SAP users face many challenges. They must respond more rapidly and flexibly to changes in volatile, globalized business environments. They must boost competitiveness and exploit emerging opportunities. At the same time, economic conditions reinforce pressures to cut or at least contain growth in costs. The concepts and technologies of “cloud computing” may play an important role in meeting these challenges. Clouds offer the potential to reduce IT cycle times, more effectively exploit virtualization technologies and increase operational efficiencies. But adoption rates among SAP users have been conservative.

1. April
2012
MANAGEMENT
BRIEF
Value Proposition for
IBM PureFlex System
Case for IBM PureFlex System for
Cloud-Enabled SAP Enterprise Environments
International Technology Group
609 Pacific Avenue, Suite 102
Santa Cruz, California 95060-4406
Telephone: + 831-427-9260
Email: Contact@ITGforInfo.com
Website: ITGforInfo.com

2. Copyright © 2012 by the International Technology Group. All rights reserved. Material, in whole or part, contained in this document may not be
reproduced or distributed by any means or in any form, including original, without the prior written permission of the International Technology
Group (ITG). Information has been obtained from sources assumed to be reliable and reflects conclusions at the time. This document was
developed with International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) funding. Although the document may utilize publicly available material from
various sources, including IBM, it does not necessarily reflect the positions of such sources on the issues addressed in this document. Material
contained and conclusions presented in this document are subject to change without notice. All warranties as to the accuracy, completeness or
adequacy of such material are disclaimed. There shall be no liability for errors, omissions or inadequacies in the material contained in this
document or for interpretations thereof. Trademarks included in this document are the property of their respective owners.

3. TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
Overview 1
PureFlex System Value 1
Use Cases 2
Mechanisms 3
Differentiators 4
SAP VIEW 6
Challenges 6
Overview 6
Clouds and Virtualization 6
Solutions 7
SAP NetWeaver Landscape Virtualization Management 7
PureFlex Systems Interfaces 9
TECHNOLOGY VIEW 10
PureFlex Systems 10
Power Compute Nodes 10
Overview 10
Distinctive Technologies 11
Availability 12
Security 13
Intel Processor-based Compute Nodes 14
Storwize V7000 14
Overview 14
Automated Tiering 15
DETAILED DATA 16
Installations and Configurations 16
Personnel Costs 19
Facilities and Energy Costs 19
List of Figures
1. Conventional and PureFlex Systems-enabled Cycle Times – Examples 2
2. Cost Reductions Through Use of PureFlex Systems 3
3. Key Capability Areas for SAP NetWeaver Landscape Virtualiztion Management 1.0 8
4. Initial PureFlex Systems Interfaces to SAP Landscape Virtualiztion Management 9
5. Power Systems Technology Integration 12
6. Reported Medium and High Severity Vulnerabilities During 2011 13
7. Intel Processor-based Compute Server
– Key Reliability, Availability and Serviceability Features 14
8. Installations Summary 16
International Technology Group i

4. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Overview
SAP users face many challenges. They must respond more rapidly and flexibly to changes in volatile,
globalized business environments. They must boost competitiveness and exploit emerging opportunities.
At the same time, economic conditions reinforce pressures to cut or at least contain growth in costs.
The concepts and technologies of “cloud computing” may play an important role in meeting these
challenges. Clouds offer the potential to reduce IT cycle times, more effectively exploit virtualization
technologies and increase operational efficiencies. But adoption rates among SAP users have been
conservative.
There are good reasons for this. Organizations must deal with complex, interlocking systems and
landscapes that support business-critical systems. Compatibility with SAP architecture and standards must
be maintained, and diverse application and technology environments must be supported.
Two new solutions address these requirements. SAP NetWeaver Landscape Virtualization Management
(SAP LVM) addresses higher-level SAP components and processes, while IBM PureFlex System offers
industry-leading capabilities at the infrastructure management level. Although PureFlex Systems are not
restricted to use with LVM, they complement and can be tightly integrated with the LVM stack.
PureFlex Systems compete primarily with Vblock solutions offered by the Virtual Computing
Environment (VCE) consortium of EMC and its VMware subsidiary, and Cisco Systems. However,
PureFlex Systems are better integrated, support a broader range of processors, operating systems and
hypervisors and offer more effective system management capabilities.
To a greater extent than any competitive offering, PureFlex Systems offer the potential to transform the
server, storage and network infrastructures that support SAP enterprise environments. They also allow
organizations to extend common management services to non-SAP applications.
PureFlex System Value
The value proposition for PureFlex Systems consists of two main components:
1. Operational efficiencies. In six deployment examples presented in this report, use of PureFlex
Systems to consolidate older servers, storage systems and networks significantly reduces
administrative staffing. Three-year personnel costs average 44 percent less for PureFlex Systems
than for existing environments.
In the same examples, facilities and energy costs are reduced by even wider margins. Three-year
costs for use of PureFlex Systems average 89 and 85 percent less respectively.
Combined costs for all installations average 54 percent less. In two cases of UNIX server
consolidation, combined costs average 57 and 43 percent less. In x86 server consolidation
examples costs average 38 and 40 percent less, and for mixed UNIX and x86 environments costs
average 58 and 60 percent less.
Calculations assume that organizations fully exploit PureFlex Systems strengths, including the
advanced management capabilities of the new IBM Flex System Manager, and that systems are
implemented and operated in a best practice manner. Results in other organizations may vary.
International Technology Group 1

