Hi can anyone let me know which is the better server
-
hi, i am trying to find out which is the better dedicated server and would like your opinion.
the first one is
Dell PowerEdge Intel Xeon E3-1220L, 2.2GHz Dual-Core
4GB DDR3 RAM
2 x 500GB SATA HDD
Linux/Windows
10000GB Monthly Transfer
Up to 2 IP Addresses
LSI Raid Cardand the second one is,
Intel Atom 330 1MB L2 Cache 1.6GH
500GBStorage
4GBRAM
10TBBandwidthif you can please let me know the difference and which one is better for speed and for memory for a large site.
many thanks
-
Sorry I missed your followup question on this, Diane.
I would say the original server mentioned is still the better choice. The Xeon processor in it is specifically designed for server use. The i3 processor in this one is the 3rd tier of Intel's consumer processors.
In addition, the original is a name-brand Dell built with components specifically for servers - motherboard, power supply etc This is important because servers are a much higher-stress environment than most consumer-level computers. Also it has a RAID array which is of major importance in critical servers. i.e. if you lose money when sites are offline.
The system you just listed looks to be a "white box" system - a system assembled by the hosting company using whatever parts are most economical. Doesn't mean it's a bad server, just that it's much harder to know the quality of the components.
The one thing this last server has in its favour is that it's got 50% more RAM. Good for heavy server loads. But in my opinion this doesn't outweigh the other advantages of the first server. (And you can simply upgrade to more RAM for the original server if and when your websites' needs require it.)
All that said, the hardware isn't the only thing by which to a dedicated server should be judged. The quality, speed and redundancy of the backbone connections to the Internet, quality and speed of tech support, turnaround time for hardware repairs are all critical as well.
Hope that helps.
Paul
-
can i check if the following dedicated hosting package is any better than the ones i have listed
Intel i3 540 3.06 Ghz HT 4MB S-Cache
500GBStorage6GBRAM10TBBandwidth
-
Given the number of sites and total volume of traffic, a dedicated server seems to be a reasonable choice in your case, Diane, as you probably need that kind of power.
Do note though that most hosting accounts, even shared hosting, allow for hosting of multiple sites on one account so it's not necessary to go to a dedicated server for that reason alone.
Not sure what kind of cost you're looking at for the dedicated server, but an equivalently powered fully-managed VPS would run in the range of $200/month plus $25/month for daily offsite backup for a UK-based server.
This would not provide root access to the server, but then most fully-managed dedicated servers don't offer that either.
One of the big benefits to a VPS is its flexibility. It's very easy to add power to the server for the busy times, then scale it back (ie save money) during slower periods. It also means that if you add more sites and more traffic and need more power, it's only a couple of click to accomplish, as opposed to a full server move as would be needed on a dedicated server.
Paul
-
Hi. the reason i am choosing a dedicated server is because in total i have around 30 small sites and one medium site and one large site, so a dedicated server was the cheaper option than having seperate hosting accounts.
If there is a cheaper and better option then i would love to hear about it. the total traffic from all the sites is around12000 visitors per day
-
thank you for that, i will go with that one then, many thanks
-
Oleg and Maurizio are correct in their assessment, but they've each introduced some confusion in the process.
Here's the rundown:
-
Xeon processors are extremely powerful processors specifically designed for servers. Atom processors are budget consumer-level processors designed to be cheap, not fast.
-
the motherboard and associated systems of a DELL Poweredge are specifically designed for server use. That is unlikely to be true for an Atom-based system.
-
both systems contain the same amount of memory (RAM) - 4 GB. It's quite likely that the RAM in the first server is of a faster type though.
-
both systems contain the same amount of usable hard-drive space. In servers with 2 identical hard drives and a RAID setup, the default configuration is always what's referred to as "mirrored" or RAID1. This means both drives contain exactly the same content as each other. So even though the total number of gigabytes is double in the first server compared to the second, the total usable space is the same for each.
- The reason this RAID1 is highly desirable for a reliable website is that if one drive experiences a hardware failure, the other drive instantly takes over so there's no downtime. There is NO protection from getting hacked in this scenario, as each drive constantly copies itself to the other so both are identical. This means a hack would instantly be copied over to the second drive. Proper backup (eg hack protection) requires a separate backup drive stored on a completely separate server. RAID is NOT a backup method, it simplify allows systems to be more reliable even if a hardware failure occurs (called redundancy)
All this to say the first systems is clearly a superior server, as both Oleg and Maurizio pointed out.
