> On 30/10/2018 06:46, Simon Matter wrote: >>> On 10/29/18 1:55 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >>>> To me it seems like, if they are smart, they will try to push IBM >>>> POWER >>>> and RedHat Linux together to establish real competition in the >>>> hardware >>>> market again (and of course don't forget to keep Fedora/CentOS alive)! >>> Er, RHEL has been running on Power for a very long time. The fastest >>> supercomputer in the world is Power9 + RHEL. >> What I meant is that POWER could become a competitor for Intel/AMD based >> servers. We're now running AMD EPYC servers with 64Cores/128Threads and >> we >> didn't find any POWER system which could compete in this area. > > As a matter of interest, did you look at IBM's own Power Systems (IBM > System i, AS/400, System p, as was)? They promote some of these models > as having very powerful processing capabilities but I wonder how they > compare in practice with Epyc or Xeon systems.I always had the impression that those IBM systems were priced in a different range from what we were interested in. And I know that I didn't find any price listed online when looking for POWER servers from IBM last time - and I know what that means :-) If they came back now with something like their deprecated X86 servers (Netfinity, System x) but on POWER, that could be interesting. Regards, Simon
Simon Matter wrote:>> On 30/10/2018 06:46, Simon Matter wrote: >> >>>> On 10/29/18 1:55 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >>>> >>>>> To me it seems like, if they are smart, they will try to push IBM >>>>> POWER >>>>> and RedHat Linux together to establish real competition in the >>>>> hardware market again (and of course don't forget to keep >>>>> Fedora/CentOS alive)! >>>>> >>>> Er, RHEL has been running on Power for a very long time. The >>>> fastest supercomputer in the world is Power9 + RHEL. >>> What I meant is that POWER could become a competitor for Intel/AMD >>> based servers. We're now running AMD EPYC servers with >>> 64Cores/128Threads and >>> we didn't find any POWER system which could compete in this area. >> >> As a matter of interest, did you look at IBM's own Power Systems (IBM >> System i, AS/400, System p, as was)? They promote some of these models >> as having very powerful processing capabilities but I wonder how they >> compare in practice with Epyc or Xeon systems. > > I always had the impression that those IBM systems were priced in a > different range from what we were interested in. And I know that I didn't > find any price listed online when looking for POWER servers from IBM last > time - and I know what that means :-) > > If they came back now with something like their deprecated X86 servers > (Netfinity, System x) but on POWER, that could be interesting. >Um, yep. The AS/400/system 1/whatever is not a small system. It's what used to be called a mid-frame, not a micro. It's money. Back around '94, I worked at a small software house that had it's own DOS/VSR/SP mini-mainrame: Looked like a *very* large tower case... and cost $192k. I wouldn't expect a system 1, if that's the current name, to be under $100k or $200k, minimum. mark
On 30/10/2018 14:40, Simon Matter wrote:>> On 30/10/2018 06:46, Simon Matter wrote: >>>> On 10/29/18 1:55 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >>>>> To me it seems like, if they are smart, they will try to push IBM >>>>> POWER >>>>> and RedHat Linux together to establish real competition in the >>>>> hardware >>>>> market again (and of course don't forget to keep Fedora/CentOS alive)! >>>> Er, RHEL has been running on Power for a very long time. The fastest >>>> supercomputer in the world is Power9 + RHEL. >>> What I meant is that POWER could become a competitor for Intel/AMD based >>> servers. We're now running AMD EPYC servers with 64Cores/128Threads and >>> we >>> didn't find any POWER system which could compete in this area. >> As a matter of interest, did you look at IBM's own Power Systems (IBM >> System i, AS/400, System p, as was)? They promote some of these models >> as having very powerful processing capabilities but I wonder how they >> compare in practice with Epyc or Xeon systems. > I always had the impression that those IBM systems were priced in a > different range from what we were interested in. And I know that I didn't > find any price listed online when looking for POWER servers from IBM last > time - and I know what that means :-)Yup, I thought they'd be eye-wateringly expensive. Nevertheless, they are just rackmount servers, much like the kinds of x86-64 servers you can buy from Dell, Lenovo, HPE, Tyan, Gigabyte, etc. Better CPUs and buses but otherwise quite similar.> If they came back now with something like their deprecated X86 servers > (Netfinity, System x) but on POWER, that could be interesting.Haven't the IBM x86 servers gone to Lenovo now? As far as I can see, IBM Power Systems *are* in effect what you are looking for, i.e. a Power-based server to run Linux (or AIX or IBM i if you prefer) -- well, that's how IBM would see it I think. They already support Linux on Power Systems. But I don't think they are going to undercut themselves, sadly. -- Mark Rousell
On 30/10/2018 14:49, mark wrote:> I wouldn't expect a system 1, if that's the current nameAS/400 -> eServer iSeries -> System i -> Power Systems RS/6000 -> eServer pSeries -> System p -> Power Systems So the current 'Power Systems' range combines what was AS/400 with what was RS/6000. They all use Power CPUs now and run Linux, IBM i, or AIX. "IBM i" is, of course the operating system previously known as OS/400 and then i5/OS. Simple, eh. ;-) -- Mark Rousell
> On 30/10/2018 14:40, Simon Matter wrote: >>> On 30/10/2018 06:46, Simon Matter wrote: >>>>> On 10/29/18 1:55 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >>>>>> To me it seems like, if they are smart, they will try to push IBM >>>>>> POWER >>>>>> and RedHat Linux together to establish real competition in the >>>>>> hardware >>>>>> market again (and of course don't forget to keep Fedora/CentOS >>>>>> alive)! >>>>> Er, RHEL has been running on Power for a very long time. The fastest >>>>> supercomputer in the world is Power9 + RHEL. >>>> What I meant is that POWER could become a competitor for Intel/AMD >>>> based >>>> servers. We're now running AMD EPYC servers with 64Cores/128Threads >>>> and >>>> we >>>> didn't find any POWER system which could compete in this area. >>> As a matter of interest, did you look at IBM's own Power Systems (IBM >>> System i, AS/400, System p, as was)? They promote some of these models >>> as having very powerful processing capabilities but I wonder how they >>> compare in practice with Epyc or Xeon systems. >> I always had the impression that those IBM systems were priced in a >> different range from what we were interested in. And I know that I >> didn't >> find any price listed online when looking for POWER servers from IBM >> last >> time - and I know what that means :-) > > Yup, I thought they'd be eye-wateringly expensive. > > Nevertheless, they are just rackmount servers, much like the kinds ofAre you sure, has this changed? In the past time when I had to do with iSeries, they even had their own rack size, no chance to put them into a standard server rack.> x86-64 servers you can buy from Dell, Lenovo, HPE, Tyan, Gigabyte, etc. > Better CPUs and buses but otherwise quite similar. > >> If they came back now with something like their deprecated X86 servers >> (Netfinity, System x) but on POWER, that could be interesting. > > Haven't the IBM x86 servers gone to Lenovo now? > > As far as I can see, IBM Power Systems *are* in effect what you are > looking for, i.e. a Power-based server to run Linux (or AIX or IBM i if > you prefer) -- well, that's how IBM would see it I think. They already > support Linux on Power Systems. But I don't think they are going to > undercut themselves, sadly.I agree the Power System L922 looks promising, but I'm afraid the "Please contact us for pricing" still means the prices are eye watering. The problem is that there is almost no competition in the POWER server market which results in higher prices. IBM has the chance to change this now. Regards, Simon