5. Significant reductions could be expected in software costs for databases and other products priced
on a per core basis. For organizations acquiring licenses independently of SAP, numbers of
database server cores are reduced by an average of 63 percent, and application server cores by an
average of 70 percent. The extent of savings would depend upon vendor licensing policies.
Savings could also be expected in maintenance, network infrastructure and other areas. Hardware
as well as software maintenance savings would tend to be highest among organizations migrating
from older high-end UNIX servers and disk arrays.
2. Cycle time reductions. Compared to conventional server, storage and network environments,
PureFlex Systems enable organizations to significantly reduce the amount of time required for
provisioning, installation, configuration and other processes to change or expand infrastructures.
Figure 1 shows examples.
Conventional
PureFlex
Task
Systems
Systems
Provision
new
server
2-­‐6
hours
5-­‐10
minutes
Provision
storage
for
new
server
3-­‐5
hours
20-­‐25
minutes
Provision
network
capacity
30-­‐60
minutes
N/A
Add
capacity
to
virtual
server
60-­‐90
minutes
1
minute
Install
new
UNIX
OS
6-­‐8
hours
30
minutes
System
set-­‐up
10-­‐20
hours
2-­‐3
hours
Figure 1: Conventional and PureFlex Systems-enabled
Cycle Times – Examples
Reduced infrastructure cycle times translate into administrator timesavings and greater
responsiveness to internal customer needs. They may provide value not only in improving the
efficiency of existing environments, but also in replicated and new system deployments. Shorter
implementation times and project durations typically yield savings in external services as well as
internal costs.
Faster cycle times realized by PureFlex Systems facilitate similar gains through use of SAP LVM
for system copying, cloning and refreshing for database and application layers; and for workload
and capacity management, monitoring and other operational processes.
The eventual SAP objectives are to enable a single view of processes and resources across all
layers of SAP environments, and to automate management of these from a single point of control.
For organizations planning to implement LVM, PureFlex Systems ensure that underlying
infrastructures are fully consistent with these objectives.
PureFlex Systems offer the broader potential of enabling organizations to expand IT infrastructures in a
less disruptive manner. New compute, storage and network resources may be added, and existing resources
upgraded, without replacing entire servers, storage frames or switches. Self-service extensions will
eventually enable SAP Line of Business (LOB) users to handle authorized provisioning directly.
Use Cases
PureFlex Systems can be deployed in any SAP environment, to support any SAP system and landscape.
The platform incorporates key features of IBM Power Systems, System x and BladeCenter, and Storwize
V7000 systems which have been widely employed by SAP users.
International Technology Group 2

6. The cost calculations presented in this report are based on six user installations employing the full range of
SAP applications. Results are based on a set of before and after calculations for each installation. Before
calculations are for actual user installations. Server and storage bases, and full time equivalent (FTE)
administrator staffing levels are based on user-supplied data.
After calculations are based on estimates of configurations that would be required if applications and
workloads were transferred to PureFlex Systems.
Installations include a large IT services company whose before environment includes more than 300 UNIX
and x86 servers from a variety of vendors. The environment includes six different operating systems, eight
hypervisors and more than 20 management consoles. PureFlex Systems are employed to consolidate and
standardize these.
In three installations in manufacturing, distribution and retailing companies, PureFlex Systems are
employed to replace older HP Integrity Superdome and midrange systems with EMC high-end arrays; IBM
System p servers and DS8100 arrays; and IBM System i servers and DS4800 arrays respectively.
Finally, a second manufacturer and a diversified manufacturing, distribution and IT services company
employ PureFlex Systems to consolidate SAP landscapes deployed on Windows servers with HP and EMC
arrays. The extent of operational efficiency improvements, and of savings resulting from them, varies
between these installations as shown in figure 2.
PureFlex
Systems
Percent
Less
Installation
Consolidation
Type
Facilities
Energy
Personnel
IT
Services
Company
Mixed
platforms
92%
87%
51%
Manufacturing
Company
1
UNIX
servers
94%
94%
36%
Distribution
Company
UNIX
servers
80%
78%
34%
Retail
Company
Mixed
platforms
66%
59%
60%
Manufacturing
Company
2
x86
servers
80%
71%
30%
Diversified
Company
x86
servers
65%
68%
35%
AVERAGE
FOR
ALL
INSTALLATIONS
89%
85%
44%
Figure 2: Cost Reductions Through Use of PureFlex Systems
Facilities, in this presentation, include data center occupancy as well as maintenance and other operating
costs for cooling, power distribution and other support equipment.
Generally, the highest gains are realized when organizations move from complex, diverse environments
characterized by comparatively low levels of capacity utilization, and limited use of virtualization and
automation. Even in installations employing more efficient practices, however, significant cost reductions
are achieved.
Detailed installation profiles, along with further information on methodology and assumptions employed,
may be found in the Detailed Data section of this report.
Mechanisms
Multiple mechanisms contribute to cycle time and cost savings. These include the effects of consolidation
and standardization, which typically reduce costs as well as improving manageability, availability and
other operational variables.
International Technology Group 3

7. PureFlex System-specific mechanisms include the following:
• New technology. PureFlex Systems employ latest-generation IBM POWER7 and Intel Xeon
processor E5s, along with 600 gigabyte (GB) Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) and solid state drives
(SSDs) versus the 146 GB or, in one case, 73 GB Fibre Channel (FC) drives in before calculations.
Systems also incorporate state-of-the-art space, cooling and energy efficiency features.
• Higher virtual machine densities. Many organizations do not exploit the full potential of
hypervisors. To realize this, virtualization must be coupled with highly effective management
mechanisms to ensure that resources are efficiently used without risks that workloads will exceed
available capacity. The capabilities of IBM Flex System Manager contribute materially to
operational efficiencies.
• Storwize V7000 capabilities. Virtualization and thin provisioning, along with use of storage tiering
(IBM Easy Tier) and space-efficient snapshot copying (IBM FlashCopy SE) contribute to higher
capacity utilization and lower costs for PureFlex Systems storage. Software enabling all of these is
included in the base StorwizeV7000 solution.
• Higher administrator productivity. Flex System Manager offers a single management console for
physical and virtual Power and Intel processor-based compute nodes, storage and network
resources. Streamlined task structures, high levels of automation and a user-friendly graphical user
interface (GUI) offering interactive hardware maps further boost administrator productivity.
In practice, few organizations would reduce overall numbers of personnel. Savings result from the
ability to minimize the amount of time spent on repetitive, low value-added tasks. Personnel are
typically reassigned to more substantive roles.
A further point should be noted. Although individual capabilities provide value, “the whole is more than
the sum of the parts.” Organizations that deploy more efficient technology and implement best practices
often do not address all the variables that affect operational performance and cost structures. PureFlex
Systems represent an opportunity to so.
Differentiators
PureFlex Systems are the latest of what may be characterized as “converged infrastructure solutions,”
which package server, storage and network components with combined management suites. Hewlett-
Packard initially popularized the concept. The company’s CloudSystem Matrix offerings, however, have
not achieved much traction to date in the SAP world.
The VCE consortium has more aggressively targeted the SAP marketplace. The consortium’s Vblock
offerings include EMC VMAX and VNX disk arrays, Cisco Unified Computing System (UCS) blade
servers and switches, and VMware software. EMC Ionix Universal Interface Manager (UIM) provides a
common management solution.
There are, however, significant differences between Vblock and PureFlex Systems. These include:
• Breadth of support. While Vblock supports only x86 servers and VMware, PureFlex Systems also
allow use of Power Systems with the IBM AIX and IBM i operating systems, SUSE and Red Hat
versions of Linux on Power (LoP), and PowerVM virtualization. Intel processor-based hypervisors
supported include VMware, Microsoft Hyper-V and Kernel Virtual Machine (KVM).
The ability to incorporate Power Systems should be highlighted. The declining competitiveness of
HP’s Integrity platform and of Oracle Sun SPARC-based servers have left IBM Power Systems
and AIX as the only real enterprise-class UNIX server option. Many organizations are reluctant to
entrust large-scale, availability-sensitive systems to x86 platforms.
International Technology Group 4

