View
2.599
Download
2
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
zEnterprise Economics
Dr. John ShedletskyVP, Competitive Technology
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 2
COST PER WORKLOAD
Accurately allocating cost in a virtualized environment
New metric for the age of Smarter Computing
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 3
Smarter Computing With zEnterprise
Platforms Optimized For Different Workloads
Consistent Structured Management
Lowest Cost Per Workload
Best fit for workload Consistent structured practices
Lowest Cost Of Lowest Cost Of Operation Per Operation Per
WorkloadWorkload
Lowest Cost Of Lowest Cost Of Acquisition Per Acquisition Per
WorkloadWorkload
Linuxz/VM AIXz/OS
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 4
Agenda
Platforms Optimized For Different Workloads
Consistent Structured Management
Right fit for workload
Lowest cost per workload
Consistent structured practices
Lowest labor costs
Linuxz/VM AIXz/OS
Cost Per WorkloadExamples
Consolidate standalone workloadsClaims processing Consolidate hybrid front ends
Why zBX
is better than do-it-yourself
zManager labor savingsBenefits of workload management
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 5
Consolidating Workloads With Heavy I/O Requirements
Workloads
Benchmark to determine which platform provides
the lowest TCA over 3 years
IBM WebSphere NDMonitoring softwareOn 4 core “Older” Intel
Online banking workloads, each driving 22
transactions per second, with 1 MB I/O per
transaction
10 workloads per Intel blade
PowerVM
on PS701 8 core Blade
$14,325 per workload
240 workloads per 32-way z/VM
15 workloads per POWER7 blade
$21,413 per workload
z/VM on zEnterprise CPF32 IFLs
$14,052 per workload
Virtualized on Intel 8 core Blade
I/O bandwidthlarge scale poolConsolidation ratios derived from IBM internal studies. z196 32-way performance
projected from z196 8-way and z10 32-way measurements. zBX
with x blades is a statement of direction only. Results may vary based on customer workload profiles/characteristics. Prices will vary by country.
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 6
Consolidating Heavy Workloads
Workloads
Benchmark to determine which platform provides
the lowest TCA over 3 years
IBM WebSphere NDMonitoring softwareOn 8 core Nehalem servers
Online banking workloads, each driving 460
transactions per second with light I/O
1 workload per Intel blade
PowerVM
on PS701 8 core Blade$107,437 per
workload
23 workloads per 32-way z/VM
2 workloads per POWER7 blade
$214,133 per workload
z/VM on zEnterprise CEC32 IFLs
$146,631 per workload
Virtualized on Intel 8 core Blade
more parallelthreads
Consolidation ratios derived from IBM internal studies. z196 32-way performance projected from z196 8-way and z10 32-way measurements. zBX
with x blades is a statement of direction only. Results may vary based on customer workload profiles/characteristics. Prices will vary by country.
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 7
Consolidating Light Workloads
Workloads
Benchmark to determine which platform provides
the lowest TCA over 3 years
IBM WebSphere NDMonitoring softwareOn 4 core “Older” Intel
Online banking workloads, each driving 22 transactions
per second with light I/O
36 workloads per Intel blade
PowerVM
on PS701 8 core Blade
$6,320 per workload
270 workloads per 32-way z/VM
34 workloads per POWER7 blade
Virtualized on Intel 8 core Blade
$5,948 per workload
z/VM on zEnterprise CEC32 IFLs
$12,491 per workload
Fast low cost threads
Consolidation ratios derived from IBM internal studies. z196 32-way performance projected from z196 8-way and z10 32-way measurements. zBX
with x blades is a statement of direction only. Results may vary based on customer workload profiles/characteristics. Prices will vary by country.
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 88
Cost Per Workload Reveals True Value
1
zEnterpriseBest fit
192 cores total
Cost of Hardware
Cost of Software
Cost per Workload
$1.7M $9.8M $23.0K
$2.7M $4.7M $15.0K
True Value: Cost Per Workload
Cost Of Hardware Is Misleading
Note: 3yr TCA. CPO benchmarks. Equal mix of WAS ND and DB2 workloads. List prices.
