Mac Pro vs. xServe

[OlliR]

I am always thinking of Xserves when it comes to permanent installations which require rather Pixelmad output than graphic output.
The Xserves are designed to run really 24/7 - that will make them more reliable in the long run. And they do nicely fit into 19" racks...

[SourceChild]

This is an old thread I published over a year ago before any of us started using Mtron SSDs or the AIC codec. I was dealing with clients who needed to run HD on their systems for multiple layers.

My hope was to steal the idea from a pandora's box where everything is rack-mount in a small rack that also had the SCSI drive array. It was my thought at the time to mount 5 xServes and one xServe raid into a rack so that at any given time I could have up to 4 catalysts running with an active spare.

Now that TH2G and DH2G work, I normally get 4 outputs per CAT and since I can stack content on as many SSDs as I want, I don't need the xServe Raid anymore and have abandoned the idea of using xServes.

[SourceChild]

I am always thinking of Xserves when it comes to permanent installations which require rather Pixelmad output than graphic output.
The Xserves are designed to run really 24/7 - that will make them more reliable in the long run. And they do nicely fit into 19" racks...

I agree with you Olli. However, until a better GPU can fit in an xServe, their worthless to me for Catalyst.