locked
HP MediaSmart Killer - from HP! RRS feed

  • Question

  • Morning Gents

     

    I've posted a couple of times recently on the knock-out price HP Prolaint ML110 G4, but have also been reading with interest on the HP MediaSmart machines.

     

    The Proliant seems such a bargain now - check this out, all prices courtesy of ebuyer.com of course!

     

    1x ML110 G4 server, 1.8GHz Xeon dual-core, 512MB ECC, 160GB SATA - £169.99

    2x Crucial 1GB ECC DDR2 667MHz RAM - £37.98

    2x Western Digital 500GB RE2 hard drives (1.2M hrs MTBF, 16MB cache, ECC transfers) - £165.00

    1x WHS OEM License - £85.20

     

    Total £457 vs. EX470's £399 or there abouts.

     

    So for an extra £60 you get dual cores, 2GB RAM, 160GB system and 2x 500GB enterprise disks, ECC protection on RAM and hard-disk transfers, 3 yr warantee on the server and 5 yrs on the 500GB disks.

     

    As you may have guessed this is my set up, it wasn't such a bargain when I bought it though!

     

    Anyway hopefully this will be of interest given the number of 'can I use xxx with yyy' recently.

     

    Cheers!

    Thursday, February 21, 2008 12:10 PM

All replies

  • Jimbo, you should be aware that Western Digital's RE drives include a technology that WD calls TLER. That technology makes the drives unsuitable for use in anything other than a RAID array connected to a good RAID controller. Here's a link to the WD technical brief on TLER.

    Also, you should be aware that other manufacturers of disk drives may have similar technologies in their enterprise-class drives. Read spec sheets very carefully; Windows Home Server is designed to work with desktop drives.
    Friday, February 22, 2008 2:37 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi Ken

     

    I think that applied to the original REs - the doc is dated 2004 - but not to the RE2s, have a look here:

    http://techreport.com/articles.x/13253

     

    The RE2s do continual background surface scans, so the chance of encountering an error is much reduced in the first place.  Plus, would you want to rely on data that took over 7 seconds to gather anyway?

    Friday, February 22, 2008 3:29 PM