|
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
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.