8. Power Systems also offer strengths in availability, security and other areas that exceed Windows
and x86 Linux equivalents by wide margins. They deliver higher per core SAPS capacity, and
PowerVM technologies are significantly more advanced.
POWER7 processor-based compute nodes with up to 32 cores may be employed, enabling
PureFlex Systems to function as “scale-up” as well as “scale-out” platforms for UNIX server
consolidation. As several of the examples presented in this report illustrate, even relatively large
conventional UNIX servers may be replaced in this manner.
The storage and networking capabilities of PowerFlex Systems are also more inclusive. Storwize
V7000 systems can virtualize IBM as well as non-IBM external storage (Vblock supports only
EMC), while IBM and third-party network switches may be employed (Vblock supports only
Cisco Nexus and MDS). PureFlex Systems will fit more easily into many existing customer
environments than Vblock.
• System integration. Although marketed as a package, Vblock solutions are still essentially a
combination of Cisco UCS blades and VMware with EMC disk arrays.
Many of the claims made for Vblock solutions are in practice due to such factors as replacement of
old technology with new Cisco and EMC platforms offering better price/performance, more
aggressive use of VMware, and gains realized by more effective operational practices.
In contrast, PureFlex Systems employ a new hardware design that includes internal storage
systems and incorporates latest-generation system packaging, power, cooling, and reliability,
availability and serviceability (RAS) technologies. It builds upon IBM’s considerable engineering
strengths in these areas.
The level of integration offered by Flex System Manager is also greater. While EMC’s UIM acts
as an overlay to existing EMC, Cisco and VMware management enablers, Flex System Manager
employs a single toolset to manage physical as well as virtual resources.
Plug-in modules include VMControl for deployment and management of virtual operating system
images, and Storage Control and Network Control for management of storage and network
administration tasks.
Early experiences with PureFlex Systems also suggest that Flex System Manager offers higher
levels of functional integration (fewer steps are required to perform tasks) than UIM. Integration
of server and storage administration functions is also more advanced. Automation technologies are
clearly more sophisticated than Vblock equivalents, and IBM automated storage tiering software is
– by wide margins – simpler to use than that of EMC.
Vblock limitations in these areas may account for the fact that operational cost savings do not
seem to be much in evidence among its users. One of the consortium’s most-publicized case
studies for SAP deployment (Levi Strauss), for example, cites operational cost savings of only
“three to four percent.”
Broader differences should also be noted. EMC’s leading role in the VCE consortium means that Vblock
functionality tends to be storage-centric. The IBM approach is more evenly balanced between servers,
storage and networks.
In addition, while EMC, VMware and Cisco Systems have coordinated support for Vblock systems,
customers are still dealing with three different support organizations. In IBM’s case, they are dealing with
one. The company’s Foundation Advantage program offers single-level support for all PureFlex Systems
components, and a wide range of additional services are available.
International Technology Group 5

9. SAP VIEW
Challenges
Overview
By any standard, SAP is a complex system. According to the company, the core modules of Business Suite
7 contain more than 285 million lines of code. Additional components and customizations mean that, even
in small installations, it may be necessary to support 500 million to a billion lines of code for production
environments alone.
Users now deploy solutions that address heterogeneous transactional processes as well as in planning,
analysis, reporting and decision-making; interaction with customers, partners and employees through the
Internet and intranets; governance, risk management and compliance (GRC); data and process
management; and a wide range of industry-specific activities.
Challenges are multiplied by the fact that multiple SAP systems (e.g., ERP, CRM, BI) may be deployed,
and that for every production instance, there are typically three to five instances for test, development,
quality assurance, training, sandbox and other non-production functions. Organizations with exceptionally
large and/or complex SAP environments may have more.
In such environments, processes such as system cloning and copying for projects and QA testing, along
with everyday operational tasks, have become progressively more exacting. Numbers of IT staff may
increase, or fewer skilled personnel may be available to meet new business demands.
For many users, there is the risk that major migrations and upgrades, as well as deployment of new SAP
applications, may become lengthier, more time-consuming exercises. The ability to conduct application
innovation projects, which often require ad hoc creation of numerous short-lived development systems,
may be impaired.
Business performance may be affected by delays in delivering critical functionality, and by protracted
downtime during transitions. Longer project cycles also translate into higher costs.
Stresses extend to underlying system infrastructures. Organizations must deal with larger, more complex
and more volatile workloads. The demands of greater business agility mean that infrastructure changes
must occur more rapidly, in a more flexible manner than in the past.
At the same time, data volumes routinely expand by 30 to 60 percent per year, causing growth in storage
capacity, and generating ripple effects across large segments of IT infrastructures. More data must be
copied, distributed, backed up and – in the event of a serious outage – recovered.
SAP’s response to these challenges has been the NetWeaver LVM solution. PureFlex Systems compute
and integrated storage nodes allow them to be addressed at the infrastructure level.
Clouds and Virtualization
Among SAP users, interest has grown in two potential, closely related ways of meeting these challenges –
cloud computing and virtualization.
The appeal of cloud computing has been driven by the same potentials that are recognized across the IT
world as whole: greater speed and flexibility of solution delivery; and reduced costs through improved
staff productivity, increased infrastructure efficiency and adoption of “payment for service” models.
International Technology Group 6

