Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 23

Competitive Comparisons

POWER8 versus Intel x86

Contents
x86 Vendor Claims
IBM Response

x86 Vendor Claims how to respond


X86 Vendor Sales Tactics
x86 systems have leadership
performance versus POWER8
systems

IBM Response / Reality


x86 Vendors compare 4-socket 60 core x86 servers to the Power S824 2 socket 24 core class boxes, to
claim better system performance. This is SYSTEM performance and not core performance, which
translates to expensive SW licensing costs. The Scale Out POWER8 systems are scale out solutions and
should credibly be compared to 2-socket x86 E5-26xx class servers, with laser focus on per core
performance, as that is where the software licensing charges accumulate.
POWER8 cores are 2x the performance over x86 cores across a wide range of benchmarks.
PowerVM enables higher sustained utilization on Power Systems and even fewer cores, which we
guarantee on POWER8 SCO Systems.
See more detail here.

x86 Systems have better price


performance versus POWER8
systems

Power systems are actually TCA price-performance advantaged versus x86 systems, particularly when
we drive the system utilization levels up with PowerVM enabling consolidation.
Linux on Power versus Linux on X86 comparisons should be with the 822L and 812L. The 824L contains
GPUs (and cost) for specific functionality that is not contained in standard x86 configurations.
If database or ISV software costs are included the Power Scale-Out systems can show even more
dramatic savings over x86 systems.
See more detail here.

x86 systems have equal RAS to


IBM Power systems

IBM Power systems have a long history of unmatched Enterprise-class RAS capabilities. X86 systems
require expensive cluster software (like RAC) to achieve even minimal RAS.
See more detail here.

IBM technology is 3 years behind


Intel technology in silicon
manufacturing

IBM and Intel are delivering 22nm technology. What is important is that IBM core performance improves
every generation and Intel performance degrades core to core.

Oracle SW is cheaper on x86 than


on Power due to the 0.5 multiplier
on x86 versus 1.0 on the Power
Solution.

PowerVM is approved for sub-capacity licensing, allowing only the cores that are being utilized by the
Oracle DB to require licenses; with x86/VMWare solutions, the customer must license every core for
both DB and RAC from the time of purchase. See more detail here.

See more detail here.

Return to x86 Tactics

POWER8 processor is Purpose Built resulting in


premium performance over Intel Xeon
Sandy Bridge
EP
E5-26xx

Ivy Bridge EP
E5-26xx v2

Haswell EP
E5-26xx v3

Ivy Bridge EX
E7-88xx v2

1.7-3.7GHz

1.7-3.7GHz

1.9-3.4 GHz

3.1-4.4 GHz

3.0-4.15 GHz

1,2*

1, 2*

1, 2*

1, 2*

1, 2, 4

1, 2, 4, 8

Cores per socket

12

18

15

12

Max Threads / sock

16

24

36

30

32

96

Max L1 Cache

32KB

32KB*

32KB*

32KB*

32KB

64KB

Max L2 Cache

256 KB

256 KB

256 KB

256 KB

256 KB

512 KB

Max L3 Cache

20 MB

30 MB

45 MB

37.5 MB

80 MB

96 MB

Max L4 Cache

128 MB

31.4-51.2 GB/s

42.6-59.7 GB/s

51.2-68.3 GB/s

68-85**
GB/s

100 180
GB/sec

230 - 410 GB/sec

Clock rates
SMT options

Memory Bandwidth

1.83.6GHz

* Intel calls this Hyper-Threading Technology (No HT and with HT)

POWER 7+

POWER8

Return to x86 Tactics

x86 Claims - Performance


x86 CLAIM:
x86 systems have leadership performance versus POWER8 systems
IBM RESPONSE:
x86 Vendors compare 4-socket 60 core x86 servers to the Power S824 2
socket 24 core class boxes, to claim better system performance. This is
SYSTEM performance and not core performance, which translates to
expensive SW licensing costs. The Scale Out POWER8 systems are scale
out solutions and should credibly be compared to 2-socket x86 E5-26xx class
servers, with laser focus on per core performance, as that is where the
software licensing charges accumulate.
POWER8 cores are 2x the performance over x86 cores across a wide range
of benchmarks.
PowerVM enables higher sustained utilization on Power Systems and even
fewer cores, which we guarantee on POWER8 SCO Systems.

