New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Yes, germany is rather weird and strange in some regards.
But in NL, for instance, one does get the kind power pricing I talked about.
You have to look at performance/Watt and you have to see the whole story. If my scenario is not a "as much power as possible in a single box" but, say, a VPS one then Xeon D may well be the better solution.
Also don't forget the performance/$ ratio and the fact that saving on power is a major cost saver for a hoster, up to the point that he can fill some of them cheaper racks that allow only a couple kW per Rack.
Or, to say it somewhat pointed, E5 may be nice for performance per reck but I guess that Xeon D is nice for profit per rack.
A lot of providers do this on blades. It's not a scam. Stop using the word to describe something you don't understand. Scam would be they took your money and ran off.
Have you seen the price on blades? It isn't cheap to do it and you have to be in a DC willing to give you enough power to make it worth it.
Francisco
Last company I worked at used blades and when older blades weren't selling/customers started kicking tires to try to get it cheaper, they were reused for the whole dedicated CPU "cloud server" thing which started getting the monthly cost (or sometimes more) when it was sold as a dedicated server rather than idling in a rack.
@Francisco
Yes. But there's a but. If you get the power into the rack, either because the colo provides it or because you are running low-power cpus, you get two desirables, a) density and b) simple wiring and management.
1 mgmt interface and cable for 8 - 16 nodes and 1 (or, for resilience 2) 10 Gb feed cables.
One of my clients, for example, uses one cisco ucs per rack plus 3 fat blade centers (typ. hp) and one dual (resilient) file server with the ucs also serving as handover switch for his couple of racks, as rack switch, as firewall, etc. and still leaves him 7 blades for higher value customers.
I was astonished at first, too, but he explained/reminded me that overall he saves money as man hours are more expensive than hardware.
But OK, that's almost certainly outside of the scope of this thread.
That's very hard to find, without paying a bundle! The biggest colo around here includes about 1.5kw per rack.
Yes, but that's due to marketing approaches (low price with ridiculous power/rack plus (usually insane) pricing/kW) and not due to technical reasons (which typ. is due to single or dual 230V * 16A).
Since @MSPNick has not replied I'm sure this is a classic overselling case. Not got any real evidence on that it's possible to make a profit on 4 or 8 customers on a 1240v5 server.
Power in a data center is usually at least 0.25 USD/kwh. So 4kw is $1/hour, at 720 hr/month = $720/month for power alone. You can't sell racks for $500/mo with electricity that expensive.
That's assuming 1) that power is actually that expensive (I pay that at home with taxes included) 2) All cores loaded 100% 24/7 3) the TDP actually being reached (undervolt a production server? maybe.)
Really? Here in Norway we usually get billed 0.003 USD/kW. I thought it was expensive here...
@daffy we only think power is expencive here in Norway, but it's really not.
P.S If you go to buy the plan, on his site it says "Fair share CPU usage".
This means it's not as dedicated as he says it is.
Obviously not ;-)
Do you have redundant circuits, backup generators, power distribution and conditioning gear etc. at home? Does that add anything to your cost?
If you're selling dedis you have to budget for that.
Or maybe he feels like I do and doesn't think justifying himself is worth it since its basically an attempt to show how he runs his business to competitors or somebody wanting to try it out who will try to under cut him and fail over time. Sometimes things are simply nobody's business even as much as people demand and attempt to use improper terms to describe his service. Does anybody have proof/evidence or is assumptions now proof?
@doughmanes I understand what you are saying. It could be seen as business secrets.
Sorry, no. A lot of details, personal relations, know-how and other elements maybe business secrets, but telling customers "you get a dedicated core" and actually selling them shared cores is something rather different.
1 thread of an E3 for $7/month sounds close to breakeven as a promo offer, though it's probably not profitable enough to pay the bills if it's the main product.
It's easy enough to get an E3 dedi in EU for well under $56/month. Maybe not a v5 but same idea. I'm currently paying 20 euro/month for an E3-1230v3 with 32GB ram and 2x 1TB HDD from an Online.net promo.
Vortexnode has also had dedi offers in a not much higher price range.