10. Potential reductions in cycle times and operational complexity have had particular resonance. Cloud
initiatives in SAP environments tend initially to focus on these areas.
Virtualization has been widely seen as addressing multiple challenges. Despite more than a decade of
consolidation initiatives, numbers of servers have continued to expand in many organizations. Low levels
of capacity utilization, high administration overhead, excessive downtime and other effects remain
common for x86 server farms.
VMware has, unsurprisingly, been widely adopted as a means of consolidating servers, increasing speed
and flexibility of provisioning, reducing planned downtime through use of VMotion, and achieving other
benefits. There has also been a trend toward Linux server virtualization using VMware, Xen and, more
recently, KVM hypervisors.
The bottom-line results of virtualization initiatives, however, have often been disappointing. Virtualization
of x86 servers has often been a bottom-up process. Integration into broader landscapes and process
structures as well as the creation of management backbones have typically been addressed after the fact.
The challenges of creating, distributing and managing virtual images have often increased rather than
decreased complexities. Use of automation tools has been less widespread than should have been the case.
New approaches are needed that more effectively integrate and manage virtualized resources in SAP
environments.
The general industry conclusion has been that the challenges of cloud computing and virtualization
management should be met with common solution sets. These are now beginning to reach the marketplace,
not least from SAP itself.
Solutions
SAP NetWeaver Landscape Virtualization Management
The centerpiece of SAP’s response to the challenges and opportunities of cloud computing has been LVM.
Beta testing of this solution began in June 2011, and limited deployment began in November as part of a
ramp up period scheduled to last until May 2012.
Although LVM was formally announced by SAP only in 2011, it builds upon earlier SAP solutions
developed for customers through the SAP Value Prototyping organization. LVM also incorporates SAP
Virtual Appliance Factory solutions and, according to the company, draws upon SAP experience in more
than 1,700 cloud projects for over 1,000 customers.
The objective of LVM is to provide simple, automated management of SAP services by full or partial SAP
instances. The scope of LVM extends across all layers of SAP environments, including SAP applications
as well as the physical and virtual IT resources that support these.
LVM employs the same general structure as SAP Adaptive Computing Controller (ACC) and defines
overall frameworks for visualization and monitoring, operational and capacity management automation,
and instance provisioning and relocation. LVM Enterprise extends to post-system copy/refresh processes,
which typically run from dozens to hundreds of additional tasks.
Key areas of capability as implemented in LVM 1.0 are as shown in figure 3.
International Technology Group 7

11. END-­‐TO-­‐END
SYSTEM
CLONING/COPYING/REFRESHING
OPERATIONAL
AUTOMATION
Automated
creation
of
task
&
training
systems
Start/stop/relocate
systems
Automated
provisioning
of
new
development
Mass
operations
&
scheduling
&
QA
systems
Automation
of
post-­‐copy/refresh
tasks
SAP
SYSTEMS
VISUALIZATION
&
MONITORING
AUTOMATED
CAPACITY
MANAGEMENT
(All
system
&
infrastructure
layers)
Automated
load
balancing
in
response
to
Dashboards,
graphical
landscape
map,
workload
changes
detailed
monitoring,
reporting
THIRD-­‐PARTY
INFRASTRUCTURE
Servers,
storage,
networks
Operating
systems,
virtualization
software
tools
Figure 3: Key Capability Areas for SAP NetWeaver Landscape Virtualiztion Management 1.0
LVM complements SAP Solution Manager, enabling end-to-end monitoring of and reporting on key
performance indicators (KPIs) for business as well as IT processes.
Early tests with LVM have shown promising improvements in landscape administration flexibility, as well
as in cost savings. For example, IBM has reported that beta test customers with whom the company has
worked have reduced entire system cloning and copying processes to less than five minutes and
approximately 30 minutes (compared to several hours). Organizations have also been able to install and
remove application servers in less than three minutes.
According to SAP, future LVM capabilities will include higher levels of automation, more sophisticated
capacity planning and management tools, and integration of virtual appliances (preconfigured and tested
SAP application templates with optimized virtual hardware settings). User self-service, metering and
billing interfaces to financial systems, and single logical views of SAP landscapes mapped to underlying
infrastructures will be delivered in future releases.
More detailed discussion of LVM capabilities would not be appropriate here. Many SAP users are already
evaluating this solution and most, if not all, can be expected to do so in the future.
Attention, however, should be drawn to a key principle – the extent to which LVM objectives of multi-
layer transparency are realized will depend to no small degree on the effectiveness with which third-party
infrastructure resources are integrated. The speed at which this will occur will also be heavily dependent
on investments by infrastructure vendors.
In the case of PureFlex Systems, substantial investments have already been made by IBM. The capabilities
of Flex System Manager are closely synergistic with the application-level functionality provided by LVM.
These synergies are reinforced by the interfaces described below.
International Technology Group 8

12. PureFlex Systems Interfaces
Standardized interfaces have been put in place by SAP and IBM for PureFlex Systems in general, and Flex
System Manager in particular, and interoperability has been verified and tested by both companies.
Key interfaces for “out of the box” integration with SAP LVM are illustrated in figure 4. These focus
initially on Power Systems and selected IBM disk arrays.
SAP
SOLUTION
MANAGER
SAP
LANDSCAPE
VIRTUALIZATION
MANAGER
(LVM)
SAPHostControl
Flex
System
Tivoli
Storage
Manager
DB
library
FlashCopy
Manager
VMControl
OS
library
OS
Storage
library
Space-­‐efficient
copy
copying
&
cloning
SAP
Host
Agent
AIX,
Linux
on
Power
XIV,
Storwize
V7000
SAN
Volume
Controller
IBM
custom
code
Figure 4: Initial PureFlex Systems Interfaces to SAP Landscape Virtualiztion Management
IBM implementation has occurred at multiple levels. Extensive custom code has been developed by the
company in cooperation with SAP to implement SAPHostControl for Flex System Manager.
SAPHostControl is the principal LVM interface to infrastructure resources. SAP Host Agent support for
AIX and Linux on Power has also been put in place.
For system copying and cloning, LVM interfaces to IBM Tivoli FlashCopy Manager, an industry-leading,
space-efficient snapshot copying tool that is described later in this report.
LVM-compliant cloning and copying is supported to Storwize V7000 as well as IBM XIV disk arrays. The
IBM SAN Volume Controller (SVC) cross-platform storage virtualization solution also enables cloning
and copying to other IBM and non-IBM storage systems.
The contents of Power Systems LPARs – including operating systems, SAP software and other
components – may be copied directly to supported platforms using VMControl. Intel processor-based
compute nodes, and the operating systems and hypervisors on these may also be integrated with LVM
through Flex System Manager.
It should be emphasized that these are initial capabilities. Further expansion of interoperability between
PureFlex Systems and LVM can be expected.
International Technology Group 9