Return to x86 Tactics

Performance comparison POWER8 vs. x86 E5


IBM POWER8 core and system performance is leadership versus the x86 Xeon E5-2699 v3

Published Benchmarks ALL data is PUBLISHED

x86
Haswell

IBM
POWER S824

Intel Xeon E5-2699 v3


(except where noted)

POWER8
@ 3.5 GHz

36

24

SAP 2-Tier

16500

21212

1.9

SPECint_rate2006

1400

1750

1.8

SPECfp_rate2006

942

1370

2.1

195119

361293

2.7

11260

22543

2.0

1017639

1090909

2.1

(24-core E5-2697 v2)

(12-core)

10000

50000

(16-core E5-2690)

(6-core)

# Cores

SPECjbb2013 (max-jOPS)
SPECjEnterprise2010
Oracle eBS 12.1.3 Payroll
Siebel CRM Release 8.1.1.4
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

POWER8 vs. x86 Core


Performance Ratio

(24-core E5-2697 v2)

13.3

IBM Power System S824 on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 4 processors / 24 cores / 96 threads, POWER8; 3.52GHz, 512 GB memory, 21,212 SD benchmark users, running AIX 7.1 and DB2 10.5,
Certification # 2014016. Source: http://www.sap.com/benchmark All results valid as of October 3, 2014
Dell PowerEdge R730, on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 2 processors/36 cores/72 threads, Intel Xeon Processor 2699v3; 2.30 GHz, 256 GB memory; 16,500 SD benchmark users, running RHEL 7 and
SAP ASE 16; Certification # 2014033. Source: http://www.sap.com/benchmark.
SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/
SPECjbb2013 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/jbb2013/results
SPECjEnterprise2010 results are valid as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/jEnterprise2010/results/
Oracle eBS 12.1.3 Payroll Batch Extra Large Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/benchmark/apps-benchmark/results-166922.html
Siebel 8.1.1.4 PSPP Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/benchmark/white-papers/siebel-167484.html

Return to x86 Tactics

** Do not leave behind with client, presentation use only**

Core Performance Comparison POWER8 vs. x86


IBM POWER8 core performance is up to 9.0x the best x86 Xeon E5 performance (typical customer
utilization)

Industry Standard Benchmarks


All Intel performance numbers are IBM internal projections and publishes where available
IBM S824 data is published/projected

x86
E5

IBM
Power S824

Intel Xeon
E5-2699 v3

Power 8 @
3.5 GHz

P8 Util: 100%
x86 Util: 100%

P8 Util: 65%
x86 Util: 40%

P8 Util: 65%
x86 Util: 20%

36

24

Benchmark
Utilization

Utilization with
virtualized x86

Utilization without
virtualized x86

OLTP

2400

3585

2.2

3.6

7.2

ERP SAP 2-Tier

16500

21212

1.9

3.2

6.3

SPECjbb2013 (max-jOPS)

195119

361293

2.7

4.5

9.0

SPECint_rate

1430

1750

1.8

2.9

5.9

SPECfp_rate

965

1370

2.1

3.4

6.8

16500

22543

2.0

3.3

6.5

# Cores

SPECjEnterprise2010
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

POWER8 vs. x86 Core Performance Ratio

IBM Power System S824 on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 4 processors / 24 cores / 96 threads, POWER8; 3.52GHz, 512 GB memory, 21,212 SD benchmark users, running AIX 7.1 and DB2 10.5,
Certification # 2014016. Source: http://www.sap.com/benchmark All results valid as of October 3, 2014
Dell PowerEdge R730, on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 2 processors/36 cores/72 threads, Intel Xeon Processor 2699v3; 2.30 GHz, 256 GB memory; 16,500 SD benchmark users, running RHEL 7 and
SAP ASE 16; Certification # 2014033. Source: http://www.sap.com/benchmark.
SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/
LEGEND:
SPECjbb2013 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/jbb2013/results
SPECjEnterprise2010 results are valid as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/jEnterprise2010/results/
Published
Projected
Oracle eBS 12.1.3 Payroll Batch Extra Large Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/benchmark/apps-benchmark/results-166922.html
Siebel 8.1.1.4 PSPP Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/benchmark/white-papers/siebel-167484.html

