GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,670
So uhhhhhhh, what makes them worth buying at a non depreciated value then?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Supermicro SC825TQ-700LPB Chassis with X9DAI Motherboard+complete build
- Thread starter scharfshutze009
- Start date
- Status
auntjemima
[H]ard DCOTM x2
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 12,149
He is selling them depreciated. $986.10 depreciated (25%).
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,670
Oh wow, that's totally worth it then! Pm me OP, I just won the mega millions + powerball jackpots this week and need a server!
So, you think that because something isn't worth selling at its actual value that asking for nearly full retail makes sense?
The hardware is close to worthless. I simply pointed out that I could buy a server that does everything yours would for $509 and proved it with a link to that server. The processors you have are also objectively worse and being able to support up to 1TB of RAM does not suddenly make your setup worth $3700. Even with an extra chassis. Those chassis aren't worth more than a couple of hundred bucks. Sorry, but they aren't. The actual hardware inside isn't worth even close to that much.
The HP DL380 Gen 8 does support RAID. They have one integrated controller on the motherboard and normally have at least one add in card as well. I don't know that it supports RAID 60, but literally no one uses that. RAID 6 is used in some cases but not 60. It takes too many disks and literally no one wants that. Dell still sells hardware controllers. As for ZFS and software based RAID its perfectly safe. Many argue its safer because it doesn't depend on a specific controller config and specific firmware like hardware controllers do.
I literally worth with all this stuff for a living. (Except ZFS). I've done this kind of work for dozens of companies. No one is using RAID 60 for anything.
You don't get it. Used hard drives aren't worth anything. I even found drives like the ones you are selling on eBay for $15 each. They aren't worth what you are asking. Period. You are also are comparing consumer grade SATA drives to SAS drives. These aren't remotely in the same league. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Datacenters and real servers do not use shitty Western Digital Red SATA drives. Not one data center I've ever seen uses those.
You have no idea what you are talking about. You only think SSD is slower than mechanical drives because yours is limited by the USB 2.0 or 3.0 interface. SSD's are WAY faster than any mechanical hard drives.
You said the graphics card you were selling was better than anything I could possibly have on hand. I review hardware for a living and I was making a point. I have extra cards that I'm not using that are FAR better than the piece of shit you are trying to sell at a 10% discount from its original price almost a decade ago.
I too yell at the sky and deny reality. This is life.
It's simple. Enterprise hardware (almost always) runs on a 5 year cycle. Whether you decide to use straight line (pretty common over this time period) or one of the non-linear or table-based depreciation systems (and yes, I did study this in my graduate program), at the end of 5 years, the value to the company is ZERO. The value in the market is dependent on what it can still do, how abused it is, and what the market will bear.
In your case, you have two low-power CPUs (low value), an older motherboard (zero value unless you need that particular board), a chassis or two (meh) - and on top of that, the CPUs cannot run ESXi8 without a bypass, which reduces their value from "low" to "basically nothing.". If ESXi drops it, KVM/etc will soon - plus they don't have spectre or meltdown mitigations, so to be fully safe (especially when running a hypervisor), they're going to be even SLOWER than they were before. Ivy Bridge is dead man. Long live the king.
You were taught lies.
This was LITERALLY my career until a year ago, when I finally switched to security (although I still handle data protection and management too). ZFS or any other modern Reed-Solomon algorithm based storage system is massively more reliable and performant than any hardware fixed-width system, especially as they can handle bit-rot and checksumming natively, while you otherwise have to rely in various utilities to even attempt to do it on hardware raid (and generally cannot). Hardware raid exists primarily for ~boot~ devices now, as booting from a reed-solomon device is sometimes questionable (especially when doing a bit-rot scan or heal), although even that is generally fixed for *BSDs or Solaris. Or, it exists for simple single-purpose systems (the one physical domain controller you REALLY should have in each DC) that have only one job to do.
No one uses RAID 60. A stripe of a dual-parity is... weird. On top of that, your controller is a SATA controller - if I'm going for low cost disks, why am I choosing to use a super-complex storage layout?
Dell also includes those cards because most are run in HBA mode - they're SAS controllers, not being used as SAS RAID controllers.
Apple doesn't sell servers.