13. TECHNOLOGY VIEW
PureFlex Systems
Although PureFlex Systems contain many new features, they draw upon the technology strengths of
platforms that are established industry leaders in their own right. These include IBM Power Systems and
Storwize V7000 disk arrays, which are incorporated in current offerings.
It can also be expected that new Intel processor-based compute nodes implementing the latest eX5
generation of IBM X-Architecture will be introduced during 2012.
X-Architecture is a customized Xeon-based design, currently in its fifth generation, which is optimized for
high levels of system-wide performance and scalability. The design, based in part upon IBM mainframe
architecture, enables scaling in a manner that maximizes the performance of memory and I/O components
as well as processors.
eX5-based systems are leaders in the high-end x86 server market. The ability to support large memory
sizes – up to 6 terabytes (TB) on current eX5 models – has proved popular for densely virtualized and
database-intensive environments.
Power Compute Nodes
Overview
IBM Power Systems and their antecedents have been widely deployed to support SAP systems since the
early 1990s.
For several years, Power Systems have been the only UNIX server platform to expand its market position.
As of yearend 2011, Power Systems had experienced 15 consecutive quarters of growth in UNIX server
market share, and accounted for more than 50 percent of this market.
IBM has maintained a pace of rapid technological advance. Since the mid-2000s, Power Systems have
delivered higher per core performance than any competitive platform in SAP SD and other recent industry
benchmarks.
Power Systems demand has been reinforced by capabilities in virtualization, performance optimization and
other areas that are described below. The market momentum of this platform has been aided by weakening
UNIX server competition.
For example, the HP Integrity platform has been undercut by declining performance competitiveness, as
well as by decisions by Microsoft, Red Hat and – more seriously – Oracle to cease new development for
Itanium architecture. Older Sun SPARC-based servers have also failed to maintain competitiveness.
Among SAP users, few high-end Sun servers remain in place, and replacement of smaller Sun servers has
become pervasive.
Oracle has promoted its Exadata Database Machine for SAP deployments. Although this platform is
certified by SAP, it has rarely been adopted. The Exadata Database Machine is not well optimized for most
SAP workloads, and has not matched Power Systems performance for comparably sized configurations. It
is unlikely that Oracle SPARC SuperCluster T4-4 systems will fare better, for the same reasons.
Power Systems support IBM AIX and IBM i operating systems, along with Power versions of SUSE Linux
Enterprise Server (SLES) and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Organizations often employ AIX for
SAP databases, and Linux for application serving.
International Technology Group 10

14. Distinctive Technologies
Distinctive Power Systems technologies include the following:
• Logical partitions (LPARs) and micro-partitions. These are commonly employed for both
production and non-production applications, and support some of the largest, most business-
critical SAP systems in existence. LPARs and micro-partitions are firmware- and software-based
respectively.
LPARs may be configured in increments as small as 1/10th of a core, and may be Static (i.e.,
system resources are dedicated to partitions) or Dynamic (i.e., resources may be shared by
partitions according to predefined application priorities). Micro-partitions may be configured in
initial increments of 1/10th of a core and subsequent increments as small as 1/100th of a core.
In contrast, x86 virtualization tools employ a single software-based partitioning technology.
LPARs and micro-partitioning capacities are closely integrated with Power Systems resource
sharing and workload management mechanisms, which are among the most sophisticated of any
platform available today.
• Workload partitions (WPARs). These allow users to create multiple software-based partitions
within a single AIX instance. WPARs are typically employed for development, test, quality
assurance and other non-production instances; for light-duty production applications; and to
upgrade or migrate applications without interrupting service. There are no size limits.
• Intelligent multithreading. POWER7 processor-based systems support up to four simultaneous
threads, which can boost performance for certain SAP workloads. For example, IBM has reported
test results showing that use of four threads can boost performance for Advanced Business
Application Programming (ABAP) software stacks by 19 percent compared to the use of two.
Workloads can be executed using one, two or four threads per core. The system can automatically
determine which to use for optimum performance, or system administrators may select the number
of threads employed. In automatic mode, continuous optimization of performance for system-wide
as well as partition workloads is provided.
• Intelligent cache. The POWER7 cache structure is supported by performance optimization
functions. The system may be set to automatically determine appropriate levels of cache for
specific workloads, and to modify these as workload mixes change.
• Active Memory Expansion. This enables system-managed compression and decompression of
data in memory. IBM tests for SAP workloads indicate that de facto memory size may be
increased by 75 percent with less than one percent processor overhead, and by 111 percent with
around 15 percent processor overhead.
Compressed data consumes fewer processor cycles, and may be moved more rapidly. Performance
improvements of up to 65 percent may be realized for SAP ERP workloads with the same physical
memory size. Hardware costs may be materially reduced
• Virtual I/O Server (VIOS). VIOS allows operating system instances running in multiple LPARs to
share a common pool of LAN adapters as well as FC, SCSI and RAID devices; i.e., it is not
necessary to dedicate adapters to individual partitions.
These features are closely integrated, enabling Power Systems to vary a wide range of configuration
parameters. These include numbers of threads; use of dedicated or shared processors; cache size, main
memory and I/O; multiple forms of partitioning; and shared memory and processor pools.
International Technology Group 11

15. Figure 5 illustrates this picture.
AIX
7
Intelligent
Threads
v
Intelligent
Cache
HYPERVISOR
Shared
Memory
&
Processor
Pools
v
Partition
Capacity
Sharing
Active
Memory
Expansion
LPAR
LPAR
Dedicated
Micro-­‐partitions
Micro-­‐partitions
LPAR
Dedicated
Logical
processors
Logical
processors
LPAR
(thread-­‐based)
(thread-­‐based)
LPAR
WPARs
Shared
Virtual
Shared
Virtual
Processor
Pool
Processor
Pool
Virtual
LAN
VIRTUAL
I/O
VIRTUAL
I/O
SERVER
SERVER
Figure 5: Power Systems Technology Integration
In this presentation, Virtual I/O Servers are duplexed to provide redundancy in the event of a component
failure. This is common practice among Power users supporting business-critical systems.
Availability
There is no serious dispute that Power Systems deliver significantly higher availability than any
competitive platform. Industry surveys have consistently reported that Power Systems experience fewer,
shorter outages than Windows, x86 Linux, HP-UX or Solaris servers. This is the case for planned and
unplanned outages, as well as for clustered and standalone configurations.
International Technology Group 12

16. Power Systems are equipped with more than 200 major reliability, availability and serviceability (RAS)
features, which are implemented across all hardware components and subsystems. AIX and PowerVM also
incorporate industry-leading technologies that minimize risks of unplanned outages, facilitate recovery
from hardware or software failure and reduce the frequency and duration of planned outages.
POWER7 processor-based systems and AIX benefit from a number of technology transfers from IBM
mainframe systems, which enjoy the highest levels of availability of any major platform. According to
IBM, the availability features of POWER7-based systems were developed jointly by the company’s Power
and System z (mainframe) design teams.
Security
Power Systems may deliver significant benefits in this area. Users have found that AIX and PowerVM are
a less vulnerable to hacking and malware penetration than x86 operating systems and hypervisors.
Industry statistics confirm this picture. During 2011, for example, the National Vulnerability Database
maintained by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) reported the numbers of
medium and high severity vulnerabilities shown in figure 6 for major operating systems and hypervisors.
Linux
197
Windows
Server
128
AIX
10
VMware
39
Xen
&
KVM
13
PowerVM
0
Source:
Nadonal
Insdtute
of
Standards
&
Technology
Nadonal
Vulnerability
Database
Figure 6: Reported Medium and High Severity Vulnerabilities During 2011
Lower AIX and PowerVM vulnerability histories reflect, to some extent, the fact that these are less
targeted. However, AIX and PowerVM security mechanisms are also significantly more advanced than for
the latter.
These strengths may reduce not only business risk exposure, but also the costs of maintaining effective
security. Additional tools may be required, and more time is typically spent on security administration
tasks in x86 environments.
In security as in other areas, IT organizations facing budget pressures are increasingly required to “do
more with less.” Use of Power Systems may significantly improve the odds that they will succeed.
International Technology Group 13