Return to x86 Tactics

Performance Comparison POWER8 vs x86


Typical deceptive x86
positioning

against
System Power

Power 8

x86

S824

4s x86

24

60

SpecINT 2006 Rate

1750

2370

x86 35% faster

SpecFP 2006 Rate

1370

1740

x86 27% faster

SPEC jbb2013 max JOPS

361,293

199,752

Power 80% faster

SAP S&D 2 tier (users)

21,212

25,000

x86 18% better

Power 8

x86

Comparison

System

S824

2s x86

# Cores

24

36

SpecINT 2006 Rate

1750

1400

Power 25% faster

SpecFP 2006 Rate

1370

942

Power 27% faster

SPEC jbb2013 max JOPS

361,293

190,674

Power 89% faster

SAP S&D 2 tier (users)

21,212

16,000

Power 33% faster

# Cores

True Scale Out


Comparison

Comparison

SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE
Comparing 4socket x86 E7 (60
cores) vs S824
POWER8
(24 cores)

POWER8 is the
Performance leader in
the Scale Out Space
with 2/3 of the cores
with up to 89% better
at the system level
performance and up
to 2.7x better per core
performance

(1) IBM Power System S824 on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 4 processors / 24 cores / 96 threads, POWER8; 3.52GHz, 512 GB memory, 21,212 SD
benchmark users, running AIX 7.1 and DB2 10.5,
Certification # 2014016. Source: http://www.sap.com/benchmark All results valid as of October 3, 2014
(2) IBM System x3850 X6 on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 4 processors/ 60 cores/ 120 threads, Intel Xeon Processor 4890 v2; 2.80 GHz, 1024 GB
memory; 25,000 SD benchmark users, running Windows Server 2012 Standard Edition and DB2 10; Certification # 2014004. Source: http://www.sap.com/benchmark .
(3) IBM System x 3650 M5, on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 2 processors/36 cores/72 threads, Intel Xeon Processor 2699v3; 2.30 GHz, 256 GB memory;
16,000 SD benchmark users, running Windows Server 2012 Standard Edition and DB2 10; Certification # 2014030. Source: http://www.sap.com/benchmark.
(4) SPECjbb2013 results are valid as of 10/15/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/jbb2013/results/ All IBM benchmark results will be submitted to spec.org on October 15, 2014.
(5) SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 10/2/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/ All IBM benchmark results will be submitted to spec.org on October 6, 2014.

Return to x86 Tactics

x86 Claims Price-Performance


x86 CLAIM:
x86 systems have leadership price-performance versus POWER8 systems
IBM RESPONSE:
Power systems are actually TCA price-performance advantaged versus x86
systems, particularly when we drive the system utilization levels up with
PowerVM enabling consolidation.
Linux on Power versus Linux on X86 comparisons should be with the 822L
and 812L. The 824L contains GPUs (and cost) for specific functionality that is
not contained in standard x86 configurations.
If database or ISV software costs are included the Power Scale-Out systems
can show even more dramatic savings over x86 systems.

Return to x86 Tactics

Scale-Out Price Performance Comparison POWER8 vs x86

This price is an S824L which


has 2 GPUs not in the
Intel box!!!!
Power 8

X86 2-socket

Advantage

SpecFP 2006 Rate

1130

916

Power 23% faster

System HW Price

$37,305

$21,200

x86 43% better

33 ppf

24 ppf

x86 28% better

Price/Performance

A more comparable model would be the S822L and using


SPECfp_rate as opposed to SPECfp_base
Power 8 S822L

X86 2-socket

Advantage

SpecFP 2006 Rate

1252

942

Power 33% faster

System HW Price

$26,005

$21,200

x86 19% better

21 ppf

23 ppf

Power 10% better

Price/Performance

(1)
(2)

This is SPECfp_rate2006 base


NOTE: the performance
compares were done with
SPECfp_rate2006

POWER8 has
BETTER PricePerformance
when a valid
comparison is
made.

SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 10/2/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/ All IBM benchmark results will be submitted to spec.org on October 6, 2014.
Pricing is based on Lenovo claims and IBM econfig

Return to x86 Tactics

x86 Claims - RAS


x86 CLAIM:
x86 systems have equal RAS to IBM Power systems

IBM RESPONSE:
IBM Power systems have a long history of unmatched Enterprise-class RAS
capabilities. X86 systems require expensive cluster software (like RAC) to
achieve even minimal RAS.

..
.
..

Return to x86 Tactics

Power RAS Involves More Than Just the Processor

IBM develops, tests, integrates the entire stack for RAS

I/O drawers / memory management unit

Processors and all chips in CEC

Hypervisor (PowerVM) and VIOS

Device drivers, PCI adapters

Operating system (AIX, System i, Linux)

Middleware and Clustering software

Power Stack - Integrated RAS

Intel Processor RAS

IBM Middleware

What is
Missing?

PowerHA
AIX, IBM i, Linux

PowerVM
Firmware
Memory

12

Drivers

POWER
CPU

I/O
Drawer

RAS

LPARs / Workloads

Firmware

Memory

x86
CPU

This document is for IBM and IBM Business Partner use only. It is not intended for client distribution

Return to x86 Tactics

x86 Claims Technology


x86 CLAIM:
IBM technology is 3 years behind Intel technology in silicon manufacturing

IBM RESPONSE:
IBM and Intel are delivering 22nm technology. What is important is that IBM
core performance improves every generation and Intel performance
degrades core to core.

Return to x86 Tactics

POWER8 processor is Purpose Built resulting in


premium performance over Intel Xeon
Sandy Bridge
EP
E5-26xx

Ivy Bridge EP
E5-26xx v2

Haswell EP
E5-26xx v3

Ivy Bridge EX
E7-88xx v2

1.7-3.7GHz

1.7-3.7GHz

1.9-3.4 GHz

3.1-4.4 GHz

3.0-4.15 GHz

1,2*

1, 2*

1, 2*

1, 2*

1, 2, 4

1, 2, 4, 8

Cores per socket

12

18

15

12

Max Threads / sock

16

24

36

30

32

96

Max L1 Cache

32KB

32KB*

32KB*

32KB*

32KB

64KB

Max L2 Cache

256 KB

256 KB

256 KB

256 KB

256 KB

512 KB

Max L3 Cache

20 MB

30 MB

45 MB

37.5 MB

80 MB

96 MB

Max L4 Cache

128 MB

31.4-51.2 GB/s

42.6-59.7 GB/s

51.2-68.3 GB/s

68-85**
GB/s

100 180
GB/sec

230 - 410 GB/sec

Clock rates
SMT options

Memory Bandwidth

1.83.6GHz

* Intel calls this Hyper-Threading Technology (No HT and with HT)

POWER 7+

POWER8

Return to x86 Tactics

POWER8 moves forwards while Xeon moves backwards


IBM POWER systems continue to deliver improved system performance
and more value per SW $ spent

Infrastructure Software Price-performance has been REDUCED on Intel servers

Software Licensing has increased by 1.5x

3.09 performance gain


came from new version
of Java and increased
memory (4x more)

