[HN Gopher] IBM LinuxONE Emperor 4 servers can reduce energy con...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       IBM LinuxONE Emperor 4 servers can reduce energy consumption by 75%
        
       Author : doener
       Score  : 19 points
       Date   : 2022-11-14 21:11 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.ibm.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.ibm.com)
        
       | throwawayacc4 wrote:
       | Saving a click: this is with IBM Telum processors that use the
       | z/Architecture instruction set (versus x86-64).
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | rch wrote:
       | It's not immediately clear either way, but I'm guessing this is
       | based on composable / software defined infrastructure components,
       | like e.g. CXL memory.
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | No, because that stuff does not exist.
        
         | dragontamer wrote:
         | If its from IBM Telum processors, this is the weird processor
         | where a processor's L2 cache serves as the L3 and L4 caches of
         | other processors. The processors network with each other,
         | notice when they're not using all of their caches, and shares
         | that cache with things far away (ie: in side the box, or even
         | outside the box).
         | 
         | This way, IBM can overprovision L2 cache and "not worry" about
         | it going unused. Remote L2 cache is slower than local L2 cache,
         | but its still SRAM and should still be faster than DRAM to
         | access.
        
       | Andys wrote:
       | When it must be so expensive its not even "call us", but
       | "Schedule a Consultation".
       | 
       | You fit in with their schedule, not the other way around?
        
         | nix23 wrote:
         | Pff it's IBM you buy the Consultant with it, he sits in the
         | lower rack and has spacefood rations for 5 years, then you have
         | to do maintenance and the consultant get exchanged and retired.
         | 
         | But!! No shutdown needed.
        
           | Our_Benefactors wrote:
           | Can they be put on a generator bike? I'm concerned about
           | their carbon footprint.
        
           | broodbucket wrote:
           | Nonsense, there would be at least one more redundant
           | consultant if not two.
           | 
           | Seriously though, these machines call home when there's a
           | hardware failure, they'll fail over and someone will show up
           | to replace what failed. Enterprise tech is sometimes cool.
        
         | xhkkffbf wrote:
         | This is pretty standard across much of the enterprise world.
         | The sales team just has to earn their commission.
         | 
         | Indeed, even when they have publicly listed prices, it's
         | usually possible to negotiate a substantial discount by dealing
         | directly with the sales team. Like 50% is often possible.
        
           | Andys wrote:
           | Yeah, I know. Just poking fun of their level of hype being
           | such that they make it sound like you are one of a privileged
           | few if they even take your call and allow you to buy this
           | apparent masterpiece.
        
             | broodbucket wrote:
             | The general rule of thumb is if the product page says
             | "contact us" instead of a price, you can't afford it.
             | 
             | It is a shame though. IBM has no idea how to sell to anyone
             | other that gigantic megacorps - which, fair enough, but
             | they could probably pick up a lot of sales to medium-sized
             | businesses if they weren't so old-fashioned about
             | everything
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | If you buy an IBM mainframe you'll have a very attentive full-
         | time account manager for life. I did a ride-along with such an
         | account manager once when I was working at IBM and it was eye-
         | opening.
        
       | miohtama wrote:
       | What is the Linux distro powering this beast?
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | RHEL, SLES, or Ubuntu.
        
       | treis wrote:
       | This is the fine print:
       | 
       | >Compared 5 IBM Machine Type 3931 Max 125 model consists of three
       | CPC drawers containing 125 configurable cores (CPs, zIIPs, or
       | IFLs) and two I/O drawers to support both network and external
       | storage versus 192 x86 systems with a total of 10364 cores. IBM
       | Machine Type 3931 power consumption was based on inputs to the
       | IBM Machine Type 3931 IBM Power Estimation Tool for a memo
       | configuration. x86 power consumption was based on March 2022 IDC
       | QPI power values for 7 Cascade Lake and 5 Ice Lake server models,
       | with 32 to 112 cores per server. All compared x86 servers were 2
       | or 4 socket servers. IBM Z and x86 are running 24x7x365 with
       | production and non-production workloads. Savings assumes a Power
       | Usage Effectiveness (PUE) ratio of 1.57 to calculate additional
       | power for data center cooling. PUE is based on Uptime Institute
       | 2021 Global Data Center Survey
       | (https://uptimeinstitute.com/about-ui/press-
       | releases/uptime-i...). CO2e and other equivalencies that are
       | based on the EPA GHG calculator
       | (https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calc...)
       | use U.S. National weighted averages. Results may vary based on
       | client-specific usage and location.
        
         | nisa wrote:
         | Wondering how a dual socket AMD EPYC(tm) 9654 system with 2x96
         | cores would compare. It's not clear how many 14nm+ Cascade Lake
         | machines were used and it's also not clear how many 32core
         | machines were used. 10364cores/192servers averages about 53
         | cores/server.
         | 
         | It's apple and oranges anyway because I guess if you consider
         | this you have different priorities but I'm skeptical that x86
         | couldn't come close in terms of performance/watt
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-11-14 23:00 UTC)