Executive Summary Inform server acquisition with consolidation strategy Tactical server acquisition should be made in a strategic context of server consolidation. Consolidation enablement, along with acquisition cost, is ranked high as a decision factor by IT decision makers making server acquisitions. Think of servers as nodes of processing capacity The server is only one layer of a multi-part consolidated infrastructure along with storage, networking, and virtualization. The role of the server in this consolidated infrastructure is to provide processing capacity to host current and future application workloads. Measure capacity in processors, cores, threads, and memory The workload capacity of individual servers is a function of multiple processor cores plus addressable memory and I/O bandwidth. Significant progress has been made in processing capability that has exponentially increased the workload capacity of modern servers. Now is the time to evaluate (and re-evaluate) server capacity Server capacity has grown an order of magnitude since early 2009. In evaluating various server configurations and form factors seek to maximize a balance of capacity for consolidation with the lowest possible TCO. Justify configuration against capacity goals for consolidation Use the Info-Tech Server Acquisition Business Plan template to build out a cost justification for your server purchase. Info-Tech Research Group 1

Consolidation has its biggest impact in industry standard x86/x64 servers – by far where most server acquisition is being made Improvements in x86/x64 architecture is the tide that rises all boats (whether those server boats be from IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Sun or others). Unlike proprietary server platforms that are based on different processor designs (e.g. Sun Sparc, IBM Power, or Intel/HP Itanium) all industry standard servers all based on the same processors from Intel or AMD. Consolidation enablers, such as server virtualization and shared network storage, are a relatively recent development (within the past decade) for this class of server (originally intended for distributed stand-alone processing). Close to 89% of server acquisition is for x86/x64 architecture All others are far behind in terms of share and are fragmented across various proprietary architectures such as IBM Power, HP Itanium, and Sun Sparc. Source: Info-Tech Research Group N=63 Info-Tech Research Group

Support for consolidation – along with server cost – are the most important factors in server acquisition Though overall capital cost and vendor support rank highest in importance, support for consolidation is proportionally the highest ranked factor as Extremely Important. Meeting physical space requirements also ranked high in importance. Reduced server footprint is a benefit of consolidation. Easier physical management and reducing power requirements are two other areas of potential benefit in consolidation. For a complete breakdown of importance rankings, see Appendix 1 Source: Info-Tech Research Group N=65 Info-Tech Research Group

Think gas gauge rather than speedometer in server strategy Server acquisition has traditionally been about getting the fastest server at the best price to provision a single application. Taking a consolidated and holistic approach, server acquisition is now about providing adequate current and future capacity for multiple application workloads. Capital purchases are driven not by individual workload projects but rather by needs to maintain adequate total capacity. An individual physical server is a unit of capacity. Application workloads, virtualized and otherwise, consume capacity. Each time capacity is devoted to an application, it is removed from available capacity. Remaining capacity is the ‘gas gauge’ or planning point for adding necessary units (servers). Server hardware matters. Virtualization does not magically boost processing capacity. That comes from the server layer. Virtualization enables better utilization and sharing of the capacity. Info-Tech Insight: Info-Tech Research Group 4

Overall goal: In planning to acquire new servers, aim to balance maximum capacity per server with the lowest possible TCO Buy the cheapest is good basic advice for industry standard servers that all share the same processor hardware. However, cheapest can’t necessarily be the smallest when consolidation is an important factor and cost considerations go beyond initial price to ongoing TCO over the life of the server. Start with the capacity requirements for all the apps that are going to be housed on the server. This includes the processor, memory, network I/0 and storage requirements for each. Evaluate server configurations and form factors that meet the current requirements plus future capacity requirements. Also consider the immediate and ongoing costs of the solutions over a five-year lifecycle. Compare the TCO of multiple solutions that meet capacity requirements. For example, a blade solution vs. rack mount or more lower capacity servers vs. fewer higher capacity servers. Capacity Max addressable memory Processor, Core, Thread count I/O virtualization SMP (Symmetrical Multiprocessing TCO Support Contract Costs Utility Expenses (Power/Cooling) Network and Server Maintenance Server Acquisition Cost Info-Tech Research Group 5

Refresh the major trigger: Server consolidation is often more about doing the same with less than doing more with less Server consolidation is an important strategic consideration, but it is never the trigger for server purchase. The typical triggers for server purchase are: Replacement of server hardware that has reached end-of-life. Adding new servers to host new applications (such as new hardware for an new enterprise application) Adding new server to boost capacity to meet increased CPU demand (such as adding new servers to a database cluster to meet increasing transactional demand). In a recent survey, refresh was cited as the reason for purchase more than twice as often as new applications or the need for additional CPU capacity. In 81% of cases, replacement is for server equipment five or more years old. 5 years is the most common refresh cycle Info-Tech Research Group Source: Info-Tech Research Group