Assumes flat system pricing


12 cores versus 8 cores OR 18 versus 12

Performance has not increased proportionally to the chip core count


resulting in higher software costs

x86 publishes on 2-socket systems

x86
Sandy
Bridge

x86
Ivy
Bridge

x86
Haswell

2-socket

2-socket

2-socket

E5-2690

E5-2697v2

E5-2699v3

16

24

ERP SAP 2-Tier

7960

SPECint_rate

System
Performance
Ratio

POWER7+

POWER8

System
Performance
Ratio

IVB
to
HAS
1.50

2-socket
POWER7+

2-socket
POWER8

POWER7+ to
POWER8

36

SNB
to
IVB
1.50

16

24

1.50

10253

16500

1.29

1.61

10000

21212

2.12

693

1020

1400

1.47

1.37

884

1750

1.98

SPECfp_rate

510

734

942

1.44

1.28

602

1370

2.28

SPECjbb2013

N/A

63079

195119

3.09

NA

361293

# Cores

SPECjEnterprise201
8310
11260
N/A
1.35
13161
22543
1.71
IBM Power System S824 on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 4 processors / 24 cores / 96 threads, POWER8; 3.52GHz, 512 GB memory, 21,212 SD benchmark users, running AIX 7.1 and DB2 10.5, Certification # 2014016. Source:
0 1)
http://www.sap.com/benchmark All results valid as of October 3, 2014
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

POWER8 is 89% better at


the system level and 2.7x
the core performance

Dell PowerEdge R730, on the two-tier SAP SD standard application benchmark running SAP enhancement package 5 for the SAP ERP 6.0 application; 2 processors/36 cores/72 threads, Intel Xeon Processor 2699v3; 2.30 GHz, 256 GB memory; 16,500 SD benchmark users, running RHEL 7 and SAP ASE 16; Certification # 2014033. Source:
http://www.sap.com/benchmark.
SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/
SPECjbb2013 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/jbb2013/results
SPECjEnterprise2010 results are valid as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to http://www.specbench.org/jEnterprise2010/results/
Oracle eBS 12.1.3 Payroll Batch Extra Large Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/benchmark/apps-benchmark/results-166922.html
Siebel 8.1.1.4 PSPP Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/benchmark/white-papers/siebel-167484.html

Return to x86 Tactics

x86 Claims SW Costs are lower on x86


x86 CLAIM:
Oracle SW is cheaper on x86 than on Power due to the 0.5 multiplier on x86
versus 1.0 on the Power Solution.

IBM RESPONSE:
PowerVM is approved for sub-capacity licensing, allowing only the cores that
are being utilized by the Oracle DB to require licenses; with x86/VMWare
solutions, the customer must license every core for both DB and RAC from
the time of purchase.
Use the QuickCost TCA/TCO Tool (see IBM and PW links in the notes
section) to demonstrate how we save clients real money in TCA and TCO
around software licenses and support

Oracle Certification For VMware and KVM

Running Oracle in a VMware ESX cluster you must license ALL of the cores in the cluster
Oracle DOES NOT recognise VMware as "hard partitioning"
http://blogs.gartner.com/chris-wolf/2010/11/10/oracle-broadens-x86-virtualisation-support-but-work-remains/
Running Oracle in a VMware ESX cluster is not certified. If support is required for unknown problems then
you must recreate the problem without VMware installed view Oracle Metalink document 249212.1

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 integrates Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) and ships Xen as the default
hypervisor, so they are supported by Oracle under the Oracle Linux support program. However, Oracle
does not support Oracle products on RHEL's KVM/Xen.
http://www.oracle.com/us/technologies/027617.pdf

Executive Power Summary vs Intel Claims:


Power Systems Deliver a Lower TCA and TCO Compared against
Linux on Intel
Power Delivers
Better Investment Protection for both HW and SW versus Intel degrading in performance
with new products and additional cores (Haswell)
Better RAS features at a lower Cost vs Intel which requires up to 4.5x more downtime
Better Performance at Higher System Utilization/Performance Levels
Which we Guarantee POWER8 65% Sustained Utilization Guarantee with
No Degradation in Performance while Intel averages 20-40%

Better Scalability for intended and unexpected growth buy what you need, when you
need it versus Intel which requires additional system purchases for growth such as storage
Better Security
Dont waste resources (time and money) patching endless systems

And cost savings with POWER IS the icing on the cake

18

BACKUP

P8 Scale Out Sales Strategy - Memory


Fact: P8 Centaur memory is more expensive than standard x86 memory
Fact: Centaur memory is what give p8 servers 4x better memory performance
* Memory and I/O advantages translate into 2 10x better server performance

Position as Scale Out Servers


Box to box comparison with minimal memory comparable to x86
Box to box comparison at 128, 256, 1,024GB translates to Power being
more expensive than x86.
Fact: With higher performance for Power, fewer servers and licenses are
needed. Meaning lower TCA and TCO
Translation: In actual workloads, Power is less expensive when more than
1 server is required.
Power price is less with Server consolidation due to higher performance
Dont get caught up in Box to Box comparisons with x86.

