ASRock E3C224-4L or SUPERMICRO MBD-X10SL7-F-O Server Motherboard

fleebow8

Reputable
Feb 4, 2015
23
0
4,510
Hello!
I am building a server for my hosting business and I have narrowed my motherboard options down to 2. The ASRock E3C224-4L and the SUPERMICRO MBD-X10SL7-F-O. I will be using this with a Intel Xeon 1230 v3. Also if you don't have experience with these specific motherboards which company do you think makes better server-grade motherboards? If you do have experience which one do you think would be best for a business server (not a home server)?
Thanks!
 
Solution

kanewolf

Titan
Moderator
If this is truely a hosting business, then there are a few things I might think about.
For failure tolerance and power usage, would you do better to have a half dozen lower power Celeron quad core units with KVM running on them. Then you don't have a single point of failure. Your power usage might not be much worse.
Should you look at a commercially available server so that you have a toll free number and next day parts (or 4 hour on-site)?

Should you think about getting a dual socket motherboard (Yes then you have to get a Xeon 2xxx CPU) so that you have expandability?

Between the two boards you listed, I don't really have a strong preference either way.
 

fleebow8

Reputable
Feb 4, 2015
23
0
4,510
Ok so I am on a pretty small budget right now. We are a startup and this server will be for our cloud storage service. If we had a bigger budget or if this were for our website hosting I would be doing this much differently. I don't really think I need 2 processors because speed isn't as important because this isn't hosting a website service. For this server storage is the important thing and I already have that figured out. Your ideas were good ones but on our budget they won't work.

Because you don't have a strong preference between boards: which company would you trust more? ASRock or Supermicro?
Thanks!
 

kanewolf

Titan
Moderator


Probably SuperMicro. I will stress once-again that unless you architect it with a distributed file system and have multiple hosts, you will have a functional outage with just one of these.
 

fleebow8

Reputable
Feb 4, 2015
23
0
4,510


Um what do you mean by a distrusted file system and multiple hosts?
 

fleebow8

Reputable
Feb 4, 2015
23
0
4,510


Ah... I see... But that would mean using multiple servers which means more money. In the future? I will definitely use that. But now it will be a but much. I was thinking about using virtualization (Hyper-V or something like that) but if the whole server fails then well.. it kind of defeats the purpose.

Even though it will probably be too much, I will still look into the price it would be if I were to have multiple servers. If it doesn't exceed my budget by too much, I might do it. Thanks for all your help kanewolf! I really appreciate it! If you have any ideas on how I might be able to have cluster without spending too much money please let me know. :)

(Sorry about not responding for a while. Was on an airplane.)
 

kanewolf

Titan
Moderator


This goes back to my point of more cheaper servers may be a better implementation.
You maybe should look at used commercial equipment (HP, DELL) that have redundant hot-swap power supplies, and other reliability features. Use the IPMI interface of whatever server board you have. Take advantage of the features provided.
 
Solution

fleebow8

Reputable
Feb 4, 2015
23
0
4,510


Yes I will definitely be using IPMI and I will look into commercial equipment. Once again thanks for all your help!