Capacity: That was then, this is now. A comparative example In 2006 Info-Tech found a significant number of enterprises, small and large, beginning to explore server virtualization. That study found that the most economical configuration for hosting virtual servers was dual processor/dual core servers. In the latter half of 2010, it is likely that enterprises that acquired servers for virtualization in 2010 will be looking to server refresh both for existing VMs hosting and possibly for migrating additional workloads to a virtual platform. Current generation servers, with higher density of processor cores threads and more memory, can handle significantly higher workloads. In the example at right Intel’s Xeon Processor-based Server Refresh Savings Estimator predicts that 5 older processor servers each hosting 7 VMs could be replaced by a single Xeon 5500 quad core server with capacity for 76 VMs. What this means In refreshing VM-hosted servers, not only can more workloads be virtualized on fewer physical servers, larger workloads can be virtualized, such as apps requiring multiple processors and large memory blocks. Server Type Age VMs Per Server Number of Servers 2P Xeon Server 4 years 7 5 2P Xeon 5500 Server new 76 1 Source: Intel’s Xeon Processor-based Server Refresh Savings Estimator. Note this is offered as an example of potential capabilities. Info-Tech cannot independently confirm these ratios. Use Info-Tech’s Virtual Candidate Assessment Tool to map the capacity requirements of various servers that are consolidation candidates. Review past evaluations of server candidates for virtualization. Applications previously red flagged as candidates because of high capacity requirements could well be hosted on higher capacity servers. Info-Tech Recommends: Info-Tech Research Group

Choose the best form factor while meeting consolidation goals: Blade use is increasing, but blades aren’t for everyone Blade servers are appearing across a wide range of enterprise sizes; however, most enterprises deploy rack mounted servers. As server capacity increases a small to mid-sized enterprise can meet more ambitious consolidation goals with just a few rack mounted servers. “ We looked at getting into the blade platform. For what it would cost to get just the chassis in place and to populate it with the blade servers themselves, the numbers just didn’t work for us. ~IS Manager, Government Organization ” Source: Info-Tech Research Group “ The majority of server purchasers (53%) are acquiring rack mount servers. At 36% the proportion of blade purchasers has increased significantly since 2006 when Info-Tech found only 9% intended to acquire blades. We chose blade servers because we needed to make optimal use of the space in our data center, and blades are cheaper for their size.” ~IT Manager, Cloud Service Provider ” Info-Tech Research Group

Use Info-Tech’s Server Form Factor Selection Tool to assist your form factor selection Many current and future situation factors can influence the decision to buy blades, rack mount, or stand alone servers. The tools evaluates factors such as: Space restrictions currently imposed on the organizations data center. The importance of consolidation in the organization’s current server acquisition strategy. The importance of conserving power consumption. The need to reduce the amount of physical management required per server. The number of servers owned, leased or maintained by the data center. The need to reduce complexity in the server environment. Other important factors related to a form factor decision. Real estate is critical! Space restrictions will likely be one of the largest factors in selecting a form factor, along with support for consolidation. Info-Tech Insight: Info-Tech Research Group

Assess the lowest TCO while meeting capacity needs The Info-Tech Server Acquisition TCO Comparison Tool compares total Cost factors, including energy consumption, maintenance, software licensing and other costs. 1 Compare Apples to Apples (configuration, max memory) When comparing blade and rack-mount servers, ensure that the same functions and features are supported. Include: Processor speeds, number of processors Maximum memory supported Future expandability Note that some features available on rack-mounts may not be available on blades due to space restrictions. 2 Compare TCO over list price tags. Blades often have a high upfront cost (mostly due to the cost of the chassis) but often have lower incremental and maintenance costs. A blade processing unit often costs less than a full rack-mount server, and can more easily be replace and repaired in the event of a failure. 3 Use our comparative TCO calculator tool. With the number of factors that go into a form factor decision, a well thought out tool can help you reach a good decision faster. Info-Tech’s Server Acquisition TCO Comparison Tool Info-Tech Research Group

Use consolidation and capacity utilization strategy to justify the cost & configuration of the servers being acquired Why this business case may be necessary: A case for consolidation and maximum utilization of capacity will justify the cost of larger and more powerful servers to the business. Acquisition is normally triggered by necessities such as hardware refresh; it is unlikely that a case has to be made on a go/no go to acquire servers. In other words, it is less likely that server acquisition will need to be defended than acquisition of a particular size, cost, and form factor will need to be defended. Application Requirements Name the applications affected by the acquisitions this year. List expected requirements in subsequent years List the total number of current servers affected. Describe scenarios for meeting capacity need. Describe at least two possible (server acquisition)scenarios (vendor capacity planning tools will help develop these cases) Illustrate the TCO for each solution both in terms of cumulative annual cost and per workload. Recommend a solution Recommend a particular server configuration (and number of servers) based on balance of capacity and TCO factors. If two vendors have similar configurations, use the TCO tool to compare total costs. Use Info-Tech’s Server Acquisition Business Plan to justify recommended server acquisition. Info-Tech Research Group

Appendix I: Server Acquisition Survey Demographics Responses by Industry Responses by Number of Employees Which Describes Your Current Server Acquisition Situation? How many virtual and physical servers do you maintain? Info-Tech Research Group