17. Intel Processor-based Compute Nodes
Intel processor-based compute nodes are built around latest-generation Intel E5 eight-core technology,
offering up to 80 percent higher performance than Intel Xeon processor 5600 series equivalents, second-
generation Turbo Boost Technology and other advanced features. Up to 384 GB or 768 GB RAM may be
configured using 16 GB or 32 GB dual in-line memory module (DIMMs) respectively.
Dual- and four-socket nodes also implement dual embedded VMware ESXi hypervisors with a redundant
boot option for high availability. Microsoft Hyper-V, KVM and Xen are also supported.
Resiliency features include standard capabilities such as hot-swappable memory cards, disk drives, I/O
adapters, power supplies and fans. There are also a number of distinctive IBM-developed features,
summarized in figure 7, that are generally regarded as industry leading.
FEATURE
DESCRIPTION
Chipkill
Memory
Creates
duplicate
checksum
copies
of
data
within
memory
subsystem,
disables
inoperative
memory
chips
in
the
event
of
a
failure
(server
remains
online)
&
reinstates
data
copy.
Aids
in
correcting
single-­‐
&
multiple-­‐bit
errors.
Memory
mirroring
Provides
RAID
1-­‐equivalent
function
that
writes
data
to
multiple
memory
cards
&
enables
it
to
be
rebuilt
in
the
event
of
a
failure.
Allows
data
to
be
rebuilt
on
hot-­‐swapped
cards.
Memory
sparing
Enables
contents
of
a
memory
chip
to
be
copied
to
an
alternate
in
the
event
of
a
failure.
The
failed
chip
is
taken
offline,
&
the
alternate
is
activated.
Predictive
Failure
Provides
up
to
48
hours
advance
warning
of
failures.
Enabled
components
include
processors,
Analysis
memory
cards,
disk
drives,
I/O
slots,
power
supplies,
fans
&
voltage
regulator
modules.
Light-­‐Path
Diagnostics
Identifies
component
failures
&
illuminates
LEDs
on
server
panel
indicating
those
require
service.
Components
are
the
same
as
for
Predictive
Failure
Analysis.
Integrated
Management
Provides
remote
monitoring,
troubleshooting
&
power
control.
Enables
Predictive
Failure
Module
(IMM)
Analysis
&
Light-­‐Path
Diagnostics;
sends
alerts
&
status
&
optionally
redirects
console
functions
to
a
remote
PC.
Figure 7: Intel Processor-based Compute Servers
– Key Reliability, Availability and Serviceability Features
Intel processor-based as well as Power Systems compute nodes offer distinctive advanced energy
management features. Both support IBM Active Energy Manager software. Intel processor-based compute
nodes also offer options for use of low energy consumption Intel processors, and both platforms implement
IBM technologies such as Calibrated Vectored Cooling (which significantly reduces power consumption
by fans) and energy-efficient power supplies.
Storwize V7000
Overview
Storwize V7000 is IBM’s principal midrange disk array. Since its introduction in October 2010, it has
enjoyed strong market momentum. As of March 2012,Base software includes IBM Easy Tier, the IBM
FlashCopy SE snapshot tool, system management tools and Remote Mirroring for synchronous as well as
asynchronous replication.
A no-charge offering, IBM Active Cloud Engine allows Easy Tier to be employed to implement
Information Lifecycle Management (ILM) strategies; i.e., data is moved to lower-cost media as it ages and
is less frequently accessed. Active Cloud Engine also enables policy-driven organization, searching,
retrieval and distribution of files across systems.
International Technology Group 14

18. Storwize V7000 systems compete with EMC VNX midrange and VMAX high-end disk arrays supported
as part of Vblock packages. Storwize V7000 and VNX systems support block as well as file storage.
VMAX systems are block-only.
A key technical difference is that Storwize V7000 systems can extend virtualization to a wide range of
IBM as well as non-IBM storage systems. This is a capability of SVC, which commonly supports
heterogeneous multivendor storage environments.
VNX systems require use of separately charged software tools to provide capabilities included in the base
Storwize V7000 solution. These include EMC RecoverPoint for remote disaster recovery replication;
PowerPath multipathing software, which is required for server access; and EMC Fully Automated
Software Tiering, which is discussed below. These may significantly increase overall costs compared to
equivalent Storwize V7000 configurations.
If VMAX systems are employed, costs will escalate further. VMAX is EMC’s flagship high-end disk
array. Hardware, software and maintenance costs are – by wide margins – higher than for either VNX or
PureFlex Systems. There may be some Vblock applications where use of these would be appropriate. But
the general industry experience has been that latest-generation midrange arrays meet most requirements.
Automated Tiering
Tiering – meaning the ability to shift data between multiple tiers of high-performance and slower, higher-
capacity drives to optimize performance and reduce media costs – has increasingly become the norm
among users of high-end as well as midrange disk arrays.
Storwize V7000 systems implement IBM Easy Tier technology, while EMC systems employ the
company’s Fully Automated Software Tiering (FAST). Both enable use of three-tier configurations of
conventional and solid state drives for overall performance optimization, and provide workload balancing
across tiers in response to changes in “hot spot” patterns or configurations.
There are, however, major differences between the IBM and EMC approaches. In principle, FAST enables
operating parameters to be set more frequently, and with higher granularity than Easy Tier. It is also
designed to run continuously, with collection of performance statistics, analysis and data movement
processes occurring on a 24/7 basis.
In practice, however, users have found it difficult to exploit FAST capabilities. Continuous operations tend
to generate system overhead that may affect production performance and impair service levels. Equally,
few organizations seem prepared to invest the administrator time and effort that would be necessary to
migrate data across tiers multiple times per day, on an application-by-application basis.
In comparison, Easy Tier is designed to conduct these processes periodically, as scheduled by
administrators. Data is migrated in small increments every five minutes, reducing production impacts.
In contrast to FAST, Easy Tier was designed to minimize complexity – this was, according to IBM,
overwhelmingly requested by customers. Administrative processes are simpler, and automation is more
advanced. Overall administrator workloads thus tend to be less than for FAST environments; i.e., fewer
FTEs are required.
International Technology Group 15

