RE: IBM iseries comparison site??

Loyd,

I've put some replies inline:

> On Behalf Of Loyd Goodbar
> Subject: Re: IBM iseries comparison site??
> 
> Our division HQ balked at the price, which includes CMS and 3rd party
> vendor
> costs. Their question was, can we do a test-only request, or try LPAR with
> a
> used box.

Based on experience, I would assume that a used 820 with enough horsepower
to run two working partitions would be more expensive than an 810, once
maintenance and software pricing is figured in.  A second, used box would
probably not make it either because of the need to duplicate your software
licensing.  You really have to run the numbers from firm quotes to get a
true answer.  Bear in mind that with a new purchase of an 810, you should
have no hardware maintenance expenses for the first year.

> I'm not seriously looking at LPARing an 820, I just wanted to get an idea
> of
> how much 820 we would need to have the equivalent of 2 720 systems (plus
> interactive, memory, disk for each). It sounds like the processor-per-LPAR
> is
> the way to go, and I notice that additional processors and interactive
> features get expensive quickly.

A 720-#2061 has a base CPW of 240.  The smallest, oldest 820 (#2435) has a
CPW of 600.  Assuming that you want a significant performance boost in both
partitions, I would avoid the #2435 and consider the #2436 (CPW of 1100) to
be the lowest acceptable platform for a used LPARed 820.

> We missed the IBM cutoff for migrating our 720 into a 810; our only option
> here is a new purchase without trade-in.

Please know that your IBM Licensed Program Products (except for the OS) can
be transferred to a new machine at no expense to you, provided that you
don't change processor tiers.  The smaller 810 model you are considering
would be in the P10 tier, a 720-#2061-#1501 is in the P20 tier, so your
software subscription fees should decline somewhat.  All 820's, with the
exception of the #2435 with CPW 600/35 are in the P20 or higher tier.

> 
> All these arguments we're persuing to back the claim that an LPAR'd 810 is
> the
> best decision. We picked the smallest 810, which is I think about 3x
> faster
> than our current 720, because of its 1050 (?) interactive CPWs in the
> Enterprise edition, LPARing capability, and Linux-hosted capability.

You may have an old quote for an 810.  At the initial announcement of the
810 there were three processors, the #2466, the #2467, and the #2469, with
CPW ratings of 1020, 1470, and 2700 respectively.  A subsequent announcement
added the #2465 with a 750 CPW, this might meet your needs at a lower price.

> Thanks,
> Loyd