Network Computingwww.networkcomputing.com

	Issue TOC Print full article Print this page Download as PDF E-Mail this URL Discuss this article Flame the author     In this article Introduction Chips Matter Hewlett-Packard ProLiant ML330 Hewlett-Packard tc2120 Dell PowerEdge 600SC Gateway 920 IBM eServer xSeries 205 Lantech Database 2700 L Executive Summary How We Tested Weblinks Report Card

We enjoyed our time with the ProLiant ML330. This small midtower server, which incorporates an Intel Xeon processor at 2.4 GHz, is not just the only system in this review to use a Xeon processor; it is also the only dual-processor-capable machine, sporting the capacity to add a second Xeon.

As configured for our tests, the ML330 included a 2.4-GHz Intel Xeon processor, 256 MB of RAM and a prodigious 160 GB of storage. The storage was set up as a RAID 0 array, which isn't the optimal configuration for a server. In a RAID 0 environment, if either 80-GB ATA hard disk fails, the entire array will be lost. The preferred configuration here would be to use RAID 1 mirroring to ensure that the loss of either drive won't cause us to lose data. That would give the system a capacity of 80 GB, which should be plenty for most small-office environments.

The ML330 uses the ServerWorks Grand Champion SL chipset for motherboard logic. It also has incorporated on the motherboard an ATA RAID controller, the LSI (Large-Scale Integration) MegaRAID IDEal. This RAID controller allows for ATA RAID Level 0 or Level 1. On the back, we found the normal complement of PS/2 connectors and VGA output. This machine also sports two USB 1.1 ports and a copper Gigabit Ethernet interface, all integrated into the motherboard. There are four 64-bit 33-MHz PCI slots, and we could expand memory up to 4 GB.

Our ML330 IOMeter testing yielded some interesting results. We ran the 64-KB linear read test followed by the 64-KB linear write test. While we expected to see a slight downturn in the write test, we instead saw a major downturn. After some investigation, we determined that this result is attributable to HP disabling the write caching. (See "Maximum Throughput Test" chart.)