1. Competitive Comparisons POWER8 versus Intel x86

2. Contents
x86 Vendor Claims
IBM Response 2

3. x86 Vendor Claims – how to respond
X86 Vendor Sales Tactics
IBM Response / Reality
x86 systems have leadership performance versus POWER8 systems
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.
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.
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. 3

4. Return to x86 Tactics
Updated with Haswell
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
POWER 7+
POWER8
Clock rates
1.8–3.6GHz
GHz
GHz
GHz
GHz
SMT options
1,2*
1, 2*
1, 2, 4
1, 2, 4, 8
Cores per socket 8 12 18 15
Max Threads / sock 16 24 36 30 32 96
Max L1 Cache
32KB
32KB*
64KB
Max L2 Cache
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
Memory Bandwidth
GB/s
GB/s
GB/s
68-85**
GB/s
100 – 180 GB/sec
GB/sec
* Intel calls this Hyper-Threading Technology (No HT and with HT) 4

5. x86 Claims - Performance x86 CLAIM:
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.

6. POWER8 vs. x86 Core Performance Ratio
Return to x86 Tactics
Updated with Haswell
Performance comparison – POWER8 vs. x86 E5 IBM POWER8 core and system performance is leadership versus the x86 Xeon E v3
Published Benchmarks – ALL data is PUBLISHED
x86
“Haswell”
IBM
POWER S824
POWER8 vs. x86 Core Performance Ratio
Intel Xeon E v3
(except where noted)
POWER8
@ 3.5 GHz
# Cores 36 24
SAP 2-Tier
16500
21212
1.9
SPECint_rate2006
1400
1750
1.8
SPECfp_rate2006
942
1370
2.1
SPECjbb2013 (max-jOPS)
195119
361293
2.7
SPECjEnterprise2010
11260
(24-core E v2)
22543
2.0
Oracle eBS Payroll
(12-core)
Siebel CRM Release
10000
(16-core E5-2690)
50000
(6-core)
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 # Source: 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 # Source:
SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to
SPECjbb2013 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to
SPECjEnterprise2010 results are valid as of 9/8/ For more information go to
Oracle eBS Payroll Batch Extra Large Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to
Siebel PSPP Kit and are current as of 3/24/ For more information go to

7. POWER8 vs. x86 Core Performance Ratio
Return to x86 Tactics
** Do not leave behind with client, presentation use only**
Updated with Haswell
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
POWER8 vs. x86 Core Performance Ratio
Intel Xeon E v3
Power 3.5 GHz
P8 Util: 100%
x86 Util: 100%
P8 Util: 65%
x86 Util: 40%
x86 Util: 20%
# Cores 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
SPECjEnterprise2010
22543
2.0
3.3
6.5
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 # Source: 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 # Source:
SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to
SPECjbb2013 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to
SPECjEnterprise2010 results are valid as of 9/8/ For more information go to
Oracle eBS Payroll Batch Extra Large Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to
Siebel PSPP Kit and are current as of 3/24/ For more information go to
LEGEND:
Published
Projected

8. Performance Comparison – POWER8 vs x86 …
Return to x86 Tactics
Performance Comparison – POWER8 vs x86 …
Typical deceptive x86 positioning
against Power
Power 8
x86
Comparison
System
S824
4s x86
# Cores 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 }
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Comparing 4-socket x86 E7 (60 cores) vs S824 POWER8
(24 cores)
True Scale Out Comparison
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
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
(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 # Source: 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 # Source: .
(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 # Source:
(4) SPECjbb2013 results are valid as of 10/15/ For more information go to 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 All IBM benchmark results will be submitted to spec.org on October 6, 2014. 8

9. x86 Claims – Price-Performance
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.

10. Scale-Out Price Performance Comparison – POWER8 vs x86 …
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!!!!
This is SPECfp_rate2006 base – NOTE: the performance compares were done with SPECfp_rate2006
Power 8
X86 2-socket
Advantage
SpecFP 2006 Rate
1130
916
Power 23% faster
System HW Price
$37,305
$21,200
x86 43% better
Price/Performance
33 ppf
24 ppf
x86 28% better
A more comparable model would be the S822L and using SPECfp_rate as opposed to SPECfp_base
POWER8 has BETTER Price-Performance when a valid comparison is made.
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
Price/Performance
21 ppf
23 ppf
Power 10% better
SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 10/2/2014. For more information go to All IBM benchmark results will be submitted to spec.org on October 6, 2014.
Pricing is based on Lenovo claims and IBM econfig 10

11. 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.
….. ….

12. Power RAS Involves More Than Just the Processor
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
POWER
CPU
Firmware
AIX, IBM i, Linux
I/O
Drawer
Drivers
Memory
IBM Middleware
PowerHA
LPARs / Workloads
PowerVM
RAS
What is
Missing?
Legal approved by Catherine Quinlan/Somers/IBM 05/21/14
Firmware
x86
CPU
Memory 12
This document is for IBM and IBM Business Partner use only. It is not intended for client distribution

13. x86 Claims – Technology x86 CLAIM:
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.