56 Intel Blades(8 cores per blade)
448 cores total
25 heavy workloads240 heavy
I/O Workloads
235 light workloads
Run 500 workloads
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 9
Agenda
Platforms Optimized For Different Workloads
Consistent Structured Management
Right fit for workload
Lowest cost per workload
Consistent structured practices
Lowest labor costs
Linuxz/VM AIXz/OS
Cost Per WorkloadExamples
Consolidate standalone workloadsClaims processing Consolidate hybrid front ends
Why zBX
is better than do-it-yourself
zManager labor savingsBenefits of workload management
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 10
Customer Case Study – Insurance Claim Processing Company
Primary Stable BusinessGovernment Insurance Claims ProcessingMedicare/Medicaid/Defense/State
Growth BusinessCommercial Claims ProcessingTwo Existing Commercial Claims Processing Systems
−
Homegrown CICS/DB2 Application on Mainframe−
ISV 3rd-party Package running on HPUX
Which platform is the low-cost option for future growth in commercial claims?
10
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 11
Two Commercial Claims Processing Systems
HP 9000 Superdome
rp4440HP Integrity rx6600
HP Servers + ISV IBM System z CICS/DB2
HP 9000 Superdome
rp5470HP Integrity rx6600
Production Servers
Dev/Test Servers
Total MIPS 11,302
MIPS Used for commercial claims processing production/dev/test 2418
Claims per year 327,652 Claims per year 4,056,000
Which system costs less for
future growth?
Buy Build
Calculate cost per workload
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 12
Allocated Annual Costs For Two SystemsMainframe Distributed
Hardware 1,302,205 87,806
Hardware Maint 315,548
Software IBM MLC 4,842,384
Software Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468
Software Non IBM MLC 5,027,936
Storage 877,158
Network 418,755
Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289
Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563
Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)
Billing Center 1,611,650
Call Center 2,920,090
Development 1,907,382
Total 9,811,002 541,563
Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652
$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87
Provided by customer finance department
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 13
Allocated Annual Costs For Two SystemsMainframe Distributed
Hardware 1,302,205 87,806
Hardware Maint 315,548
Software IBM MLC 4,842,384
Software Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468
Software Non IBM MLC 5,027,936
Storage 877,158
Network 418,755
Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289
Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563
Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)
Billing Center 1,611,650
Call Center 2,920,090
Development 1,907,382
Total 9,811,002 541,563
Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652
$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87
Provided by customer finance department
Mainframe costs easily identified, distributed costs difficult to identify
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 14
Allocated Annual Costs For Two SystemsMainframe Distributed
Hardware 1,302,205 87,806
Hardware Maint 315,548
Software IBM MLC 4,842,384
Software Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468
Software Non IBM MLC 5,027,936
Storage 877,158
Network 418,755
Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289
Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563
Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)
Billing Center 1,611,650
Call Center 2,920,090
Development 1,907,382
Total 9,811,002 541,563
Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652
$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87
Provided by customer finance department
Mainframe costs easily identified, distributed costs difficult to identify
Billing and Call center costs allocated to mainframe, but would be the same for either option
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 15
Allocated Annual Costs For Two SystemsMainframe Distributed
Hardware 1,302,205 87,806
Hardware Maint 315,548
Software IBM MLC 4,842,384
Software Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468
Software Non IBM MLC 5,027,936
Storage 877,158
Network 418,755
Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289
Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563
Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)
Billing Center 1,611,650
Call Center 2,920,090
Development 1,907,382
Total 9,811,002 541,563
Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652
$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87
Provided by customer finance department
Mainframe costs easily identified, distributed costs difficult to identify
Billing and Call center costs allocated to mainframe, but would be the same for either option
Development still required to customize packaged software for each new contract
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 16
True Workload Costs For Either OptionMainframe Distributed
Hardware 1,302,205 87,806
Hardware Maint 315,548
Software IBM MLC 4,842,384
Software Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468
Software Non IBM MLC 5,027,936
Storage 877,158 ?
Network 418,755 ?
Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289
Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563
Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)
Billing Center same same
Call Center same same
Development 1,907,382 123,031
Total 5,279,262 664,594
Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652
$ Per Claim 1.30 2.03Mainframe has lower cost per workload
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 17
A Note On Support Staff Annual Costs
HP 9000 Superdome
rp4440HP Integrity rx6600
HP Servers + ISV IBM System z CICS/DB2
HP 9000 Superdome
rp5470HP Integrity rx6600
Production Servers
Dev/Test Servers
Total MIPS 11,302
MIPS Used for commercial claims processing production/dev/test 2418
Claims per year 327,652 Claims per year 4,056,000
$0.12 per claim
$0.79 per claim
Mainframe support staff has
6.6x better productivity
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 18
A Note On Processing Equivalence
Current Computing Capacity Allocated For Distributed is 38918 RPE’s
Using the Scaling Factor (Claims/Sec Distributed / Claims/Sec Mainframe) we calculate that processing the equivalent Claims volume on the mainframe would require only 195.46 MIPS
This gives us an RPE/MIPS factor of 199.10 (Distributed capacity to Mainframe capacity ratio)
We have studied Offloads that range from 122 RPE/MIPS to 670 RPE/MIPS
18
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 19
Agenda
Platforms Optimized For Different Workloads
Consistent Structured Management
Right fit for workload
Lowest cost per workload
Consistent structured practices
Lowest labor costs
Linuxz/VM AIXz/OS
Cost Per WorkloadExamples
Consolidate standalone workloadsClaims processing Consolidate hybrid front ends
Why zBX
is better than do-it-yourself
zManager labor savingsBenefits of workload management
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 20
Collapse Web Front End Workloads Into zEnterprise Platform
AIX on Power Blade
DataPower
XI50z
z/OS
z/OSz/OS
CICS/DB2CICS/DB2
AIXAIX
WASWAS ESBESB
zEnterprise z196
zEnterprise BladeCenter
Extension (xBX)
Web facing front-end
Messagehub
CICS/DB2core system
Run as ensemble of virtual servers
Unified management of virtual machines
Manage ensemble as a single workload with service goals
Assign best fit to Power blade and XI50z for lowest cost per workload
Embedded pre-configured data network
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 21zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Feb. 2011 2121
492 messages per sec$764 per mps
5,117 messages per sec$33 per mps
Linux
OSB
DataPowerXI50z
messages messages
DataPower XI50z – Built For Purpose Appliance
Enterprise Service Bus benchmark comparison
DataPower XI50z in zBX
Microsoft BizTalk ServerWindows on Intel Server
4 sockets, 32 cores128 GB
Tests consists of measuring maximum throughput of ESB while performing a variety of message mediation workloads: pass-through, routing, transformation, and schema validation
5,839 messages per sec$120 per mps
Oracle Service BusOracle Linux on HP DL380
2 sockets, 12 cores128 GB
Windows
BizTalkServer
HS 22, 8 cores
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 22
Web Front Ends Cost 58% Less On zEnterprise
28 workloads each driving
1975 tps
Web Facing
Competitive App Server57 SPARC T3-1B blades
in SUN racks2 HP DL380 servers
(for ESB)936 cores total
WebSphere App Server28 POWER7 blades2 DataPower
XI50zin zBX
224 cores total
Power Blades in zBX
SPARC T544032 core servers
HP DL380 servers(for ESB)
$11.7M3yr TCA HW+SW
$4.9M3yr TCA HW+SW
Upgrade to new SPARC T3
hardware
28 front end applications on older SPARC T2+ servers
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 23
Web Front Ends Cost 58% Less On zEnterprise
Competitive App Server57 SPARC T3-1B blades
in SUN racks2 HP DL380 servers
(for ESB)936 cores total
WebSphere App Server28 POWER7 blades2 DataPower
XI50zin zBX
224 cores total
Power Blades in zBX
$11.7M3yr TCA HW+SW
$4.9M3yr TCA HW+SW
Upgrade to new SPARC T3
hardware
Why?WAS on PS701 delivers 1.84x processing capacity
Competitive Application Server cannot effectively utilize the threads available in T3 blade
DataPower better price/performanceNeed to over provision SPARC T3 since no zManager
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 24
SAP Applications Cost 20% Less On zEnterprise
20 workloads
SAP
38 SPARC T3-1B blades in SUN rack
608 cores total
23 POWER7 blades in zBX
184 cores total
Upgrade to new SPARC T3
hardware
z196zBX
z196T3-1B
20SPARC T544032 core servers
