Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Advise needed: 1U vs Blade server

Go to solution
IT Csar
Occasional Advisor

Advise needed: 1U vs Blade server

Our server room (40-50 machines) provides two types of computer services to employees:
- non-interactive computational platform (40%)
- interactive X sessions (60%)

For long time, we kept adding 1U machine to handle growing demand for CPU cycles. In addition, we were adding NFS servers (2U + SCSI/SAS disk array) to satisfy storage expansion.

How blade servers fit our profile, and what benefit they bring over 1U machine?


Oleg B
Nuwan Alwis
Valued Contributor

Re: Advise needed: 1U vs Blade server

Hi Csar,
Ofcourse Blade servers are a good solution for a rapidly growing data center, Needs lotof planing and a higher initial invesment.


More servers than units on the rack.
One Blade sever enclosure can hold 16 servers
half hight servers (intel, AMD, Itanium)any of them as you want.
And On 42U HP10000G2 Rack 4 of these enclosures can be placed.
so thats 64 servers per 42U Rack.
With Virtualization Many more.....

Also you have the option of having tape/Storage blades on the enclosure as you want so no need of additional space requirment.

Singel Point of Administration:

With ILo2 you can manage all interconnected enclosure bays using a web browser. What ever you want do do physically to ther server eg:power on/off can be done via web.

Saves Infrastructure Cost.

No need to add power /AC/ Network/FC time to time when you Add a server by server to a rack. Once you plan for a rack thats it forever.

Good DR Solusion:

Can unplug a server from 1 enclosure and plug it on another, you are ready to up the server again.

Need expert support in planing

High Initial Invesment.


Florian Heigl (new acc)
Honored Contributor

Re: Advise needed: 1U vs Blade server

I hope I wont repeat anything already tested...

You might find a cost benefit over a blade chassis lifetime
More fitting to datacenter workloads (no emphasis on local disks)
Seems to be cheaper for high ram requirements (usually the 1U boxes dont come with 8/16 ram slots)
Seems to be cheaper on switches and such too (i'm normally just look at the used prices though :)
much better PSUs and really saving money by that
Far easier management, because it's all the same systems, and the number of uplinks is reduced, making things a lot better
Really great to upgrade (unpack the blade, put it in the chassis)

- I miss an management tool that spans multiple enclosures
- I deeply dislike virtual connect. It is a fine concept, but bugs that, for example, cause duplicate WWNs aren't.

Plus, i'm still waiting for a cheap fixed-config blade:
dual 10ge, 32gb ssd, soldered-on dual cpus and numa so you can have 8 cheap ram sockets :)
yesterday I stood at the edge. Today I'm one step ahead.
Honored Contributor

Re: Advise needed: 1U vs Blade server

If your server hardware configurations are standardized and possible to implement with blades, your situation sounds very suitable for blades.

If your hardware configurations vary and/or you have to use external hardware with e.g. SCSI or USB connections, the blades are *not* for you.

The benefit of blades comes when you have many servers in a single location: setting up just one blade alone is not efficient, as you'll need to set up an entire blade enclosure.

The network switch modules within the blade enclosure will greatly simplify network cabling by allowing you to use a smaller number of high-bandwidth links to serve the entire enclosure, instead of cabling each server separately.