As tech media goes in an overdrive highlighting the game changing nature of cloud computing, enterprises are embracing converged infrastructure at an increasing rate. Some predictions that came out at the end of 2010 claimed that 30% of the data centers will use converged infrastructure in the next 2-3 years. I am not sure how far these predictions are true but I can definitely say that there is a pretty good traction for the converged approach. Some of the advantages of converged infrastructure over the best of breed or DIY approach are:
- An integrated solution that completely removes complexity out of infrastructure equation
- Ease of deployment
- One throat to choke
- In some cases, less manpower
- In some specific cases, better performance
However, the drawbacks are increased costs and vendor lock-in.
CFO World has an article that talks about the difference in cost between Cisco UCS and the DIY approach. They point out to a 15% increase in cost over an equivalent DIY blade system
We also calculated the “UCS tax,” by comparing the cost of the blades (CPUs, memory, hard drive, network cards) and non-UCS networking alternatives against the total cost of the UCS integrated system. We found that UCS has a “tax” of about 15%, meaning that you’re paying about 15% more to have the benefits of blade servers and integrated storage/data networking compared to just going do-it-yourself with 1U servers, standalone switches, and, in the case of the 80-blade system, 280 more patch cords.
My question to enterprise managers reading this blog post is “Will you pay 15% more to get the advantages of the converged infrastructure?”. Please feel free to add your thoughts below and if you prefer to comment anonymously, please use the contact form to get in touch with me. I would really love to hear your thoughts on this.
Related articles
- Are you ready? – Convergence and Cloud calls for changes to how IT operates (blogs.cisco.com)
- Gartner Data Center Conference 2011: Trends and Observations (blogs.cisco.com)
- Another trend affecting data centers – “Convergence” (blogs.cisco.com)
is that cost analysis a true TCO? from our experience most of the ongoing (not upfront) costs come in management and support…. i’ve no idea if its factually correct but i would suspect that a converged system comes with operational cost benefits…. lots.
We’ve seen it in telecommunications, energy, applications…why wouldn’t it be true in this space?
Yes Paul. It is not an apples to apples comparison (a fact I noted in the Twitter discussion on this topic). But the fact I am trying to get out of community is if they prefer converged infrastructure for other advantages even if it is a premium. The idea behind the post is to get discussion around the cost aspects.
Krish,
The CFO quoted in the blog has not taken into account Operational Expenses with the initial Capital Expenses. Your blog lists several potential gains with the UCS which will almost certainly be accrued in a cloud environment that demands scalability,agility, and dynamic workload balancing. The CFO quoted has not taken into account, management of the infrastructure beyond the initial installation.
For a holistic view of the Total cost of ownership Data Center Managers should look at the UCS TCO/ROI tool (http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/ns340/ns517/ns224/tools/data_center_value_zone.html#~Advisor_Tools)
Ranjit
Thanks Ranjit. Definitely not the right way to calculate cost. I am using this blog post as a build up for future discussion on the cost of the management tools, etc..
[...] wrote a post covering a report which showed that the costs involved in utilizing converged infrastructure (ie a [...]
[...] wrote a post covering a report which showed that the costs involved in utilizing converged infrastructure (ie a [...]
[...] wrote a post covering a report which showed that the costs involved in utilizing converged infrastructure (ie a [...]