14. Return to x86 Tactics
Updated with Haswell
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
POWER 7+
POWER8
Clock rates
1.8–3.6GHz
GHz
GHz
GHz
GHz
SMT options
1,2*
1, 2*
1, 2, 4
1, 2, 4, 8
Cores per socket 8 12 18 15
Max Threads / sock 16 24 36 30 32 96
Max L1 Cache
32KB
32KB*
64KB
Max L2 Cache
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
Memory Bandwidth
GB/s
GB/s
GB/s
68-85**
GB/s
100 – 180 GB/sec
GB/sec
* Intel calls this Hyper-Threading Technology (No HT and with HT) 14

15. POWER8 is 89% better at the system level and 2.7x the core performance
Return to x86 Tactics
Updated with Haswell
POWER8 moves forwards while Xeon moves backwards IBM POWER systems continue to deliver improved system performance and more value per SW $ spent
3.09 performance gain came from new version of Java and increased memory (4x more)
Infrastructure Software Price-performance has been REDUCED on Intel servers
Assumes flat system pricing
Software Licensing has increased by 1.5x
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”
“Ivy Bridge”
“Haswell”
System
Performance Ratio
POWER7+
POWER8
2-socket
E5-2690
E5-2697v2
E5-2699v3
SNB to IVB
IVB to HAS
2-socket POWER7+
2-socket POWER8
POWER7+ to POWER8
# Cores 16 24 36
1.50
ERP SAP 2-Tier
7960
10253
16500
1.29
1.61
10000
21212
2.12
SPECint_rate
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
SPECjEnterprise2010
8310
11260
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 # Source: 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 # Source:
SPECcpu2006 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to
SPECjbb2013 results are submitted as of 9/8/2014. For more information go to
SPECjEnterprise2010 results are valid as of 9/8/ For more information go to
Oracle eBS Payroll Batch Extra Large Kit and are current as of 3/24/2014. For more information go to
Siebel PSPP Kit and are current as of 3/24/ For more information go to
POWER8 is 89% better at the system level and 2.7x the core performance

16. x86 Claims – SW Costs are lower on x86
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
Link to TCA/TCO tool:
SSI link:
PartnerWorld link:

17. 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"
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
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.

18. 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
Don’t waste resources (time and money) patching endless systems
And cost savings with POWER IS the icing on the cake 18

19. BACKUP

20. 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
Don’t get caught up in Box to Box comparisons with x86.
Run a Proof of Concept (PoC) to prove the value of Power

21. 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.
Don’t get caught up in Box to Box comparisons with x86.
Run a Proof of Concept (PoC) to prove the value of Power

22. Lower cost per UI per sec
POWER8 and Linux Deliver Over TWICE the Throughput Compared to Ivy Bridge-EP at 47% Lower Cost
Web Application
2.1x
Faster
47%
Lower cost per UI per sec
Power S824
Linux
User Interactions per second
RHEL
WAS
RHEL
WAS
…..
RHEL
WAS
RHEL
WAS
182,672
4 VMs
$3.11
per UI per sec
PowerVM
DB2
WebSphere on platform
Database off platform
2S/24 Core POWER8 (3.525 GHz)
Online Banking Workload v3.6
Both Servers configured to
achieve maximum throughput
Ivy Bridge EP Competitor
85,939
User Interactions per second
Last Updated on April 15, 2014
By Angshuman Roy
Power S824 Test run by Manisha Bhandar.
Intel Ivy Bridge-EP Test run by Randy Rose
==============================================================
Friendly Bank Throughput Test v3.6 Pricing:
IBM - Power S824 (STG Estimate) = $71,391
PowerVM Standard (inc 3yr 24x7 SWMA) = 362 ($ per core) * 24 (cores) = $8,688
RHEL – 2 Socket, 15 Guests (inc 3 yr 24x7 SWMA) = $12,259
Power S824 HW Total = $71,391 + $8,688 + $12,259 = $92,338
WAS ND = $202 (per PVU) x 70 (server PVU rating) x 24 (no of cores) x 1.4 (S&S yrs 2-3) = $475,104
Total HW + SW = $ 92,338 + $475,104= $567,442
UIPS = 182,672 (SMT 4)
Cost per UIPS = $ 567,442/ 182,672 = $3.11
Cost of HP:
HP - ProLiant DL380p Gen8 (2U) Xeon E v2 2.7GHz: LinuxRH: (2ch/24co) = $17,066
Cost of VMware EE (2 socket) = $9,546
Total HW = $17,066 + $9,546 = $26,612
HW + SW cost = $26,612 + $475,104= $501,716
UIPS = (6 VMs)
Cost per UIPS = $501,716/ 85939= $5.84
RHEL
WAS
RHEL
WAS
…..
RHEL
WAS
RHEL
WAS
6 VMs
$5.84
per UI per sec
Competitive Hypervisor
DB2
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 , 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 , 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 22

23. 2.5x throughput No increase 50% fewer servers
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
Bon-Ton needed to expand capacity of its e-commerce 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.
No increase
in licensing costs
50% fewer servers
required compared with x86 systems