Yea I understand you can get cheap servers on sale, like at online.net etc, but the servers in question is in the UK, and you can't base a business model on just promo servers? And since it's a E3 v5, it's pretty new servers also.
I also have a E3-1245v3 server with 32 GB RAM for around €36/mo and a E5-1620v2 with 64 GB RAM for €38/mo so I could have made some profit of 8 x 1 core for $7.
But none of them v5 and none of them with SSD drives
I don't think the business model was pitched as being based on promo servers. It was a promo as the name implies. 50gb ssd per plan is pretty good but even with no overallocation, 8x 50gb = 400gb so it could be 2x240gb or 1x480gb on the server, i.e. not that expensive. Online has a 32gb ram D-1531 server (12 threads, about same total speed as recent E3) with 2x250gb ssd as a regular product at 30 euro/month, though there's a pesky 60 euro setup fee. That could even be a profitable dedicated-thread $7/month offer with a little less SSD per person.
From what I see it's no promo but their standard product.
But I find another point that often comes up in one or another more interesting. One current example is "Oh but it's a e3-12xx-v5!"
So what? While I found it normal (if regrettable) how citizens stupidized by their government/big corp. gangs obediently eat the shit meal served by marketing and advertising, I'm somewhat surprised to find that in professional circles, too.
Sometimes I'm under the impression that the real need for intel to enhance the performance of their chips only is twofold: a) to keep up some market demand and b) to compensate for the increasing bloat in windows but also in macs and linux.
CPUs serve a purpose and so do servers. A given server either runs whatever you need it to run sufficiently well or it doesn't.
Moreover the point where one reasonably solves performance problems almost always is at the applications and daemons (crapache, mycrapsql, etc) level.
Let's look closer: my home office firewall and router runs on a 10+ years old 700 MHz Via C7 (actually 1.5 GHz but I limited it) and it easily saturates a 1 Gb/s pipe. RAM 512 MB (I felt luxurious). Disk a super shitty slow CF card. Ethernet adapter? A 10+ years old pci-x intel based card.
What's the difference between that box (at which you probably laugh) and your super-duper E5 web server? Exactly that: the web-server. Otherwise both machine's job is to fill a 1 Gb/s pipe.
What does that translate to? On your web-server you run some www-server (probably a crappy one), some sql-server (let me guess: mycrapsql), php gigacrap and all of it (and the linux) configured so so ...
I've rented an old 8C/16T 56xx server and hell, that beast is way faster than I need. Unless, of course, I ask it to run some dozen crap web servers on crapuntu.
If you feel that you must have the newest 10 core E5 version, great, enjoy it. But let us stay reasonable and not play it as if a Xeon D or a E3 v3 were useless.
One has to account for the difference in home and business electricity prices. Least here in the U.K. what I pay at home is far from what I pay in the office or in the datacentre. Also bear in mind that whatever you draw you also need to cool, and that also takes power, especially in less modern facilities.
The offer says
That looks like a promo to me. The regular product has HDD and likely an old E5xxx or L5xxx core.
Newer ones generally have improved power efficiency (including from the DDR3 and later DDR4 memory) so are cheaper to operate. You can also put 64gb of ram on recent E3's instead of 32gb.
Sorry, haven't replied sooner, was wallpapering yesterday, will clear some things up.
The original offer is on a dual L5640 machine with adequate system preferences, I have had some E3-1240v5 systems laying around for a few days so just wanted to get them back up and start making some money on them instead of leaving them around.
I haven't planned on this much interest on this as of yet, but thanks for everyone's orders, it's appreciated.
Most people purchase the 3rd or 4th plan when they buy these, just wanted to get them out!
I'd like to put out there that with our server that run E3-1270v5 we could run this price and break even on server cost, we would not make profit however if you are in it for the long run sometimes you have to lose money to make money ...
I would like to just have some E3v5's just "laying around" I guess we have the answer then, Nick has money to burn.. literally, so is not bothered about profit
mo money mo problems
And that reply explained nothing. What the hell is "dedicated fair share core" in @MSPNick universe?
It is a fully dedicated core that you can use just like you had a dedicated server unless you use more than your fair share which is 100%? hmm, I seem to have just ate my own head.
Its a fair marketing term though, HVH got away with it.