zEnterprise EconomicsDr. John ShedletskyVP, Competitive Technology
New metricfor the ageof SmarterComputing      COST PER               WORKLOAD                Accurately allocating cost in...
Smarter Computing With zEnterprise   Platforms Optimized For                                                       Consist...
Agenda   Platforms Optimized For                                                          Consistent Structured     Differ...
Consolidating Workloads With Heavy I/ORequirements   Benchmark to                                                         ...
Consolidating Heavy Workloads    Benchmark to                                                                             ...
Consolidating Light Workloads    Benchmark to                                                            36 workloads     ...
Cost Per Workload Reveals True Value                  25 heavy                                                            ...
Agenda   Platforms Optimized For                                                          Consistent Structured     Differ...
Customer Case Study – Insurance Claim Processing Company     Primary Stable Business       Government Insurance Claims Pro...
Two Commercial Claims Processing Systems  HP Servers + ISV                                                      IBM System...
Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems                                       Mainframe                  Distributed       ...
Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems                                       Mainframe                  Distributed       ...
Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems                                       Mainframe                  Distributed       ...
Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems                                       Mainframe                  Distributed       ...
True Workload Costs For Either Option                                       Mainframe                  DistributedHardware...
A Note On Support Staff Annual Costs  HP Servers + ISV                                                      IBM System z C...
A Note On Processing Equivalence     Current Computing Capacity Allocated For Distributed is     38918 RPE’s     Using the...
Agenda   Platforms Optimized For                                                          Consistent Structured     Differ...
Collapse Web Front End Workloads IntozEnterprise Platform  Web facing     Message            CICS/DB2   front-end       hu...
DataPower XI50z – Built For Purpose Appliance Enterprise                                                    Microsoft BizT...
Web Front Ends Cost 58% Less On zEnterprise    28 front end        Competitive App Serverapplications on older   57 SPARC ...
Web Front Ends Cost 58% Less On zEnterprise                                                                               ...
SAP Applications Cost 20% Less On zEnterprise  20 front end SAPapplications on older         38 SPARC T3-1B               ...
Agenda   Platforms Optimized For                                                          Consistent Structured     Differ...
Compare The Costs For 92 Hybrid Workloads   I see how fit forpurpose can cut costs,                                       ...
Labor Cost Trends Favor A Centralized     Structured Approach To Management                                Intel - Virtual...
zManager Provides Structured Management ForzEnterprise Virtual Environments  Process          Typical Distributed         ...
Hypervisor Setup And Configuration Lab Test –     Do-It-Yourself vs. zManager                             DIY Tasks (per B...
Network Setup And Configuration Lab Test –     Do-It-Yourself vs. zManager                    Do-It-Yourself Tasks (for tw...
Performance Manager Lab Test –     Automatic Allocation Of CPU Resource                  Time                             ...
zManager Performance Management Reduces                     Need To Overprovision CPU Resource                            ...
Case Study:      Compare The Costs For 92 Hybrid Workloads                                                         62     ...
zManager Labor Reduction Benefits                                4289 total hours per year reduced                        ...
Summary Cost per workload is the key metric for the new IT economics Fit for purpose reduces cost of acquisition per workl...
Smarter Computing: System z Analyst Summit     Thank you!     ibm.com/smartercomputing36                                  ...
Smarter Computing: System z Analyst SummitTrademarks and disclaimersIntel, Intel logo, Intel Inside, Intel Inside logo, In...
Backup         zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011   38
Web Workloads - Performance Data  Server       Description              Cores           RPE           RPE2             TPS...