19. DETAILED DATA
Installations and Configurations
Cost comparisons are based on before and after comparisons of servers, disk arrays and FTE
administrators in the six installations summarized in figure 8.
IT
SERVICES
COMPANY
SAP
Applications:
Wide
range
BEFORE
AFTER
(PureFlex
Systems)
UNIX
Servers
Chassis
1
2
x
IBM
560Q
8/16
x
POWER5+
1.8
GHz
4/32
x
Power
2
x
HP
rx8620
12/24
x
It2
1.6
GHz
11
x
2/16
x
E5
2600
1
x
HP
rx6600
4/8
x
It2
1.6
GHz
12
nodes
5
x
HP
rx4640
4/8
x
It2
1.6
GHz
22
x
Sun
T,
V
&
X
series
Chassis
2
AIX/LPARs,
HP-­‐UX/nPars,
Solaris
4/32
x
Power
Oracle,
DB2
13
x
2/16
x
E5
2600
UNIX
cores:
128
database
+
140
application
serving
14
nodes
x86
Servers
Power
cores:
40
database
+
24
application
serving
24
x
4-­‐socket
Intel
cores:
112
database
+
272
application
serving
249
x
2-­‐socket
AIX,
Linux
on
Power,
PowerVM
Windows,
Linux,
VMware,
Hyper-­‐V,
Xen
Windows,
Linux,
VMware,
Hyper-­‐V,
Xen
Oracle,
SQL
Server
Oracle,
DB2,
SQL
Server
Intel
cores:
388
database
+
1,454
application
serving
External
Storwize
V7000s
Storage
2
x
72
TB
+
1
x
63
TB
=
207
TB
2
x
EMC
Clariion
CX3-­‐80
53
TB
each
1
x
EMC
Clariion
CX3-­‐60
26
TB
2
x
Sun
6540
20
TB
each
2
x
HP
EVA
6100
16
TB
each
6
x
HP
MSA
1000
2.5
TB
each
9
x
HP
MSA
1000
5
TB
each
Total:
354
TB
FTEs
UNIX
sysadmin:
1.45
x86
sysadmin
6.15
Network
admin:
0.6
VMware
admin:
1.6
Storage
admin:
0.9
SAN
admin:
0.25
FTEs
Total:
10.95
PureFlex
Systems
admin:
4.65
Figure 8: Installations Summary
International Technology Group 16

20. MANUFACTURING
COMPANY
1
SAP
Applications:
ERP,
BW,
HCM,
SCM,
SM,
SRM
BEFORE
AFTER
(PureFlex
Systems)
UNIX
Servers
Chassis
1
2
x
HP
Superdome
64/64
x
It2
1.6
GHz
each
2/16
x
Power,
3
x
2/16
E5
2600
1
x
HP
Superdome
32/32
x
It2
1.6
GHz
4
nodes
8
x
HP
rx8620
16/16
x
It2
1.6
GHz
each
1
x
HP
rx7620
8/8
x
It2
1.6
GHz
Chassis
2
6
x
HP
rx4640
4/4
x
It2
1.6
GHz
each
2/16
x
Power,
4
x
2/16
E5
2600
HP-­‐UX,
nPars,
Oracle
5
nodes
UNIX
cores:
140
database
+
180
application
serving
AIX
+
PowerVM
+
Oracle,
Linux
+
KVM
Storage
Power
cores:
32
database
serving
2
x
EMC
DMX-­‐4
65
TB
&
63
TB
=
128
TB
Intel
cores:
112
application
serving
FTEs
External
Storwize
V7000s
UNIX
sysadmin
2.25
2
x
43
TB
=
86
TB
Storage
admin
0.65
FTEs
Total:
2.9
PureFlex
Systems
admin:
1.7
DISTRIBUTION
COMPANY
SAP
Applications:
ERP,
BW,
PI,
PLM,
Portal,
SM,
SRM
BEFORE
AFTER
(PureFlex
Systems)
UNIX
Servers
Chassis
1
2
x
570
2/8
x
POWER5+
1.9
GHz
2/16
x
Power,
2/12
x
Power
1
x
550Q
4/8
x
POWER5+
1.65
GHz
2
x
internal
V7000
=
36
TB
9
x
550
2/4
x
POWER5+
1.65
GHz
4
nodes
AIX,
LPARs,
DB2
Chassis
2
UNIX
cores:
20
database
+
40
application
serving
2/16
x
Power,
2/12
x
Power
Storage
2
x
internal
Storwize
V7000
=
36
TB
2
x
IBM
DS8100
x
33
TB
=
66
TB
4
nodes
Power
cores:
8
database
+
48
application
serving
FTEs
UNIX
sysadmin:
1.25
AIX,
Linux
on
Power,
PowerVM,
DB2
Storage
admin:
0.4
FTEs
Total:
1.65
PureFlex
Systems
admin:
1.0
RETAIL
COMPANY
SAP
Applications:
ERP,
BW,
CRM,
POS-­‐DM,
Portal,
PI,
SCM
BEFORE
AFTER
(PureFlex
Systems)
Power/i
Servers
Chassis
1
I570
2/16
x
POWER6
4.2
GHz
2/16
x
Power,
3
x
2/16
E5
2600
I550
2/8
x
POWER6
3.5
GHz
1
x
internal
Storwize
V7000
=
21
TB
IBM
i,
LPARs
5
nodes
x86
Servers
Chassis
2
1
x
4-­‐socket,
16
x
2-­‐socket
2/16
x
Power,
3
x
2/16
E5
2600
1
x
internal
V7000
=
21
TB
Intel
cores:
36
database
+
60
application
serving
5
nodes
Windows,
VMware,
SQL
Server
Power
cores:
32
IBM
i
Storage
Intel
cores:
16
database
+
64
application
serving
2
x
IBM
DS4800
x
21
TB
=
42
TB
IBM
i
+
PowerVM;
Windows,
VMware,
SQL
Server
FTEs
IBM
i
sysadmin
0.25
x86
sysadmin
0.6
Storage
admin
0.35
FTEs
Total:
1.2
PureFlex
Systems
admin:
.85
Figure 8 (continued): Installations Summary
International Technology Group 17