You can't really do RAID 60 for real with 8 drives. Dual parity is a realistic minimum of 4+2 for a full parity calculation (despite what it might let you try to do), so you'd need 12 drives. You CAN squeeze it in with 3+2, but you'd still need 5 at that point, and the overhead calc on that is just stupid.
Usable capacity vs capacity. 105 IOPS on that WD, vs about 250,000 on the SSD. I've GOT those SSDs - namely the 7.68T version. They're great drives. Also, that's an enterprise SAS SSD, so it has capacitor backed NAND for PLP, SLC to absorb the DRAM, advanced wear leveling, etc. To put it simply, a big spinning disk like that isn't super useful because it doesn't have enough performance on random small-io, which is the majority of what any of my lab systems do. Especially at that size! That's 5 IO per TB. Meanwhile, that Nytro has 16,339 IO per TB.
Capacity has to be usable to have value - the only thing those big SATA drives are good for (and yes, I have some of them) is deep archive - or a truly tiered solution like an EMC Unity or some of the other enterprise arrays where you're only reading from them. Mine are in a massive MinIO stack for backup archive.
Also, no idea what you're smoking on the "recover" part - it's a block device, they're the same in terms of what you can do with them.
1. Performance
2. Power draw (significantly lower)
3. Heat (significantly lower)
4. Moving parts (none, leads to next item but is separate because of vibration damping)
5. Reliability (much higher).
6. Rebuild speed (much higher).
7. Native TRIM Support (big plus for enterprise workloads).
8. This is where shock absorption comes in. It's an enterprise drive - I'm not tipping over a bloody rack!
No.
A USB drive is not an enterprise SSD, or even a consumer SSD. It's barely even NAND, to be honest.
That's a symptom of USB, not the drive.
Got two 5450s and three GT710s sitting here. All have low-profile brackets.
Again, this is (was) my industry. I worked for the worlds LARGEST storage company until just last year. I literally have drives falling out of my ears half the time still - and we're moving away from spinning rust for good reason.
I’m coming back to this for a second. Do you actually think we pay full retail for enterprise gear? That we buy it new when it’s in production or even shortly after? How could any of us afford that? Even on my somewhat lofty salary, that’s insane.
Depreciation is how home labs are built. We buy off lease gear - sometimes pay extra for the 3 year old kit, sometimes not and pick it up at 5. Lots of us get it cheap or free from customers shutting things down. We then pass it on to others. The gray market is primarily folks building or learning at home - then some handful of folks that pay retail or higher price because they have to for some oddball bit of kit. Hell, I know a place that has spare VAX sitting around in case someone needs support! But none of us buy that.
Depreciation is how you should have bought your hardware. That’s how you sell your hardware - because we all know what it’s worth. There’s a never ending debate on when to move on, and when not to.
I missed the window on my X56XX series. So they run as a dedicated controller and high memory NAS. I sell what I can. I’m parting out more hardware now. But guess what? I sell for a little under what it’s worth here - ask anyone who’s done business with me here, I’m a good deal because I USED to be that broke bastard trying to learn. Now? Now I’m the provider. But I know what the stuff is worth - and yours doesn’t have any value left. Get what you can out of it now - soon it will literally be worth nothing.
I kept one system far too long. A Sun IPX. Used it as a doorstop in the end - nothing would ding that 50lb brick.
scharfshutze009
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,079
With you Dan_D it wouldn't even matter if I would have spent the extra money to get the six-core 2011v2's with Hyper-threading for a little more, so of course my items have no value to you and you fail to realize that I would just charge more if it had better hard ware despite what you're saying because it costs me more money to buy better hardware and my dad told me it's not worth selling for what you consider it's deprecated value and he said the same thing about the Home Theater Personal Computer I advertised in Ebay sales on here to when I had it on here. I'm still being nice by giving up to 25 percent off the buy it now too and if you want it for less than message me on ebay to take away the extra chassis and extra motherboard, which will bring it down to $1955.61 at 25 percent off and if you still don't think it's worth at least $1955.61 I can't help you see it my way because I do not accept you comparison to that HP at $508 with only one 600 GB 15k RPM SAS hard drive and it's nothing else like what I'm selling.
Last edited:
If your system is such a good deal, why hasn't it sold yet?
