Just from the 'specs', not much. On paper the only real diference between a low-end 'server' and a desktop would probabally be that the Server will generally have a higher-output power supply.
The main difference is the quality of the components and construction. 'server grade' hardware is designed and warranted for 24x7 operation (even for a low-end server like the PowerEdge 500SC or Proliant ML330) Another benefit for 'server-grade' hardware, although it isn't quite as relevant for Linux as it is for NetWare/SCO UNIX/ect. (and for a lesser extent, Windows NT/2000 Server) is that they are generally certified for use with the various operating systems. The main benefit of this is that if you have a problem on your Dell/Compaq/IBM/etc 'Server' and call up the vendor for tech support you are likely to get an aswer like 'Yeah, there is a known problem with the BIOS revision on some units on that model, go to the vendor's web site and download file xxxxxx and everything should work fine once you apply the update' whereas if you had used a 'desktop' computer the response (probabally from both the OS and hardware vendor) would be 'The only operating systems supported on that model are Windows 98/ME/NT4.0 Workstation...'. -----Original Message----- From: Paul RodrÃguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: newbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 16 Nov 2001 16:34:00 -0500 Subject: Re: [newbie] motherboard suggestion for stable system What exactly differentiates server grade hardware and desktop grade? I ask this because checking out some Dell servers (just above the price range for this project, but wrangleable) they seem to be pretty much the same hardware I would find in a desktop computer. IDE drives for example, and not even ATA/100/133 RAID. -Paul RodrÃguez On Mon, 2001-11-12 at 13:55, Jim Dawson wrote: > My only recomendation is to use 'server grade' hardware. 'Desktop' grade computers >are not designed to run 24/7. Unfortunately I don't know of any server-grade >computers that use AMD processors. > > If possible go with a SCSI disk subsystem rather than IDE. IDE drives are made for >the desktop market and are generally not designed for 24x7 operation. If you can >afford it get a RAID controller (even if you are just mirroring, a RAID controller >can handle mirroring much better than the server itself.) and hot swappable drives. >it is also a good idea to have redundant (and if possible hot swappable) power >supplies and cooling fans. On Fri, 2001-11-16 at 12:24, Paul Schwebel wrote: > Tell your doctor that Data reliability and "cheap" don't go together. He/she > will have to choose. > > Mirrored drives, along with daily backups will give you some reliability. They > don't necessarily have to be hot swappable, unless downtime is not an option. > > I have run both Compaq and Dell servers in a public school environment > (Netware, not Linux). I prefer the Dells. > > My .02, > > -Paul Schwebel, Lab Facilitator > San Dieguito Union High School District _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
