The IBM HS20 and HP BL35p (SAS) seems to be lacking in the Raid Controller cache arena as well... Enough so, that one customer is considering abandoning RAID 1 in favor of a RAID 0 configuration... Initial benchmarks are showing a HUGE improvement in Read, Writes, and overall performance. But of course, you loose that redundancy. Joe On 1/24/06, Rusty Yates <rusty27@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Just heard back from our outside sales from Dell and was told that one > customer did a major test with Citrix and the Dell 1855 Blades and found > that Citrix ran 30% slower due to no enough cache on the Raid Controller in > their blades. Anyway the outside sales guy is recommending us to go with > the 1850 1u servers instead which basically defects the purpose of going to > blades (ex: density, wiring, power, etc......). Never thought I would > actually hear a sales rep recommend against their own product. > > Anyway, just thought I would pass this along. > > Rusty > > > On 1/24/06, Rusty Yates <rusty27@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I appreciate all the information from everyone. From all the research > > that we've done we are hoping to go with IBM Servers and Blades but if the > > pricing isn't close we will most likely choose Dell. We understand IBM is > > going to have better management, denisty, etc and if money wasn't a factor > > IBM would be our #1 choice. But on the flip side with Dell, we are a Dell > > shop, the Dell pricing is better, and Dell's support has been great. > > > > I will say I'm very disappointed that no one brought up Hitachi's Blade > > Servers or even Silicon Blade Servers. :-) > > > > Thanks again for all the information and laughs! > > > > Rusty > > > > > > On 1/21/06, Rusty Yates <rusty27@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I would like to know if anyone on this board has had any good or bad > > > experience with the Dell PowerEdge 1855 Blade Servers. We are currently > > > taking a hard look at using the Dell Blades for our Citrix Servers. > > > > > > Thanks in advance! > > > > > > Rusty > > > > > > > >