Here's an example:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/154071331200
This one is under -half- what you want. It's 3 years newer than yours. It has 128GB DDR4 RAM. It has 2x 12core CPUs. It has 4x10Gbps NICs (yours has zero). It has better RAID hardware.
EVEN IF you were to say "Well it doesn't have harddrives or GPU", and give yourself $200 for GPU and $250 for drives, that still brings the total to only $1300.
Everything about the system I posted is much, much, much better than yours. It is much better performance. I has much newer CPU instruction sets. It has higher performance RAM. It has much higher performance RAID hardware. It uses less power. It makes less heat. It costs way, way, way less than yours.
So again, tell me why I would even THINK about buying yours, with that system available?
Here's a system that costs similar to your "25%" bullshit trash:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/134160420571
This one is 4 years newer than yours.
Get with the times. Your trash is, well, trash. If you're lucky, right now, you can salvage a couple hundred out of it. If you sit and complain about it for another 4 years, you'll end up throwing it in the trash.
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
It wouldn’t matter if it was the top end hardware from that era. It’s over 10 years old.
And have you sold either of those?
25% off is more than the deprecated value or market value of the hardware. You could pick $1,000,000 to ask and give 50% off. It’s not worth that either.
For 2k I’m buying something from the Broadwell generation- if not first gen scalable. I’m not touching haswell or older.
I’m throwing away better servers than you’re selling now. I showed you the picture!
Seriously? Who uses spinning disks in a server? I’m using 250G inland cheap SSDs for boot drives. $20 a pop. 15 on sale!
Hell. Both of those are great deals. Especially the TrueNAS one.
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Quite honestly spent maybe, maybe 5 minutes searching. I'm sure there's better deals than those on ebay, but, those are right at that 5-yr mark, so, almost the perfect mark for home lab folks on budget.
Yup. I'd be tempted by that second one if I didn't have enough right now - that's a good system, the 5118s are good CPUs, and that's a very solid price for what you get - and a highly usable chassis too.
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1707758471){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,866
This is not a good comparison. AM4 is not a server/enterprise platform. Doesn't matter if you use an Asrock Rack motherboard. Consumer hardware is not the same thing, and I would never use it in a server.
Don't get me wrong. OP is out of his mind when it comes to what he is trying to sell his shit for, but I'd use aging Enterprise hardware in a server over new consumer hardware any day.
This is really the realm of Xeon or Epyc. Heck, with OP's vintage of hardware we can even include Opteron.
What OP is selling is real enterprise hardware. It's just a decade old enterprise hardware that doesn't have much in the way of value anymore, because it is bordering obsolete.
I've used ASRack stuff pretty extensively. It has most of the features you'd expect in "enterprise" gear, just orientated towards prosumers. IPMI, RDIMM, ECC, and so on. Just because it's a consumer level CPU doesn't mean the entire platform should be brushed aside.
Overall I agree with the rest of your points and it's going way off topic now. I'm just going to lurk in this thread and have popcorn when scharfshutze009 decides to return.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,866
I mean, I built a server with an FX 8120 and a 990FX motherboard once as well. It was the spare hardware I had at the time. That doesn't mean I'd necessarily recommend that anyone do it
Agreed though. Popcorn time.
Last edited:
Can’t run RDIMM on cpu that don’t support it - that’s the main issue. Epyc/Xeon have a pile of memory and reliability tech that isn’t there on consumer - and I use a lot of both for servers.
scharfshutze009
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,079
I do to know what I'm talking about because SSD's write slower than mechanical and I've seen the benchmarks to prove that SSD's write slower than mechanical too. Also, SSD's are harder to recover from than Mechanical because it's harder to locate the data on an SSD after data loss has occurred and it says it right here in the link below:
More Difficult to Locate Data on SSD
Source on this, please. If you're going to make extraordinary claims, you have to provide proof.
Every low-end SATA SSD will have at least 2x write speed of the fastest HDD.
I know you want to sell your gear, but, lying will only make your situation worse. You now come off as shady and untrustworthy.
Grebuloner
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 2,048
You got a link that proves that? My 900p and 970 Pro go 3000MB/s+ all day long. Mechanicals are constrained by the 600MB/s limit of the SATAIII connection (not that any even get close).
