I want to run a server which will keep a website open. The website has a video stream running at 320 kbps. Literally the only thing I need to do is keep this website open. I aim to run maybe ~30 instances of the website.

The problem with this is not processing speed but data transfer. A network can only run so many streams at a time.

How much would such a server cost? What would be the best solution for this?

link|improve this question
Shopping Questions are Off-Topic on any of the Stack Exchange sites. See [Q&A is hard, lets go Shopping](blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/qa-is-hard-lets-go- shopping) and the FAQ for more details. – Chris S Feb 8 at 22:22
feedback

closed as off topic by Chris S Feb 8 at 22:21

Questions on Server Fault are expected to generally relate to servers, networking, or desktop infrastructure, within the scope defined in the faq.

1 Answer

Your problem isn't the server; you would be hard pressed to buy a machine that couldn't manage 30 * 32KB = 1MB a second of data flowing out of it.

Your problem is network. Which, honestly, you would still be hard pressed to find something slower than anywhere but home network. Almost any hosting company should be able to deliver a system with at least a 10Mbit Ethernet connection.

As to cost, that is going to depend on how sustained that rate is: most hosting companies end up charging on a combination of peak rate and sustained data transfer, but you should expect less than a couple of thousand dollars a month for 24x7x365 1MB data transfer outbound, and substantially lower cost for something that only briefly peaks at 30 concurrent video streams.

link|improve this answer
feedback

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