Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


[Dedi] What CPU/RAM ratio would you guys like to see?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

[Dedi] What CPU/RAM ratio would you guys like to see?

erhwegesrgsrerhwegesrgsr Member
edited November 2012 in General

So what ratio would you actually like to see for dedicated servers?
I guess EVERYBODY appriciates "too" much RAM? (e.g. 8GB on dual core)

What RAM would you like to see for:

  • i3 - 2 cores/4 threads
  • i5 - 4 cores/4 threads
  • i7 - 4 cores/8 threads

What I was thinking of was:

  • i3 -> 8GB
  • i5 -> 16GB
  • i7 -> 24GB
  • Some (Xeon) 8 core -> 32GB

Comments

  • "The new Kimsufi"

    So desktop grade is fine for their target @Zen

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider

    @BronzeByte said: What I was thinking of was:

    • i3 -> 8GB
    • i5 -> 16GB
    • i7 -> 24GB
    • Some (Xeon) 8 core -> 32GB

    Perfect.

  • Throw in a Celeron/Pentium with 2/4GB and you'll be set for "the new Kimsufi".

  • @wdq

    Haha, I have to agree on that but I strive to deliver better hardware :)

  • I've done pretty decent using an i7 920 with hyper threading enable, It's powerful enough to run maybe 8 or more OpenVZ vpses on it (I'd be watching more the disk i/o, but most are just gona come with a typical SATA drive).

    Technically there's not "too much ram" depending on what you're going to use it for.

    For myself personally if I were going with a development box per se, I wouldn't mind something like an i5/8gb. But for the price I'd be leaning towards server grade chips (xeons etc). Course when I say 'for the price', some places like wholesale internet still charges about 160-180 per month for an i7 920, and single 500gb sata drive (least if you've never canceled and switched to their i7 2300k for 99).

  • @kbeezie

    Actually I was considering SSD drives or at least SAS to keep the durability long but I am not sure if that's actually true.

  • @BronzeByte I've nothing concrete to back this up, but I'm actually finding that SSD drives are less durable/reliable, and are more intended for speed (depending on the model, since there are such a thing as cheap SSD drives). Personally if redundency were key, it wouldn't matter to me if it were SATA, SCSI, SSD etc as long as it had raid-mirror at the very least, that way if one drive dies regardless of what kind it is, it can least be replaced and rebuilt.

Sign In or Register to comment.