Case Study:zEnterprise Reduces Infrastructure Labor Hours                       5000                       4500           ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

zEnterprise Reduces Cost Per Workload

2,881 views
2,781 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,881
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
72
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
158
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

zEnterprise Reduces Cost Per Workload

  1. 1. zEnterprise EconomicsDr. John ShedletskyVP, Competitive Technology
  2. 2. New metricfor the ageof SmarterComputing COST PER WORKLOAD Accurately allocating cost in a virtualized environment zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 2
  3. 3. Smarter Computing With zEnterprise Platforms Optimized For Consistent Structured Different Workloads Managementz/OS z/VM AIX Linux Best fit for workload Consistent structured practices Lowest Cost Of Lowest Cost Of Acquisition Per Operation Per Workload Workload Lowest Cost Per Workload zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 3
  4. 4. Agenda Platforms Optimized For Consistent Structured Different Workloads Managementz/OS z/VM AIX Linux Right fit for workload Consistent structured practices Lowest cost per workload Lowest labor costs Cost Per Workload Why zBX is better than Examples do-it-yourself Consolidate standalone zManager labor savings workloads Benefits of workload Claims processing management Consolidate hybrid front ends zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 4
  5. 5. Consolidating Workloads With Heavy I/ORequirements Benchmark to 10 workloads Virtualized on Intel determine which per Intel blade 8 core Blade platform provides $21,413 per workload the lowest TCA over 3 years 15 workloads PowerVM on PS701 per POWER7 blade 8 core Blade Workloads $14,325 per workload IBM WebSphere ND Monitoring software On 4 core “Older” IntelOnline banking workloads, 240 workloads z/VM on zEnterprise CPF each driving 22transactions per second, per 32-way z/VM 32 IFLs with 1 MB I/O per $14,052 per workload transaction I/O bandwidth Consolidation ratios derived from IBM internal studies. z196 32-way performance large scale pool 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 5
  6. 6. Consolidating Heavy Workloads Benchmark to Virtualized on Intel determine which 1 workload 8 core Blade platform provides per Intel blade $214,133 per the lowest TCA workload over 3 years 2 workloads PowerVM on PS701 per POWER7 blade 8 core Blade Workloads more parallel $107,437 per IBM WebSphere ND threads workload Monitoring software On 8 core Nehalem servers Online banking workloads, 23 workloads each driving 460 z/VM on zEnterprise CECtransactions per second with per 32-way z/VM 32 IFLs light I/O $146,631 per Consolidation ratios derived from IBM internal studies. z196 32-way performance workload 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
  7. 7. Consolidating Light Workloads Benchmark to 36 workloads Virtualized on Intel determine which per Intel blade 8 core Blade platform provides Fast low cost $5,948 per workload the lowest TCA threads over 3 years 34 workloads PowerVM on PS701 per POWER7 blade 8 core Blade Workloads $6,320 per workload IBM WebSphere ND Monitoring software On 4 core “Older” Intel Online banking workloads,each driving 22 transactions 270 workloads z/VM on zEnterprise CEC per second with light I/O per 32-way z/VM 32 IFLs $12,491 per workload 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
  8. 8. Cost Per Workload Reveals True Value 25 heavy True Value: Cost Per Workload 240 heavy workloads I/O Workloads 235 light Cost Of Hardware Is Misleading workloadsRun 500 workloads Cost of Cost of Cost per Hardware Software Workload 56 Intel Blades (8 cores per blade) 448 cores total $1.7M $9.8M $23.0K 1 zEnterprise Best fit $2.7M $4.7M $15.0K 192 cores total Note: 3yr TCA. CPO benchmarks. Equal mix of WAS ND and DB2 workloads. List prices. zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 8
  9. 9. Agenda Platforms Optimized For Consistent Structured Different Workloads Managementz/OS z/VM AIX Linux Right fit for workload Consistent structured practices Lowest cost per workload Lowest labor costs Cost Per Workload Why zBX is better than Examples do-it-yourself Consolidate standalone zManager labor savings workloads Benefits of workload Claims processing management Consolidate hybrid front ends zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 9
