Now I want to know what everyone thinks about High Density Data Centers, and High Density dedicated servers? I know this is the way a lot of companies are going, especially with the new IBM, and HP Blade Servers.

Let me know your opinions.

Thank you,

Great as long as they can keep the place cool enough with all the extra heat generated. I visited a datacenter in France last year which had a lot of high density racks and they are VERY noisy but you can get a good chunk of extra servers in the space.

Keep it cool and all will be good

Most facilities are not designed for the type of power requirements, or cooling for that matter, that high density servers require. Such things did not exist when the majority of data centers were built!
.
.

I guess that Serverpoint.com provide high-density collocation services. I agree that while lowering the total cost of ownership, high-density datacenters create more heat and need more energy.
I think that in the future we'll move to high-density DCs, but now being the end-user I won't be able to tell the difference between high- and low-density datacenter services.

I think that the fact whether the datacenter is high or low-density is more important for a host ather than the end-user.

Savings might be passed on to the end user, but you are probably correct that it is the host that would find it more important (beneficial).

Data Centers that are high density get more use out of SQF, and have 18-24 inch raised floors, and higher ceilings. This is one way of going about this.

More and more companies are going towards Blade Center Chassis and the majority of datacenters are having a hard time with it. In most datacenters, the customer ends up having to either spread their equipment out amongst more racks or paying for square footage that will remain empty.

I think it leads to many troubles. Is it profitable?

I know ServerPoint.com have their DC in Las Vegas, and I guess they are using one of the low density dcs.