An administrator has been tasked with specifying hardware for a deployment having the following requirements: 4 node cluster within a single MX7000 chassis Each node needs a minimum of 6x 2.5"…

Question

Options

• AMX740c with no storage sleds
• BMX740c with MX5016s storage sleds
• CMX840c with no storage sleds
• DMX 840c with MX5016s storage sleds

• A
  34% (19)
• B
  7% (4)
• C
  16% (9)
• D
  43% (24)

Explanation

Option D is correct because the MX840c is a quad-socket compute sled capable of supporting well beyond 64 physical CPU cores and up to 6TB of memory per node - far exceeding the 3TB/64-core minimums, making it the maximum configuration. Since neither the MX740c nor MX840c alone provides 6x 2.5" drives onboard, the MX5016s storage sled is required to satisfy the drive requirement, and four MX840c + MX5016s pairs can still fit within a single MX7000 chassis.

Why each distractor fails:

• A (MX740c, no storage sleds): Fails on drives - no MX5016s means insufficient 2.5" drive capacity, and MX740c's dual-socket architecture doesn't maximize CPU/memory headroom.
• B (MX740c + MX5016s): Solves the drive problem but MX740c is dual-socket, limiting you to roughly 3TB memory and ~64 cores at the ceiling - it meets minimums but isn't the maximum configuration.
• C (MX840c, no storage sleds): The quad-socket MX840c handles CPU and memory, but without MX5016s you cannot achieve 6x 2.5" drives per node, failing a hard requirement.

Memory tip: Think "Max needs MX840c + MX5016s" - whenever a question asks for the maximum config with drive requirements, the quad-socket sled (MX840c) covers compute/memory and the storage sled (MX5016s) covers drives; no storage sled = no drives, no MX840c = not maximum.

No community discussion yet for this question.