  10. 10. Customer Case Study – Insurance Claim Processing Company Primary Stable Business Government Insurance Claims Processing Medicare/Medicaid/Defense/State Growth Business Commercial Claims Processing Two 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 10
  11. 11. Two Commercial Claims Processing Systems HP Servers + ISV IBM System z CICS/DB2 Which system costs less for Production Servers HP 9000 Superdome rp4440 future HP Integrity rx6600 growth? Total MIPS 11,302 MIPS Used for commercial Dev/Test Servers claims processing HP 9000 Superdome rp5470 Calculate production/dev/test 2418 HP Integrity rx6600 cost per Claims per year 327,652 Claims per year 4,056,000 workload Buy Build zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 11
  12. 12. Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems Mainframe Distributed Provided by customerHardware 1,302,205 87,806 finance departmentHardware Maint 315,548Software IBM MLC 4,842,384Software Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468Software Non IBM MLC 5,027,936Storage 877,158Network 418,755Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)Billing Center 1,611,650Call Center 2,920,090Development 1,907,382Total 9,811,002 541,563Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87 zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 12
  13. 13. Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems Mainframe Distributed Provided by customerHardware 1,302,205 87,806 finance departmentHardware Maint 315,548Software IBM MLC 4,842,384 Mainframe costs easilySoftware Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468 identified, distributedSoftware Non IBM MLC 5,027,936 costs difficult to identifyStorage 877,158Network 418,755Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)Billing Center 1,611,650Call Center 2,920,090Development 1,907,382Total 9,811,002 541,563Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87 zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 13
  14. 14. Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems Mainframe Distributed Provided by customerHardware 1,302,205 87,806 finance departmentHardware Maint 315,548Software IBM MLC 4,842,384 Mainframe costs easilySoftware Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468 identified, distributedSoftware Non IBM MLC 5,027,936 costs difficult to identifyStorage 877,158Network 418,755 Billing and Call center costs allocated toSupport Staff 2,324,623 257,289 mainframe, but would bePlatform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563 the same for either optionPlatform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)Billing Center 1,611,650Call Center 2,920,090Development 1,907,382Total 9,811,002 541,563Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87 zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 14
  15. 15. Allocated Annual Costs For Two Systems Mainframe Distributed Provided by customerHardware 1,302,205 87,806 finance departmentHardware Maint 315,548Software IBM MLC 4,842,384 Mainframe costs easilySoftware Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468 identified, distributedSoftware Non IBM MLC 5,027,936 costs difficult to identifyStorage 877,158Network 418,755 Billing and Call center costs allocated toSupport Staff 2,324,623 257,289 mainframe, but would bePlatform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563 the same for either optionPlatform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)Billing Center 1,611,650 Development still required to customizeCall Center 2,920,090 packaged software forDevelopment 1,907,382 each new contractTotal 9,811,002 541,563Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652$ Per Claim 2.42 0.87 zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 15
  16. 16. True Workload Costs For Either Option Mainframe DistributedHardware 1,302,205 87,806Hardware Maint 315,548Software IBM MLC 4,842,384Software Non IBM OTC 647,843 196,468Software Non IBM MLC 5,027,936Storage 877,158 ?Network 418,755 ?Support Staff 2,324,623 257,289Platform + Staff Total 15,756,452 541,563Platform + Staff Claims Allocation 3,371,880 (21.4%) 541,563 (100%)Billing Center same sameCall Center same sameDevelopment 1,907,382 123,031Total 5,279,262 664,594Claims Processed 4,056,000 327,652 Mainframe has lower$ Per Claim 1.30 2.03 cost per workload zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 16