538,120 total SAPs640 cores total
$1.2M3yr TCA HW+SW
$0.97M3yr TCA HW+SW
Power Blades in zBX
20 front end SAP applications on older SPARC T2+ servers
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 25
Agenda
Platforms Optimized For Different Workloads
Consistent Structured Management
Right fit for workload
Lowest cost per workload
Consistent structured practices
Lowest labor costs
Linuxz/VM AIXz/OS
Cost Per WorkloadExamples
Claims processing Consolidate standalone workloadsConsolidate hybrid front ends
Why zBX
is better than do-it-yourself
zManager labor savingsBenefits of workload management
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 26
72 workloads
20 workloads
Web Facing
SAP
POWER7 blades in BladeCenter
chassis
POWER7 bladesin zBX
racks with zManager
(Manage+Automate)zEnterprise
Do-It-Yourself
Compare The Costs For 92 Hybrid Workloads
I see how fit for purpose can cut costs, but why do I need zBX
racks?
Can’t I just use BladeCenters to do it
myself?
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 27
0
50
100150
200
250
300
350400
450
500
2000/01 2007/08
Year
Intel - Virtual Servers/FTE z/OS - MIPS/FTE
Labor Cost Trends Favor A Centralized Structured Approach To Management
Large scale consolidation and consistent structured management practices
drive increases in labor productivity
Small scale consolidation with ad hoc management achieves
lesser gains
The more workloads you consolidate and manage with consistent structured practices…
the lower the management labor costSource: IBM Scorpion Studies and IDC Three Data Centers –
One Vision.PDF
(IDC, 2010)
3.9x Improvement
18x I
mprov
emen
t
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 28
Process Typical Distributed Management Practices
zManager
Asset Management
Discover assets with ad hoc methodsManual entitlement management
Automated discovery and management of entitlement assets
Deployment Management
Manually configure hypervisor and build networks
Automated deployment of hypervisor and attachment to integrated networks
Security Management
Different ways to manage administrator access
Centralized, fine-grained administrator access management
Change Management
No visibility into impact of changes Track dependencies for change impact
Capacity and Performance Management
No end-to-end transaction monitoringManually adjust CPU resources to meet changing workload demands
End-to-end transaction monitoring to isolate issuesAutomatic CPU resource adjustments to meet changing workload demands
zManager Provides Structured Management For zEnterprise Virtual Environments
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 29
DIY Tasks (per Blade) Elapsed Time Labor TimeInitial communication setup & educationBoot VIOS disc & install (creates LPAR for VIOS automatically)Configure VIOS networkingCreate new storage pool for LPARsInstall VIOS service fix packs
6 min 26 sec37 min 59 sec2 min 49 sec35 sec61 min 5 sec
6 min 26 sec36 min2 min 49 sec35 sec20 sec
TOTAL TIME 1 hr 48 min 52 sec 46 min 10 sec
zManager Tasks (per Blade) Elapsed Time Labor TimeAdd entitlement for a blade 90 min 92 sec
TOTAL TIME 1 hr 30 min 1 min 32 sec
Hypervisor Setup And Configuration Lab Test – Do-It-Yourself vs. zManager
Source: IBM CPO Internal Study
97% reductionin labor time
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 30
Network Setup And Configuration Lab Test – Do-It-Yourself vs. zManager
Do-It-Yourself Tasks (for two BladeCenters) Elapsed/Labor TimePlanning (includes time to go over docs, etc)CablingAMM ConfigurationLogical Configuration (L2)Blades network configurationTestingDocumenting the configuration
5 hrs2 hrs2 hrs8 hrs4 hrs2 hrs3 hrs
TOTAL TIME 26 hrs
zManager Tasks (for two BladeCenters) Elapsed/Labor TimePlanningCabling (pre-cabled in zBX)AMM Configuration (done in zBX)Logical configuration (L2)Blades network configurationTesting (pre-tested)Documenting the configuration (all part of zManager)
3 hrs0 hrs0 hrs30 mins1 hr 30 mins0 hrs0 hrs
TOTAL TIME 5 hrs
Source: IBM CPO Internal Study
81% reductionin labor time
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 31
Performance Manager Lab Test – Automatic Allocation Of CPU Resource
zManager monitors virtual machine performance and automatically adjusts CPU resources as needed
Considers priority and performance relative to service level agreement goals
Reduces the need to over-provision CPU resources
Workload 2 (W2)
Workload 1 (W1)
2. Performance Manager is turned on. zManager
detects W1 is underperforming.
