Recommendation for new file/print server

[goodes]

I'd like to get some accurate reviews of mid-range servers. A Dell 600SC PowerEdge has been recommended to me to replace our HP LC3 (we're upgrading from NT to Win2000 Server) as our new file/print/ftp server. The new server would be a primary domain controller, run Active Directory, IIS and possibly FileMaker Pro Server. Also has to have RAID-5. Any suggestions for other machines or is the PE600SC a really good machine for our use? Thanks.

 

[NickFerrar]

I wouldn't rate the 600SC as a mid-range sever, it is very much low end.

I haven't actually used a 600SC but the specs look OK on paper, apart from it's poor expandability.

Personally the smallest server type I would recommend (and we have a few of them) is the 2600. It's far more expanable and is based on Xeon rather than P4. It's also not a whole lot more expensive than a 600SC with a similar spec.

You don't really mention what budget you have and what spec you were aiming at. Personally I'd say get a 2600, single Xeon 2.8GHz, 512MB, 3 x 36GB drives.

If you have more budget I'd say go to 1GB RAM as a priority, then worry about more disk, redundant power and a second CPU.

 

[goodes]

Thanks. Yes, I deduced that the 600SC was entry level at best and decided to spec out at 1600SC - coming in at about the same price. Does the 2600 still beat that one hands down?

I've been disappointed in the newer desktop Dell Optiplex and I'm hoping the servers are a different class of machine. Even as regards construction of the box.

But it seems Dell easily provides all kinds of options for the "right" price.

 

[NickFerrar]

I haven't used the 1600SC either, SC denotes their budget servers though. We use 1U 1650's here and they're fine (but we don't use them for file and print).

It really depends on your environment - if you have 100 users connecting to it then I'd say go for a 2600 minimum.

Try pricing a 2600 to the same rough spec as the 1600sc, they probably are pretty similar on price.