  17. 17. A Note On Support Staff Annual Costs HP Servers + ISV IBM System z CICS/DB2 $0.79 per claim Production Servers HP 9000 Superdome rp4440 $0.12 per claim HP Integrity rx6600 Total MIPS 11,302 MIPS Used for commercial Dev/Test Servers claims processing HP 9000 Superdome rp5470 production/dev/test 2418 Mainframe HP Integrity rx6600 support staff has Claims per year 327,652 6.6x better Claims per year 4,056,000 productivity zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 17
  18. 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/MIPS18 zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 18
  19. 19. Agenda Platforms Optimized For Consistent Structured Different Workloads Managementz/OS z/VM AIX Linux Right fit for workload Consistent structured practices Lowest cost per workload Lowest labor costs Cost Per Workload Why zBX is better than Examples do-it-yourself Consolidate standalone zManager labor savings workloads Benefits of workload Claims processing management Consolidate hybrid front ends zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 19
  20. 20. Collapse Web Front End Workloads IntozEnterprise Platform Web facing Message CICS/DB2 front-end hub core system Run as ensemble of virtual servers Unified management of virtual machines Manage ensemble as a AIX on Power DataPower z/OS single workload with service Blade XI50z goals WAS ESB CICS/DB2 Assign best fit to Power blade and XI50z for lowest cost per workload AIX z/OS Embedded pre-configured zEnterprise BladeCenter zEnterprise data network Extension (xBX) z196 zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 20
  21. 21. DataPower XI50z – Built For Purpose Appliance Enterprise Microsoft BizTalk Server 492 messages per sec Service Bus Windows on Intel Server benchmark BizTalk $764 per mps 4 sockets, 32 cores comparison Server 128 GB Windows Oracle Service Bus 5,839 messages per sec OSB Oracle Linux on HP DL380 $120 per mps 2 sockets, 12 cores Linux 128 GB messages messages DataPower XI50z 5,117 messages per sec $33 per mps Tests consists of measuring maximum throughput DataPower of ESB while performing a variety of message mediation workloads: pass-through, routing, XI50z in zBX transformation, and schema validation HS 22, 8 cores zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO -- Feb. 2011 zEnterprise Economics SWG CPO Mar 2011 21
  22. 22. Web Front Ends Cost 58% Less On zEnterprise 28 front end Competitive App Serverapplications on older 57 SPARC T3-1B blades in SUN racks SPARC T2+ servers 2 HP DL380 servers (for ESB) 936 cores total Web Facing 28 workloads each driving Upgrade to $11.7M 1975 tps new SPARC T3 3yr TCA hardware HW+SW SPARC T5440 WebSphere App Server 32 core servers 28 POWER7 blades 2 DataPower XI50z HP DL380 servers in zBX (for ESB) 224 cores total Power Blades $4.9M in zBX 3yr TCA HW+SW zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 22
  23. 23. Web Front Ends Cost 58% Less On zEnterprise Why?Competitive App Server57 SPARC T3-1B blades in SUN racks 2 HP DL380 servers WAS on PS701 (for ESB) 936 cores total delivers 1.84x processing capacity Competitive Upgrade to $11.7M new SPARC T3 Application Server 3yr TCA hardware HW+SW cannot effectively utilize the threads available in T3 bladeWebSphere App Server DataPower better 28 POWER7 blades 2 DataPower XI50z price/performance in zBX 224 cores total Need to over provision SPARC T3 Power Blades $4.9M since no zManager in zBX 3yr TCA HW+SW zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 23
  24. 24. SAP Applications Cost 20% Less On zEnterprise 20 front end SAPapplications on older 38 SPARC T3-1B blades in SUN rack SPARC T2+ servers 608 cores total T3-1B z196 SAP Upgrade to $1.2M 20 workloads new SPARC T3 3yr TCA hardware HW+SW 20 SPARC T5440 32 core servers 23 POWER7 blades 538,120 total SAPs in zBX 640 cores total 184 cores total zBX z196 Power Blades $0.97M in zBX 3yr TCA zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 HW+SW 24
  25. 25. Agenda Platforms Optimized For Consistent Structured Different Workloads Managementz/OS z/VM AIX Linux Right fit for workload Consistent structured practices Lowest cost per workload Lowest labor costs Cost Per Workload Why zBX is better than Examples do-it-yourself Claims processing zManager labor savings Consolidate standalone Benefits of workload workloads management Consolidate hybrid front ends zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 25
