Evaluating HP, Dell, IBM Solutions for small VMware deployment

By Chiper ·
Gday All,
Currently doing some research for a solution to consolidate our 6 or so servers using VMware. We are looking to implement HA, DRS and VMotion. Our budget for the hardware is about $30K AUD and we currently have 10 users.

We have the following server roles to consolidate and they are running on various ESX hosts with local storage and physical servers at present
DC (100GB data)
Exchange (9GB Mailbox Store, PF 0GB)
BES (2 Devices currently no more than 5)
SQL (2 databases, 1 MSP app)
Web (2 web applications, 1 MSP app)
TS (Max 2 simultaneous users)
VCS (To manage ESX hosts)

Based on our small user base, direct attached SAS should suffice. Moving forward we are looking at moving into virtual hosting to provide our customers with hosted application solutions and will probably role this out with VMware View so we should make provision for this.

Initially we would aim to install this hardware locally however as we convert customers to our hosted solution would require to move this to a data centre purely based on bandwidth requirements.

With this in mind we are considering a blade solution to
A - Ensure smallest footprint as possible
B - Ensure expandability

That said we have come up with the following solutions and would appreciate any feedback or advice you can offer in relation to these products.

Each host has the following specs
24GB RAM (6 x 4GB modules)
2 x 72GB SAS 15K HDD RAID 1 - For ESX install
2 x Xeon Quad Core 95W 2.66GHz/1333MHz CPU

Each storage has the following specs
Dual Controller model
5 x 450GB SAS 15K 3.5" HDD RAID 5 (1.8TB storage)

Option A - IBM ($9K More)
2 x IBM X3650 M2 Servers
1 x DS3200 SAS Storage Array Dual Controller
Blade Centre S Chassis
2 x HS22 Blades

Option B - HP ($4K More)
2 x HP DL380 G6 X5550 Servers
1 x 2012SA DC Modular Smart Array

Option C - Dell (Best Price)
2 x Power Edge R710 Rack Mount Servers
1 x Power Vault MD3000 with HA solution

Would like to thank anyone that takes the time to offer advice, its all clear as mud as we slowly battle through the design phase.


This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Answers

Collapse -

Figure out the total cost trade offs

by CG IT In reply to Evaluating HP, Dell, IBM ...

If you went to Virtual Machines, what are the savings? what are the costs? what are the impacts on the business if the hardware hosting VM failed? How is recovery done if it fails? how long does that take. which all adds to cost. Whats the administrative costs trade offs for the VM servers vs standard box? If is more effort or less effort, all that costs $$. How long and how many people will be required to go this route? That all costs $$ and cost into how much it costs to implement this change.

The bean counters ought to have all this information for you because that's what they do.They know how much floor space costs Electrical costs, A/C costs, labor costs, how much depreciation they can charge off for capital expenditures.

Technology for technologys sake is playing the latest and greatest game and the only ones who benefit from that are those that make the latest and greatest stuff. The losers are those who buy it.

Collapse -

All of these will no doubt give you some level of scalability, but consider

by Akinade In reply to Evaluating HP, Dell, IBM ...

consideration for hardware purchase usually goes beyond specs; it also about budget, competence of available human resource, "power-consumption", h/ware life-cycle policy, etc. With all things been equal, I'll go with IBM -> HP -> DELL in that order.

Collapse -

Hi there !

by voldar In reply to Evaluating HP, Dell, IBM ...

Before going into the virtualisation, I would like to know how you came out with the specs for the servers (RAM and procs). As far as I see, you have only 7 servers that use in total no more than 12 GB at their pick (at the same time). 48GB for 7 servers is a lot, in my opinion.
I would not go for such a simple configuration like yours with something "high-end", unless you think about evolution in the near future. And even then, I would think twice, because this solution with a direct attached SAS is not evolutive at all. So, I'd go with DELL. Even if a physical server goes down, your VM will still be able to run with no problems on the other one. That's for sure.

Related Discussions

Related Forums