more, there's less storage space, which means obviously we'll to buy more. I'm looking at a 500GB 7200 Seagate HD. What are your tkaes on this?

Thanks again!

 

[ew915]

get the PE2950. they can take SATA drives so there is more flexibility. for 20-30 people you really dont need scsi drives. and if your not running a heavy DB you really dont need them. also dont get the perc raid card if possible, get the better option, there is a flaw with the perc cards, i just found this out recently as i bought the 2950 with the perc 6/i.

there is a major performance hit when you use certain settings on the raid array.

the 2950 has redundant power supplies too.

how much are you planning on spending? you can get a pretty nice configured box for around 6-7k.

also see if you can get a premier account with them, it will cut the cost about 30%. ask your salesperson.

 

[BruHawk]

Originally posted by: ew915
get the PE2950. they can take SATA drives so there is more flexibility. for 20-30 people you really dont need scsi drives. and if your not running a heavy DB you really dont need them. also dont get the perc raid card if possible, get the better option, there is a flaw with the perc cards, i just found this out recently as i bought the 2950 with the perc 6/i.

there is a major performance hit when you use certain settings on the raid array.

the 2950 has redundant power supplies too.

how much are you planning on spending? you can get a pretty nice configured box for around 6-7k.

also see if you can get a premier account with them, it will cut the cost about 30%. ask your salesperson.

What is the better option for the RIAD controller? We're looking at spending about in the price range of $6000-7000.

Can't the PE2900 III take SATA drives?

 

[BruHawk]

I have another question for you guys.

We're getting Windows 2003 Small Business Server Premium. Right now we are basically planning on having the server just act as a file server and not a domain. So we need CAL's for people to get onto the server and get files, or are CAL's only applicable when a domain is involved?

Thanks

 

[AdamDuritz99]

Originally posted by: ew915
also dont get the perc raid card if possible, get the better option, there is a flaw with the perc cards, i just found this out recently as i bought the 2950 with the perc 6/i.

What's the problem with the perc raid card? l'm also looking at a poweredge 2900 with a raid 5 setup using the perc card.

 

[JackMDS]

CAL is per device, and each device needs to have an account on the server regardless of the DC.

http://www.microsoft.com/windo...ion/faq/licensing.mspx

 

[RebateMonger]

For all Windows Servers, appropriate CALS are needed for Users or Devices accessing services on the Server (including file shares). It makes no difference whether you have a Domain or not.

SBS 2003 CALs, which include licenses for Windows Server, Exchange, and SQL (in case of SBS Premium) cost about $80 apiece, or about $15 per person per year if you figure you'll use the Server for five years (typical). If you don't get SBS and later decide you want either Exchange or SQL, you'll pay a LOT more for both software and CALs. Exchange CALs alone are about $50 apiece. "Plain" Server 2003 CALs are around $20, I believe. Exchange 2003 Standard Edition by itself is $1500.

You likely aren't going to want to turn the Server on and off. Things like email store defragmentation, backups, and other maintenance are usually run off-hours.