However, I'd also like to say - it's pretty unusual that an individual website would benefit from this heavy a server configuration. Only a heavily database-intensive site getting well over a million visits a year would require this kind of power and associated expense.
Most individual websites are much better served by a VPS (Virtual Private Server) which offers most of the advantage of a dedicated server but with significantly more flexibility and lower cost.
Are you certain a dedicated server is what's needed?
Paul
-
-
Yes Oleg is right
The first server is sure the better than the second.
-
The Cpu si more faster
-
The memory is more..
Ciao
Maurizio
-
-
The top one is better. Faster processor, more HD space (1TB vs 500GB), same bandwidth, + RAID card (in case your HD is fried/hacked, have a backup).
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
What Can I Do To Improve The SEO of My Site?
We have a website that is ranking okay but we can't seem to get past #6 or #7 for a specific national keyword, "self storage software". We are working on a more effective back-linking strategy right now, but we really are having a hard time identifying steps to take besides that. If anyone can help me out and give me some suggestions I would be very appreciative. Maybe even seeing a competitive analysis from someone else would help catch something that I am not seeing. Website is www.storageunitsoftware.com Thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | kenturley0 -
Has anyone had problems with google webmaster tools verified sites
Hi, i have just been into google webmaster tools and i have noticed that five of my websites are no longer verified. i have tried putting the code back into the head and also i have tried verifying it through google analaystics but nothing is working can anyone let me know what has happened and if anyone has noticed this regards
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Webmaster Tools Server Error
We recently did a build to our site and after the build the build one of the softwares that we are using changed. This caused our server errors to go into the thousands. right now google webmaster tools gave us a list of top 1,000 pages with errors and we fixed them all is there a way to see the rest of the errors?
Technical SEO | | DoRM0 -
Structuring URL's for better SEO
Hello, We were rolling our fresh urls for our new service website. Currently we have our structure as www.practo.com/health/dental/clinic/bangalore We like to have it as www.practo.com/health/dental-clinic-bangalore Can someone advice us better which one of the above structure would work out better and why? Should this be a focus of attention while going ahead since this is like a search engine platform for patients looking out for actual doctors. Thanks, Aditya
Technical SEO | | shanky10 -
Can I remove 301 redirects after some time?
Hello, We have an very large number of 301 redirects on our site and would like to find a way to remove some of them. Is there a time frame after which Google does not need a 301 any more? For example if A is 301 redirected to B, does Google know after a while not to serve A any more, and replaces any requests for A with B? How about any links that go to A? Or: Is the only option to have all links that pointed to A point to B and then the 301 can be removed after some time? Thank you for you you help!
Technical SEO | | Veva0 -
How to de-index the server location of my website
Somehow my website is indexed by it's server location. So in addition to www.[example].com, it's also indexed like this: server123.[server name].com I have no idea how that happened. But, I was wondering, does anyone know how to de-index all the urls like this? I have a lot of urls indexed using my server's address. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | webtarget0 -
How can i redirect a url that has % in it?
Google webmaster tools shows a 400 eroor for an old link that contains a 30% off in it. The problem is the % I would like to 301 redirect this link : http://www.geographics.com/Graduation-Stationery,-35%-OFF-Printable-Certificates-Blank-Gift-Certificates/c1353_1354_1359/index.html to http://www.geographics.com/Graduation-Stationery-Printable-Certificates-Blank-Gift-Certificates/c1353_1354_1359/index.html We do not know how to do this in httaccess. Can you please advise? Thanks a lot! Madlena
Technical SEO | | Madlena0 -
Are (ultra) flat site structures better for SEO?
Noticed that a high-profile site uses a very flat structure for there content. It essentially places most landing pages right under the root domain folder. So a more conventional site might use this structure: www.widgets.com/landing-page-1/ www.widgets.com/landing-page-1/landing-page-2/ www.widgets.com/landing-page-1/landing-page-2/landing-page-3/ This site in question - a successful one - would deploy the same content like this: www.widgets.com/landing-page-1/ www.widgets.com/landing-page-2/ www.widgets.com/landing-page-3/ So when you're clicking deeper into the nav. options the clicks always roll up to the "top level." Top level pages are given more weight by SEs but conventional directory structures are also beneficial seen as ideal. Why would a site take the plunge and organize content in this way? What was the clincher?
Technical SEO | | DisneyFamily1