4. W1 reaches performance goal.
3. Over time, zManager
adjusts CPU resources, taking from W2 and giving to W1.
15 minutes
1. No performance management. W1 is underperforming, and W2 is over-
performing.
Goal
Time
Source: IBM CPO Internal Study
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 32
zManager Performance Management Reduces Need To Overprovision CPU Resource
Without zManager With zManager
Performance manager enables trading off resource from lower priority workload, avoiding the need to overprovision
Must overprovision CPU resource for both workloads by 10% to handle unexpected spike in demand
Workload 2 Workload 2
Workload 1 Workload 1
11%
11%
11%
11%
13.2%
Unexpected 20% spike in average demand
Aver
age
utiliz
atio
n
100%
110%
8.8%
Performance manager reduces entitlement by
20%
13.2%
Unexpected 20% spike in average demand, Performance Manager increases entitlement by 20%
Tota
l CPU
Res
ourc
e N
eede
d
100%
Aver
age
utiliz
atio
nTo
tal C
PU R
esou
rce
Nee
ded
10% more CPU resources needed
No additional CPU resources needed
No additional CPUresource needed
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 33
72 workloads
20 workloads
Web Facing
Data Processing
62POWER7 blades in 5 BladeCenter
chassis
56POWER7 blades
in two zBX
racks with zManager
(Manage+Automate)
72 Web facing hybrid applications, 2 per POWER7 blades20 SAP hybrid applications, 1 per POWER7 blade. DIY blades over provisioned by 10% because no zManager
performance manager Cost of CICS/DB2 and SAP components of workloads not includedLabor costs are for blade management onlyLabor rate $159,600 per year
zEnterprise
Do-It-Yourself
Blades Cost of Acquisition $7,325K
Labor $ 987K
Total (3yr) $8,312K
$30.1K per workload per year
$27.9K
per workload per year
zBX
Cost of Acquisition $6,994K
Labor $ 714K
Total (3yr) $7,708K
28%
less labor cost and 7% less cost per workload
Results may vary based on customer workload profiles/characteristics. Prices will vary by country.
Case Study: Compare The Costs For 92 Hybrid Workloads
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 34
zManager Labor Reduction Benefits
Deployment Management
Reduced by 33%
Capacity/PerformanceManagement
Reduced by 52%
Change Management
Asset Management
Reduced by 9%
Security Management Reducedby 20%
Reducedby 41%
4289 total hours per year reduced by 28% to 3104 hours per year
Automatic setup and configuration of the hypervisor and out-of-the-
box networks
Automation to isolate and fix issues
Automated discovery, entitlement management
Centralized fine-grain administrator access control
Standardization of images and firmware, visibility into relationships among resources
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 35
Summary
Cost per workload is the key metric for the new IT economics
Fit for purpose reduces cost of acquisition per workload
zEnterprise integrated management reduces cost of labor per workload
36© 2011 International Business Machines Corporation36
Smarter Computing: System z Analyst Summit
Thank you! ibm.com/smartercomputing
37© 2011 International Business Machines Corporation37
Smarter Computing: System z Analyst Summit
Trademarks and disclaimersIntel, Intel logo, Intel Inside, Intel Inside logo, Intel Centrino, Intel Centrino
logo, Celeron, Intel Xeon, Intel SpeedStep, Itanium, and Pentium are trademarks or registered trademarks of Intel Corporation or its subsidiaries in the United States and other countries./ Linux is a registered trademark of Linus
Torvalds
in the United States, other countries, or both. Microsoft, Windows, Windows NT, and the Windows logo are trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States, other countries, or both. IT Infrastructure Library is a registered trademark of the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency which is now part of the Office of Government Commerce. ITIL is a registered trademark, and a registered community trademark of the Office of Government Commerce, and is
registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the United States and other countries. Java and all Java-based trademarks and logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other company, product, or service
names may be trademarks or service marks of others. Information
is provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind.
