5 ms·

That would be nice, but the problem with these systems historically is that they're ridiculously expensive compared to x64 servers for the end user. As a result

by api 9y ago

That would be nice, but the problem with these systems historically is that they're ridiculously expensive compared to x64 servers for the end user. As a result end users and SMBs never get their hands on them and nobody develops anything for them or supports them.

pm90 9y ago
which is why they're not being sold directly to enterprises but to Cloud Providers. I'm not a hardware engineer so not familiar with the fine print but what I've read so far seems to suggest that Power systems are more efficient at running Database-centric workloads and the power hypervisor is an order of magnitude more efficient than intel ones http://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Intel-x86-and-IBM-POWER-CPUs-Which-When-Why http://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Intel-x86-and-IBM-POWE.... Disclosure: I work on IBM cloud, but only tangentially with the Power systems.
- hsivonen 9y ago
  Is there a cloud provider that allows a EU-based natural-person customer buy a little Power 9 time for testing? Last I looked, Power cloud offerings required the customer to be a big company that buys a lot of compute.
  - greglindahl 9y ago
    I think IBM Softlayer has been renting out small numbers of Power-based machines for a while now, enough to test with.
    - pm90 9y ago
      Correct! They rent out POWER8 systems: https://www.ibm.com/cloud/bare-metal-servers/power https://www.ibm.com/cloud/bare-metal-servers/power. POWER9 systems don't seem to be available (yet). As for the future, I can't say much publicly (le sigh) but let me just say that personally I think future of power is bright, especially with cloud providers.
Nomentatus 9y ago
The article addresses this at a couple of points, do you know factors which would counter its argument, or are you just pointing to the same history the article pointed to? e.g.: "Power 9 should do better than its predecessors given its costs, bandwidth, and ease of porting. Power 9 is IBM’s first to use standard DIMMs, opening a door to other standard components that are, overall, cutting system costs by 20% to 50% compared to the Power 8, said IBM’s partners."
- marshray 9y ago
  IBM will never understand this but few, if any, architectures have made it into the datacenter that were not first affordable for experimenters and enthusiasts. The burden of proof is on those claiming the pricing does not present a barrier to entry to the ecosystem. I am curious about developing for Power. Please link me to an entry-level system I can buy on the web.
  - ChuckMcM 9y ago
    Well there are some counter examples, network switches, fiber channel, and Infiniband come to mind. And of course IBM "invented" the data center by defining environmental requirements for their machines in the 50's and 60's. Setting that aside though, its true that easy experimental access can allow a technology to "sneak in" to a market that previously ignored it, but that isn't really the case here. (nor was it the case for SPARC or Itanium) These systems are being built for folks who are going to deploy a lot of them and they already know their cost of ownership numbers for existing x64 boxes.
    - rbanffy 9y ago
      This is an excellent way to cater to the legacy app market, but not a very good way to ride the next wave. The next wave is probably running on commodity x86 hardware running Linux and using gamer-grade GPUs. They'll probably be first deployed to production on x86 virtual hardware in a cloud provider. If you want companies to adopt your technology, make their developers adopt it first. That's how most of the current enterprise DevOps tools happened.
kev009 9y ago
Server cost is dominated by storage at the moment. DRAM is also a large static cost with little negotiation room. The cost of a P9 and motherboard is a small subset of a system build and below the price of Skylake for me.
shaklee3 9y ago
I can say for sure they are not more expensive than comparable xeons. Even cheaper by some measures.

by api 9y ago

pm90 9y ago

which is why they're not being sold directly to enterprises but to Cloud Providers. I'm not a hardware engineer so not familiar with the fine print but what I've read so far seems to suggest that Power systems are more efficient at running Database-centric workloads and the power hypervisor is an order of magnitude more efficient than intel ones http://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Intel-x86-and-IBM-POWER-CPUs-Which-When-Why http://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Intel-x86-and-IBM-POWE.... Disclosure: I work on IBM cloud, but only tangentially with the Power systems.

hsivonen 9y ago
Is there a cloud provider that allows a EU-based natural-person customer buy a little Power 9 time for testing? Last I looked, Power cloud offerings required the customer to be a big company that buys a lot of compute.
- greglindahl 9y ago
  I think IBM Softlayer has been renting out small numbers of Power-based machines for a while now, enough to test with.
  - pm90 9y ago
    Correct! They rent out POWER8 systems: https://www.ibm.com/cloud/bare-metal-servers/power https://www.ibm.com/cloud/bare-metal-servers/power. POWER9 systems don't seem to be available (yet). As for the future, I can't say much publicly (le sigh) but let me just say that personally I think future of power is bright, especially with cloud providers.

Nomentatus 9y ago

The article addresses this at a couple of points, do you know factors which would counter its argument, or are you just pointing to the same history the article pointed to? e.g.: "Power 9 should do better than its predecessors given its costs, bandwidth, and ease of porting. Power 9 is IBM’s first to use standard DIMMs, opening a door to other standard components that are, overall, cutting system costs by 20% to 50% compared to the Power 8, said IBM’s partners."

marshray 9y ago
IBM will never understand this but few, if any, architectures have made it into the datacenter that were not first affordable for experimenters and enthusiasts. The burden of proof is on those claiming the pricing does not present a barrier to entry to the ecosystem. I am curious about developing for Power. Please link me to an entry-level system I can buy on the web.
- ChuckMcM 9y ago
  Well there are some counter examples, network switches, fiber channel, and Infiniband come to mind. And of course IBM "invented" the data center by defining environmental requirements for their machines in the 50's and 60's. Setting that aside though, its true that easy experimental access can allow a technology to "sneak in" to a market that previously ignored it, but that isn't really the case here. (nor was it the case for SPARC or Itanium) These systems are being built for folks who are going to deploy a lot of them and they already know their cost of ownership numbers for existing x64 boxes.
  - rbanffy 9y ago
    This is an excellent way to cater to the legacy app market, but not a very good way to ride the next wave. The next wave is probably running on commodity x86 hardware running Linux and using gamer-grade GPUs. They'll probably be first deployed to production on x86 virtual hardware in a cloud provider. If you want companies to adopt your technology, make their developers adopt it first. That's how most of the current enterprise DevOps tools happened.

kev009 9y ago

Server cost is dominated by storage at the moment. DRAM is also a large static cost with little negotiation room. The cost of a P9 and motherboard is a small subset of a system build and below the price of Skylake for me.

shaklee3 9y ago

I can say for sure they are not more expensive than comparable xeons. Even cheaper by some measures.