Stated reasons are standardization and cost. Based on that, the head of our IT department has decided it's a great idea to buy many used Dell 2950 servers for running VMs. I feel like this is a bad idea. We are already more limited by space and heat than anything else- paying a little extra to get a newer more efficient server would have been a lot cheaper than spending tens of thousands on construction of a second server room, for example. We literally have 6 racks full of servers, mostly 2950s, and no more room for expansion in our original server room. I am under the impression that if we consolidated our servers into something faster and more efficient we could save a lot of space and produce less heat. Also, a few of the 2950s have already failed, and since they are old with no or limited warranty it's just been extra expenses for us. I'd like to be able to make a strong case to stop this insanity and switch to buying new or at least newer hardware. Just based on CPU progress of the last few years I imagine a brand new server should have about 4-8X as much processing power as a 2950, and would let us consolidate the VMs hosted on multiple 2950s into a single machine. The barrier to doing this is the ease at which they find used 2950s, for example there are several on ebay right now for $399 buy it now. Even if I try to explain how a brand new server could host 5X as many VMs, they will point out that a new server costs more than 5X as much as a 2950. Is my thinking flawed, or should I try to push for a change here? Anyone have a good suggestion for a more modern server to standardize on to replace hundreds of VMs?