Don't get a Thinkserver (it's the only Think branded product I don't
recommend). However, I strongly recommend the server line formerly known
as IBM.
Specifically System X servers. We run them almost exclusively, 3550 M3
and M4s, and have started using Flex nodes in an enterprise chassis.
The design, build quality and stability are amazing. They handily beat
previous Dell and White Box servers we used to purchase.
The server support for hardware is great. In fact, the integrated online
SR form that lets you submit hardware fix issues from Thinkcentre /
ThinkVision all the way to Flex nodes and everything in between is a
real joy. No chatting, no calling and waiting. Fill out the form, and a
replacement part is on the way, or they call you, usually within 10
minutes or so if they need more information or have a known fix.
If you know what you're doing, there is no reason not to get System X in
my opinion.
That said, I will point out the one weakness I've seen. Contractors. The
on site contractors are hit and miss. The misses are pretty bad,
thankfully I believe Lenovo has started to address this. The
configuration support both costs extra and is less than helpful. If you
need to have someone do integration work for you, I'd look for a
consultant for that, and just buy the hardware from Lenovo. I've never
had a complex set up from anyone else, and so I don't know that Dell or
HP would be any better on the small scale yet complex configurations.
The reason the above doesn't matter? You just need hardware. You don't
need them to configure converged infrastructure for you. Also, the
failure rate is very very very low. Hit or miss on site hardware
replacement for ~ 2% of systems means you have problems very rarely, and
rarely even contact support. This was not the case on White Box or HP
computers we've used in the past.
Finally, to +1 a previous respondent, the design is quite good. It's a
little different if you're not used to it, but once you're used to the
Lenovo / IBM designs, it is very intelligent. Dell has been notorious
for having designs that are easy for them to build, but impossible for
you to upgrade or replace parts on. Every Lenovo / IBM hardware I've
seen has ALWAYS been designed with the question "Can I take this appart
in the field for easy repair or upgrade?". It's all pretty slick.
However, it's a really good idea to work out what hardware you need up
front - upgrading PSUs because you want to add a Tesla card down the
road is pretty tricky and expensive.
The other really nice thing about Lenovo Think branded products, and
System X server line is that once you figure out a configuration that
works for you, you can keep ordering that for quite a while, at least 18
months, and recently one line was 27 months of platform stability.
Everything gets RHEL certified also. Very nice. Oh, and there are PDFs
out there of spec sheets and service manuals for everything.
James Pulver
CLASSE Computer Group
Cornell University
On 02/19/2016 10:30 PM, Ryan Finnesey wrote:
It has been almost 7 years since I selected server hardware.
What are peoples preference? I used to be a big HP fan mostly because I
used Compaq servers back in the day. I had a lot of clients use Dell
mostly because of the price but I found there support poor. How are
Lenovo Servers? I am a big ThinkPad fan.
I am building a product where I need to deploy a large amount of
servers at remote locations. Each server will need to run 4 VMs
Microsoft’s recommended specs are:
o64-bit dual processor, six core (12 real cores), 2.50 gigahertz (GHz)
or higher
o64 gigabytes (GB) ECC RAM
oFour 600 GB (or better) 10K RPM 128M Cache SAS 6Gbps disks, configured
in a RAID 5 configuration
oThree 1 Gbps RJ45 high throughput network adapters
Remote monitoring and management will be key. I will most likely be
deploying Operations Manager but I need to confirm if I can install
software on the Guest OS .
Cheers
Ryan
