Howdy, Stranger!

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


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.

[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

  • @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.