Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We are currently investigating options to consolidating our servers and we've had two proposals from different partners one offering a HP solution and another offering a Intel Modular system. I know there are different factors which will help make the decision but based on pure performance which is best? If I give you some basic factors and the spec given is it possible for you to help us with our decision?

  • Consolidating 4 servers (1xAccounts database, 1xWMS database, 1xTMS database, 1x Microsoft Exchange
  • Windows Server 2008
  • Active Directory
  • Between the 3 databases, neither database is more the 500mbs each, and all 3 have 10 concurrent users during day time (Total 30 users during day time) which is all just basic text entry
  • Exchange there are 80 mailboxes, majority of the accounts below 800mbs with around 15 accounts over 1gb
  • Total amount of users 70, all of which only save spreadsheets and word documents (Not many over 5mbs)

So there's no real massive resource hog other then exchange.

The two solutions we've been offered are:

HP BLc3000 3 x HP BL460 G7 / On each blade 2 x Intel Xeon E5630 & 24gb RAM 8.4tb HP P2000 SAN

The other being

Intel Modular MFSYS25 3 x MFS5520VIBR / On each blade 2 x Intel Xeon E5630 & 24gb RAM 8.4tb SAN

share|improve this question
don't get it, to much price overhead in just the chassis alone. – tony roth May 10 '11 at 20:28
Welcome to Server Fault! I have removed the [vmware] tag from your question. If you really want a VMware related tag, please choose one of the product specific tags. – Ben Pilbrow May 10 '11 at 20:45
Sorry Ben, will take note for future reference – Pallet King May 11 '11 at 6:47

I can only speak for HP, as I only buy their kit, but I utterly love their blades, I've had every generation of BL460c and buy them as my default machine. My initial thought was that you're not planning on any form of virtualisation but reading more carefully I totally get it, you want the best performance and you'll be just fine without any virtualisation just now. Totally have with the kit specs, may be tempted to have bought a C7000 if you have the space to give you more expansion options but the 5630 is a good CPU that I buy myself. You don't mention specifically which model of P2000 you're looking at, would you let us know? Oh and which interconnects are you going for?

I wish I could offer some form of comparison between the two makes but I can confirm the HP kit is to quality, full of usefully tech and reliable.

Good luck.

share|improve this answer
Right, the P2000 choice matters as an iSCSI unit would have different performance characteristics than a SAS unit. Personally, I would virtualize. There doesn't seem to be much savings in a C3000 setup versus a pair of well-spec'd DL380's and shared storage. – ewwhite May 10 '11 at 20:14
See I'd go for the FC version, the break-even on blades is the 5th one, so not much more expansion to go to justify it. – Chopper3 May 10 '11 at 20:17
Hi, Thanks for the responses. We will be virtualising the servers using VMware or Hyper V (VMware has been offered with the Intel system & Hyper V with the HP) If we go Intel instead of the HP it's around 35% cheaper then the HP solution. The interconnects on the Intel are 3gb per module to a 10gb back plain and I believe the HP is 1gb per blade to a 10gb blackplane. – Pallet King May 11 '11 at 7:17

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.