The customer examples described are presented as illustrations of how those customers have used IBM products and the results they may have achieved. Actual environmental costs and performance characteristics may vary by customer.
Information concerning non-IBM products was obtained from a supplier of these products, published announcement material, or other publicly available sources and does not constitute an endorsement of such products by IBM. Sources for non-IBM list prices and performance numbers are taken from publicly available information, including vendor announcements and vendor
worldwide homepages. IBM has not tested these products and cannot confirm the accuracy of performance, capability, or any other claims related to non-IBM products. Questions on the capability of non-IBM products should be addressed to the supplier of those products.
All statements regarding IBM future direction and intent are subject to change or withdrawal without notice, and represent goals
and objectives only.
Some information addresses anticipated future capabilities. Such
information is not intended as a definitive statement of a commitment to specific levels of performance, function or delivery schedules with respect to any future products. Such commitments are only made in IBM product announcements. The information is presented here to communicate IBM's current investment and development activities as a good faith effort to help with
our customers' future planning.
Performance is based on measurements and projections using standard IBM benchmarks in a controlled environment. The actual throughput or performance that any user will experience will vary depending upon considerations such as the amount of multiprogramming in the user's job stream, the I/O configuration, the storage configuration, and the workload processed. Therefore, no assurance can be given that an individual user will achieve throughput or performance improvements equivalent to the ratios stated here.
Prices are suggested U.S. list prices and are subject to change without notice. Starting price may not include a hard drive, operating system or other features. Contact your IBM representative or Business Partner for the most current pricing in your geography.
Photographs shown may be engineering prototypes. Changes may be incorporated in production models.
© IBM Corporation 2011. All rights reserved.References in this document to IBM products or services do not imply that IBM intends to make them available in every country.
Trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation in the
United States, other countries, or both can be found on the World Wide Web at http://www.ibm.com/legal/copytrade.shtml.
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 38
Backup
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 39
Web Workloads - Performance Data
Server Description Cores RPE RPE2 TPS(Measured)
TPS(Calculated)
T5440 SPARCT2+32 core
Sun SPARC Enterprise T5440 (4U) UltraSPARC T2+ 1.6GHz 4MB (4ch/32co)
32 102,617 21,580 5,300 Max throughput
with multi JVM run using Solaris containers
T3-1B 16 core
Oracle SPARC T3-1B SPARC T3 1.65GHz (1ch/16co)
16 61,249 11,520 2829 Calculated as
5300*(11520/21580)
Power 7108 core
Power 710 Express (2U) Power7 3.55GHz (1ch/8co)
8 60,208 14,920 5,670
PS7018 core
IBM BladeCenter
PS701 Express Power7 3.0GHz (1ch/8co)
8 53,189 13,730 5218Calculated as
5670*(13730/14920)
WAS on PS701 versus WLS on T3-1B is 1.84x WLS on T5440 versus WLS on T3-1B is 1.87xWLS on T5440 versus WAS on PS701 is nearly 1x
zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 40
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Change Mgmt
Security Mgmt
Asset Mgmt
Capacity/Perf Mgmt
Deployment MgmtYear
ly L
abor
Hou
rs
zEnterpriseDo-It-Yourself
28%fewer labor
hours
Case Study: zEnterprise Reduces Infrastructure Labor Hours
Recommended