21. MANUFACTURING
COMPANY
2
SAP
Applications:
ERP,
BI,
CRM,
ECM,
PLM,
Portal,
SCM,
SM,
SRM,
xApp
BEFORE
AFTER
(PureFlex
Systems)
x86
Servers
Chassis
1
4
x
4-­‐socket,
36
x
2-­‐socket
4
x
2/16
x
E5
2600
72
database
+
86
application
serving
cores
5
nodes
Windows,
VMware,
SQL
Server
Chassis
2
Storage
4
x
2/16
x
E5
2600
2
x
HP
EVA
8100
x
14
TB
=
28
TB
1
x
internal
Storwize
V7000
=
15
TB
5
nodes
54
database
+
74
application
serving
cores
FTEs
x86
sysadmin
1.25
Windows,
VMware,
SQL
Server
Storage
admin
0.35
FTEs
Total
1.6
PureFlex
Systems
admin:
0.95
DIVERSIFIED
COMPANY
SAP
Applications:
ERP,
BI,
PI,
Portal,
SCM,
SM
BEFORE
AFTER
(PureFlex
Systems)
x86
Servers
Chassis
1
2
x
4-­‐socket,
17
x
2-­‐socket
2
x
2/16
x
E5
2600
36
database
+
80
application
serving
cores
1
x
internal
Storwize
V7000
=
10
TB
Windows,
VMware,
SQL
Server
3
nodes
Storage
Chassis
2
2
x
Clariion
CX4-­‐120
x
9
TB
=
18
TB
2
x
2/16
x
E5
2600
1
x
internal
Storwize
V7000
=
10
TB
3
nodes
16
database
+
32
application
serving
cores
FTEs
Windows,
VMware,
SQL
Server
x86
sysadmin
0.75
Storage
admin
0.25
FTEs
Total
1.0
PureFlex
Systems
admin:
0.55
Figure 8 (continued): Installations Summary
In all calculations, UNIX as well as x86 servers are employed for SAP database and application serving,
and include production and non-production systems. Servers employed for file/print serving and other
peripheral functions are not included.
In before calculations, x86 servers were installed between yearend 2005 and yearend 2010, and were
equipped with then-current Intel 5000 series (dual-socket) and 7000 series (four-socket) processors.
Operating systems and hypervisors employed were as shown in figure 8.
Most UNIX servers and disk arrays in before calculations date from the same period. In practice, some
organizations upon which calculations are based also employed newer servers and disk systems. However,
it is assumed that aging platforms would be targeted first for replacement.
With one exception, before disk arrays were configured as RAID 5 systems employing 146 GB FC or
Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) drives. The exception was manufacturing company 1, where EMC DMX-4
arrays were configured with 73 GB FC drives in a RAID 0 (i.e., fully mirrored) configuration. RAID 0 was
recommended by EMC for this platform at the time.
Externally attached as well as internal Storwize systems were equipped with 600 GB, 450 GB or 300 GB
SAS drives, and 200 GB or 400 GB SSDs in tiered configurations using IBM Easy Tier. Terabyte
capacities shown for Storwize V7000 systems allow for use of virtualization.
International Technology Group 18

22. Both before and after calculations include servers and arrays duplexed for disaster recovery purposes. For
this reason, two chassis are employed for after calculations. This is the case even in installations where a
single chassis would have been sufficient to hold all components.
Cost calculations are for operating costs only, and do not include transition and migration costs that would
be incurred in replacing existing servers and disk arrays with PureFlex Systems.
Personnel Costs
Personnel costs are for numbers of FTEs shown in figure 8, and were calculated based on annual salaries
of $87,851 for IBM i administrators; $85,294 for dedicated VMware administrators; $83,564 for UNIX
system administrators; $80,014 for SAN administrators; $78,433 for storage administrators; $75,908 for
Windows and x86 Linux administrators; and $67,410 for network administrators.
Salaries were increased by 56.4 percent to allow for benefits, bonuses and related items, and totaled for a
three-year period. All values were based on prevailing U.S. levels at the time of writing.
An annual average salary of $90,000 was assumed for PureFlex System administrators, again multiplied by
56.4 percent and totaled for a three-year period.
Facilities and Energy Costs
Facilities costs are for servers, disk arrays and related networking equipment in before and PureFlex
Systems in after calculations.
Facilities costs include data center occupancy and maintenance, depreciation and operational costs for
support equipment including cooling systems, uninterruptible power supplies (UPS), power distribution
systems (PDS), and facilities management and physical security systems.
Occupancy costs were calculated based on numbers of Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA) units,
assuming use of standard 42U racks, with allowance for rack space, service clearances, aisles and other
inactive areas. A conservative value of cost per square foot per month for existing facilities was then
applied to calculate three-year costs. Costs do not include new construction.
Energy costs are for the same equipment as in facilities calculations, including support equipment as
defined above. Values for PureFlex Systems were estimated.
Energy costs were calculated based on specific utilization levels, including allowance for inactive periods,
for each installation over a three-year period. A conservative assumption for average price per
kilowatt/hour was employed to determine overall costs.
All values for facilities and energy cost calculations are for the United States.
International Technology Group 19

23. ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY GROUP
ITG sharpens your awareness of what’s happening and your competitive edge
. . . this could affect your future growth and profit prospects
International Technology Group (ITG), established in 1983, is an independent research and management
consulting firm specializing in information technology (IT) investment strategy, cost/benefit metrics,
infrastructure studies, deployment tactics, business alignment and financial analysis.
ITG was an early innovator and pioneer in developing total cost of ownership (TCO) and return on
investment (ROI) processes and methodologies. In 2004, the firm received a Decade of Education Award
from the Information Technology Financial Management Association (ITFMA), the leading professional
association dedicated to education and advancement of financial management practices in end-user IT
organizations.
The firm has undertaken more than 120 major consulting projects, released more than 250 management
reports and white papers and more than 1,800 briefings and presentations to individual clients, user
groups, industry conferences and seminars throughout the world.
Client services are designed to provide factual data and reliable documentation to assist in the decision-
making process. Information provided establishes the basis for developing tactical and strategic plans.
Important developments are analyzed and practical guidance is offered on the most effective ways to
respond to changes that may impact complex IT deployment agendas.
A broad range of services is offered, furnishing clients with the information necessary to complement
their internal capabilities and resources. Customized client programs involve various combinations of the
following deliverables:
Status Reports In-depth studies of important issues
Management Briefs Detailed analysis of significant developments
Management Briefings Periodic interactive meetings with management
Executive Presentations Scheduled strategic presentations for decision-makers
Email Communications Timely replies to informational requests
Telephone Consultation Immediate response to informational needs
Clients include a cross section of IT end users in the private and public sectors representing multinational
corporations, industrial companies, financial institutions, service organizations, educational institutions,
federal and state government agencies as well as IT system suppliers, software vendors and service firms.
Federal government clients have included agencies within the Department of Defense (e.g., DISA),
Department of Transportation (e.g., FAA) and Department of Treasury (e.g., US Mint).
International Technology Group
609 Pacific Avenue, Suite 102
Santa Cruz, California 95060-4406
Telephone: + 831-427-9260
Email: Contact@ITGforInfo.com
Website: ITGforInfo.com WAL12354-USEN-01