Run a Proof of Concept (PoC) to prove the value of Power


20

2014 IBM Corporation

P8 Scale Out Sales Strategy - Storage


Fact: P8 2U servers have max of 12 x 2.5 2TB drives/Server = 24TB
Fact: x86 2U servers can have 16 or more 2.5 2TB drives/Server = 32TB

Position as Scale Out Servers


Box to box comparison of storage favors x86
Fact: With Power, if more storage is needed, a storage drawer can be added.
Fact: With x86 servers, if more storage is needed, a new server is required
which means more cores (more license cost)
Translation: In actual Big Data environments, Terabytes up to Petabytes of
data are in use.
Adding storage drawers is more cost effective than adding additional servers to
add storage.

Dont get caught up in Box to Box comparisons with x86.

Run a Proof of Concept (PoC) to prove the value of Power


21

2014 IBM Corporation

Competitive Project Office

POWER8 and Linux Deliver Over TWICE the Throughput


Compared to Ivy Bridge-EP at 47% Lower Cost
Web Application
Power S824
Linux

WAS
WAS

WAS
WAS

..

RHEL
RHEL RHEL
RHEL

WAS
WAS

RHEL
RHEL

WAS
WAS

4 VMs

182,672

User Interactions
per second

2.1x
Faster

RHEL
RHEL

$3.11

PowerVM

DB2

2S/24 Core POWER8 (3.525 GHz)

per UI per sec

WebSphere on platform
Database off platform

Both Servers configured to


achieve maximum throughput

Online Banking Workload v3.6

47%

Lower cost
per UI per sec

Ivy Bridge EP Competitor


WAS
WAS

WAS
WAS

RHEL
RHEL RHEL
RHEL

..

WAS
WAS

WAS
WAS

6 VMs

RHEL
RHEL RHEL
RHEL

Competitive Hypervisor

DB2

85,939

User Interactions
per second

$5.84

per UI per sec

WebSphere on platform
Database off platform

2S/24 Core Ivy Bridge-EP (2.7 GHz)


This is an IBM internal study designed to replicate a typical IBM customer workload usage in the marketplace. It consists of a POWER8 S824 with 24 cores, 3.52 GHz, 512GB Memory, RHEL 6.5, WAS 8.5.5.1, DB2 9.7,
JDK 7.0 FP1 compared to an Ivy Bridge EP 24 cores 2.7 GHz, 256 GB Memory, RHEL 6.5, WAS 8.5.5.1, DB2 9.7, JDK 7.0 FP1. The results were obtained under laboratory conditions, and not in an actual customer
environment. IBM's internal workload studies are not benchmark applications, nor are they based on any benchmark standard. As such, customer applications, differences in the stack deployed, and other systems
variations or testing conditions may produce different results and may vary based on actual configuration, applications, specific queries and other variables in a production environment. Prices, where applicable, are

based on published US list prices for both IBM and competitor, and the Total Cost of Acquisition (TCA) includes the list HW and SW prices and 3 years of service & support which is then
divided by the number of transactions to get $ per user interaction per second.
22
2014 IBM Corporation

Bon-Ton boosts e-commerce throughput by 2.5x and


improves the customer experience while controlling costs

2.5x throughput
for more orders per
minute

No increase
in licensing costs

50% fewer
servers
required compared with
x86 systems

Bon-Ton needed to expand capacity of its ecommerce environment to handle seasonal


demand spikes and significant ongoing
customer growth
Migrated WebSphere Commerce from an x86
environment to Linux on Power Systems and
PowerVM virtualization
Substantially enhanced throughput without
increasing per-core software licensing costs.