We post this everywhere in this forum: If you aren't backing up your data, you deserve what you get when shit goes wrong. Data recovery of any device is well beyond the cost of a good backup solution.
Last edited:
To your first - No. Citation please. Also just no. Again, until earlier this year, this was the industry I worked in. An NVMe SSD drive will run rings around any traditional spinner. A SATA SSD will do the same, and get lapped by the NVMe drive. This is even assuming we're talking throughput - if we're looking at IOPS, the difference is in orders of magnitude in favor of the SSDs, as we're not waiting for a ~physical drive head~ to find and locate data.
As for two - Your link is talking about physical recovery of a cracked open drive - in that sense yes, it's harder to pull data from a NAND chip than a drive platter, unless you have the right tools to talk to the controller. Real recovery companies (eg: Kroll Ontrack) have no issue with this - I've shipped them drives before. Software only for recovery only works if the FS is trashed but the drive isn't - in which case it doesn't matter if it's SSD or platter based, as they're all talking (with the exception of NVMe, which abstracts that to the CPU) to a SATA block device (or SAS, or whatever - you don't care). And the assumption that company (which I've never heard of before, I'll add, and given what I've read so far I'm unimpressed - Access 97 in a 2020 blog post?) makes on drive failures is... not accurate either.
Irrelevant. You should have a good back up plan that mitigates the need to ever recover data from a physical drive be it an SSD or a mechanical one. Keep in mind failure rates on SSD's are lower than that of mechanical drives. I don't know why you think mechanical drives are faster than SSD's. I've literally tested these products for a living and I've never seen a single case where a mechanical drive was faster than a solid state drive at anything.
Starfalcon
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2020
- Messages
- 1,323
He is actually comparing a hard drive to a low end USB flash drive, obviously he has never actually used a real SSD..sata or NVME. I am into retro, and going back to old systems with hard drives as the boot drive is a night and day difference. Back in ye olde days when I ran a boot hard drive, I just never turned off my system...I kept it running 24/7 so I didnt have to wait for it to boot up.
I forgot about the fact the only SSD he's used was a USB drive. He doesn't realize how bad the USB bus chokes that drive.
And lack of dram or quality flash. They’re built for different uses
scharfshutze009
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,079
I'm not lying. If you need a picture or a screenshot I can't provide it because I don't use SSD's considering that they cost a lot more and Seagate just recently released a $6000 or so SSD that the cost doesn't appeal to me due to their being no way I could afford one let alone eight of them for this server and if I did purchase eight for this server I would just charge a lot more for this listing too. Therefore, you would just complain even more about how much I'm charging for the listing and the case with dual 700 watt power supplies alone still sells for $620 here below and I better not see any complaints about overcharging and sketchiness bullcrap either because both my chassis are new or in good condition and they have not been used 24/7 365 days a year yet for anything.
Also, I'm being nice enough to offer up to 25 percent off everything with the buy it now or best offer. Plus, the only use the complete build got was an Installation of Ubuntu Server showing the processor speeds and the amount of memory aka RAM installed that was just 32 GB of ECC DDR3 and is now 64 GB of ECC DDR3. You people are ridiculous too because you expect me to sell my server for $508 or $509 just because you found different servers for around that price and no I don't believe they are as good as what I'm offering either. Then one of you had to compare my listing to a custom built piece of crap using a Corsair 800D that was all dusty and dirty as well as in desperate need of montly cleaning, which I don't see how that compares to my listing either because it was actually junk compared to my build.:
Supermicro SuperChassis 825TQ-R700LPB
Last edited:
scharfshutze009
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,079
I'm not referring to how bad the USB bus chokes my flash drives. I'm referring to how the SATA/SAS connectors handle SSD speeds.
scharfshutze009
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,079
How could I be trolling my own post.
No, you aren't. The only SSD you've tried by your own admission is one that is in an external USB enclosure. That drive will not perform well because of that. As for internal SATA connectors, it doesn't matter. Even with the constraints of SATA, any internal SSD will be faster than any mechanical drive. Even 15,000rpm SAS drives.
Grebuloner
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 2,048
Some can't believe how stubborn you are about this.
Still, put up or shut up: Show us the benchmarks that back up your claims that mechanical drives are faster than SSDs. And I'm not talking about those USB flash drives, either.