  26. 26. Compare The Costs For 92 Hybrid Workloads I see how fit forpurpose can cut costs, POWER7 blades inbut why do I need zBX BladeCenter chassis racks? Can’t I just use BladeCenters to do it Web Facing myself? Do-It-Yourself 72 workloads SAP 20 workloads POWER7 blades in zBX racks with zManager zEnterprise (Manage+Automate) zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 26
  27. 27. Labor Cost Trends Favor A Centralized Structured Approach To Management Intel - Virtual Servers/FTE z/OS - MIPS/FTE 500 450 Large scale consolidation and t 400 en consistent structured em 350 management practices drive ov 300 pr increases in labor productivity Im 250 x 18 200 150 Small scale consolidation with 100 ment 50 3.9x Improve ad hoc management achieves 0 lesser gains 2000/01 2007/08 Year The more workloads you consolidate and manage with consistent structured practices… the lower the management labor costSource: IBM Scorpion Studies and IDC Three DataCenters – One Vision.PDF (IDC, 2010) zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 27
  28. 28. zManager Provides Structured Management ForzEnterprise Virtual Environments Process Typical Distributed zManager Management PracticesAsset Discover assets with ad hoc Automated discovery andManagement methods management of entitlement assets Manual entitlement managementDeployment Manually configure hypervisor and Automated deployment ofManagement build networks hypervisor and attachment to integrated networksSecurity Different ways to manage Centralized, fine-grainedManagement administrator access administrator access managementChange No visibility into impact of changes Track dependencies for changeManagement impactCapacity and No end-to-end transaction End-to-end transaction monitoring toPerformance monitoring isolate issuesManagement Manually adjust CPU resources to Automatic CPU resource meet changing workload demands adjustments to meet changing workload demands zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 28
  29. 29. Hypervisor Setup And Configuration Lab Test – Do-It-Yourself vs. zManager DIY Tasks (per Blade) Elapsed Time Labor Time Initial communication setup & education 6 min 26 sec 6 min 26 sec Boot VIOS disc & install (creates LPAR for VIOS automatically) 37 min 59 sec 36 min Configure VIOS networking 2 min 49 sec 2 min 49 sec Create new storage pool for LPARs 35 sec 35 sec Install VIOS service fix packs 61 min 5 sec 20 sec TOTAL TIME 1 hr 48 min 52 sec 46 min 10 sec zManager Tasks (per Blade) Elapsed Time Labor Time Add entitlement for a blade 90 min 92 sec TOTAL TIME 1 hr 30 min 1 min 32 sec 97% reduction in labor timeSource: IBM CPO Internal Study zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 29
  30. 30. Network Setup And Configuration Lab Test – Do-It-Yourself vs. zManager Do-It-Yourself Tasks (for two BladeCenters) Elapsed/Labor Time Planning (includes time to go over docs, etc) 5 hrs Cabling 2 hrs AMM Configuration 2 hrs Logical Configuration (L2) 8 hrs Blades network configuration 4 hrs Testing 2 hrs Documenting the configuration 3 hrs TOTAL TIME 26 hrs zManager Tasks (for two BladeCenters) Elapsed/Labor Time Planning 3 hrs Cabling (pre-cabled in zBX) 0 hrs AMM Configuration (done in zBX) 0 hrs Logical configuration (L2) 30 mins Blades network configuration 1 hr 30 mins Testing (pre-tested) 0 hrs Documenting the configuration (all part of zManager) 0 hrs TOTAL TIME 5 hrs 81% reduction in labor timeSource: IBM CPO Internal Study zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 30
  31. 31. Performance Manager Lab Test – Automatic Allocation Of CPU Resource Time zManager monitors virtual machine Workload 2 (W2) performance and automatically adjusts 15 minutes CPU resources as Goal needed Considers priority and Workload 1 (W1) performance relative to service level agreement goals 2. Performance Manager is 4. W1 reaches turned on. zManager detects performance W1 is underperforming. goal. Reduces the need to 1. No performance over-provision CPU management. W1 is underperforming, 3. Over time, zManager resources adjusts CPU resources, and W2 is over- taking from W2 and performing. giving to W1.Source: IBM CPO Internal Study zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 31