Starfalcon
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2020
- Messages
- 1,323
Like everyone else said, prove it with some benchmarks showing your right. I am curious to what hard drive can go that fast as I would like to get some for my older systems.
Far more effectively than we ever could.
Your mistake.
So what? Most SSDs are very affordable.
Sure you can - just not a big enterprise drive, which you also don't NEED.
No one cares about the case, no one cares about the condition on old used server hardware.
25% off insanity is still insanity.
so what? Still old. Still useless now.
Yup. That's the market.
Your mistake
It's a hell of a lot more powerful.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,866
Agreed.
To be fair, some early "low cost" SSD's could be outperformed in certain sequential loads by hard drives.
I can't even remember the brands. I want to say they were first gen Toshiba SSD's maybe? Or were they Kingston? I can't remember.
Even some more modern SATA SSD's can struggle compared to the latest hard drives in some limited circumstances. I have a 250GB Samsung PM830 in my spare parts bin that came in a refurbed Dell Latitude I bought once that was an absolute dog performance wise, but even it just barely ties hard drives in sequential writes, and destroys them in reads, random writes and IOPS.
Also if you do heavy write workloads and don't have trim capability you can run into some cases where you are writing slower than hard drives.
But these are exceptions, not the norm, especially with modern hardware.
The slowest mass market SSD (I'm talking anything non-USB branded for the western market, not some noname made in china crap) you can buy today, yes even SATA ones will absolutely destroy the fastest hard drive you can buy in every workload. Sequential reads, sequential writes, random reads, random writes, IOPS, you name it. It's not a competition.
You are either lying or delusional. At the very least, you are completely and totally ignorant of how this stuff works and how a free market works.
NVMe SSD's are cheap. Yes, their cost per gigabyte is higher than mechanical drives but any drive you buy will vastly outperform even the best mechanical drives on earth.
Who cares? No one says you have to buy that drive, much less eight of them. 1TB NVMe drives are $100 or less.
You are missing the point. Used is used. Obsolete hardware is obsolete, regardless of its condition. You are selling hardware that's literally been available for a decade. You are trying to sell that hardware for 10x what it's worth.
Actually, that's not being nice. You are literally trying to rip people off by asking for about 10x what your hardware is worth.
Actually, I think what you are offering is worth less than a refurbished HP DL380 Gen8. The latter would have some kind of warranty on it and there is plenty of information out there to support the system should there be any issues with it. Also, what you get for that $509 is faster and more powerful than what you are selling As I pointed out earlier, the CPU's in these refurbs are far better than what you are offering.
True. Some very early SSD's had crap 4K writes and things like that. Also, mechanicals in RAID configurations can sometimes do better with sequential numbers compared to those earlier drives. However, modern NVMe drives absolutely demolish spinning disks of any class at just about everything.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,866
Did you just get out of a coma you have been in since 2008?
SSD's have reliably absolutely wrecked hard drives since 2008-2009 some time when they started to become more mainstream.
Back in the early days there were some models that were crap, but as long as you did your research and didn't just blindly buy bad drives they would reliably outperform hard drives by WIDE margins.
In recent years you can't even really get those old bad SSD's anymore. You can pretty much just buy any SSD and it will trounce any hard drive.
There was a time when SSD's were cost prohibitive, but these days that is really only the case for very large models, greater in size than ~2TB. which is why most NAS/Storage servers still use hard drives for mass storage, and keep SSD's around for boot/OS/etc.
My server has 16 SSD's in it to accelerate small things. My mass storage is on 12x 16TB hard drives though.
Grebuloner
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2009
- Messages
- 2,048
The internet is a bountiful place. I'll totally settle for a comparison review from a semi-competent tech website. You don't have to have one yourself.
I'd also like to express my condolences on how long you like to spend on booting up your systems. It's been a decade since I let a computer of mine take more than 1 minute to start. Thank you SSDs!
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,819
scharfshutze009 are you 2 related? I could build a rig 5x as powerful for the same $10k and brand new...
https://www.kijiji.ca/v-view-details.html?adId=1635221244
https://www.kijiji.ca/v-view-details.html?adId=1635221244
At least there are some currently valuable things in that rig and that guy uses SSDs.
- Status