  32. 32. zManager Performance Management Reduces Need To Overprovision CPU Resource Without zManager With zManager Total CPU Resource NeededTotal CPU Resource Needed 110% No additional CPU No additional CPU resourcesneeded resource needed 100% 100% 10% more CPU resources needed Unexpected 20% spike in average demand, Performance Manager Unexpected increases entitlement by 20% spike in 20% average 13.2% 13.2% demand Workload 1 Workload 1 11% 11% Average utilizationAverage utilization Performance manager reduces entitlement by 20% 11% Workload 2 Workload 2 11% 8.8% Must overprovision CPU resource for Performance manager enables trading off both workloads by 10% to handle resource from lower priority workload, unexpected spike in demand avoiding the need to overprovision zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 32
  33. 33. Case Study: Compare The Costs For 92 Hybrid Workloads 62 POWER7 blades in 5 Blades Cost BladeCenter chassis of Acquisition $7,325K Labor $ 987K Total (3yr) $8,312K $30.1K per Web Facing Do-It-Yourself 72 workloads Data Processing workload per year 20 workloads zBX Cost of Acquisition $6,994K Labor $ 714K72 Web facing hybridapplications, 2 per POWER7blades 56 Total (3yr) $7,708K POWER7 blades20 SAP hybrid applications, 1per POWER7 blade. DIY bladesover provisioned by 10% in two zBX racks with zManager zEnterprise $27.9K perbecause no zManagerperformance manager (Manage+Automate) workload per yearCost of CICS/DB2 and SAPcomponents of workloads notincludedLabor costs are for blademanagement only 28% less labor cost and 7% less cost per workloadLabor rate $159,600 per yearResults may vary based on customer workloadprofiles/characteristics. Prices will vary by country. zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 33
  34. 34. zManager Labor Reduction Benefits 4289 total hours per year reduced by 28% to 3104 hours per yearChange Management Deployment Management Automatic setup andStandardization of images configuration of theand firmware, visibility into Reduced hypervisor and out-of-the-relationships among by 33% box networksresources Reduced Reduced by 41% by 52% Capacity/Performance Management Automation to Reduced isolate and fix issues by 9%Security Management Reduced by 20% Asset ManagementCentralized fine-grain Automated discovery,administrator access entitlement managementcontrol zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 34
  35. 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 zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 35
  36. 36. Smarter Computing: System z Analyst Summit Thank you! ibm.com/smartercomputing36 © 2011 International Business Machines Corporation 36
  37. 37. Smarter Computing: System z Analyst SummitTrademarks 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 Statesand 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, othercountries, 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 registeredcommunity 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-basedtrademarks 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 anykind.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 fornon-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 ofperformance, 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. Suchcommitments are only made in IBM product announcements. The information is presented here to communicate IBMs 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 theamount of multiprogramming in the users 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 performanceimprovements 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 inyour 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.37 © 2011 International Business Machines Corporation 37
  38. 38. Backup zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 38
  39. 39. Web Workloads - Performance Data Server Description Cores RPE RPE2 TPS TPS (Measured) (Calculated)T5440 Sun SPARC Enterprise 32 102,617 21,580 5,300 T5440 (4U) UltraSPARC Max throughputSPARCT2+ T2+ 1.6GHz 4MB with multi JVM run (4ch/32co) using Solaris32 core containersT3-1B Oracle SPARC T3-1B 16 61,249 11,520 2829 SPARC T3 1.65GHz Calculated as16 core (1ch/16co) 5300*(11520/21580)Power 710 Power 710 Express (2U) 8 60,208 14,920 5,670 Power7 3.55GHz8 core (1ch/8co)PS701 IBM BladeCenter PS701 8 53,189 13,730 5218 Express Power7 3.0GHz Calculated as8 core (1ch/8co) 5670*(13730/14920) WAS on PS701 versus WLS on T3-1B is 1.84x WLS on T5440 versus WLS on T3-1B is 1.87x WLS on T5440 versus WAS on PS701 is nearly 1x zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 39
  40. 40. Case Study:zEnterprise Reduces Infrastructure Labor Hours 5000 4500 4000 28% fewer labor Yearly Labor Hours 3500 hours Change Mgmt 3000 Security Mgmt 2500 Asset Mgmt 2000 Capacity/Perf Mgmt 1500 Deployment Mgmt 1000 500 0 Do-It-Yourself zEnterprise zEnterprise Economics - IBM SWG CPO - Mar 2011 40

×