Dell recently published a new whitepaper that compares the performance and power efficiency of four of the Dell PowerEdge M710HD and M620 blades vs. four of the Cisco B250 M2 blade servers.  Here is a summary of the key findings:

Performance / watt

The higher performance and lower power draw of the four-blade Dell solutions compared to the UCS B250 M2 blade solution led to the PowerEdge M710HD solution’s 76% higher performance per watt score and the PowerEdge M620 solution’s 108% higher performance per watt score.

Power at Idle

Even with all blades configured with the same amount of system memory, the four-blade PowerEdge M710HD solution consumed 58% as much power at idle as the four-blade UCS B250 M2 solution with its extra DIMMs and supporting circuitry. Similarly, the four-blade PowerEdge M620 blade solution drew just 55% as much power at idle as the Cisco blade solution.

Power at 100% Load

Both of the four-blade PowerEdge solutions, again with the same amount of system memory installed per blade, drew 64% to 67% as much power as the four-blade Cisco UCS B250 M2 blade solution with all blades running at 100% load.

Performance

With the same processor models and the same memory capacity installed in each blade, the four-blade solution based on PowerEdge M710HD blades provided up to 11% higher performance than the four-blade solution based on UCS B250 M2 blades, and the four-blade solution based on PowerEdge M620 blades provided up to 25% higher performance than the UCS blade solution.

Rack density

When the 10U M1000e Modular Blade Enclosure is equipped with its maximum of sixteen M710HD or M620 servers, the solution can fit 1.6 servers per rack unit of space, 2.4 times as dense as the solution with Cisco UCS B250 M2 blades.

Cost

In the configuration tested, the Cisco UCS B250 M2 blade solution costs $112,591.02[1], while the similarly configured Dell PowerEdge M710HD solution costs 34% less at $73,820.00, and the PowerEdge M620 solution costs 33% less at $75,372.00.

To read the report in its entirety, please visit:

http://i.dell.com/sites/content/shared-content/data-sheets/en/Documents/PowerEfficiencyComparisonofDellandCiscoHighMemoryCapacityBladeServers.pdf

To read the writer’s blog post on this report, visit:

http://en.community.dell.com/dell-blogs/enterprise/b/inside-enterprise-it/archive/2012/03/26/comparison-of-dell-and-cisco-high-memory-capacity-blade-servers.aspx

Kevin Houston is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of BladesMadeSimple.com.  He has over 15 years of experience in the x86 server marketplace.  Since 1997 Kevin has worked at several resellers in the Atlanta area, and has a vast array of competitive x86 server knowledge and certifications as well as an in-depth understanding of VMware and Citrix virtualization.  Kevin works for Dell as a Server Specialist covering the Global 500 East market.

One of the biggest challenges related to blade servers in an existing data center is how to power and cool.  APC wrote a white paper (link below) that explains how to asses the options to best power and cool your blade environment. 

According to APC’s whitepaper, there are five basic approaches to cooling a blade server environment:

The white paper also goes into detail on how to select the type of cooling methods as well as some major considerations to review:

The whitepaper concludes with some cooling approaches that datacenters should not use:

• Reducing air temperature set-pion on the computer room A/C units to attempt to solve hot spots
• Replacing vented tiles in a raised floor with a tile that has less resistance
• Using fan trays installed in the top of racks
• Isolating racks away from rows in an open area on all sides

To find out why these ideas are not recommended by APC, or to read the full APC whitepaper, go to:

http://bit.ly/BladePower

IBM’s BladeCenter H is rich with features, but requires planning before implementing, especially in regards to power.  Over the years, I’ve worked with a lot of customers around the question of what power is needed for the BladeCenter H, so I created a reference document for my use and now I’m sharing it for you to use.  I know IBM has a reference document but mine is focused only on the BladeCenter H and hopefully it is a bit simpler to use.

Link to my document: –> BladeCenter H Power Recommendations – BladesMadeSimple(tm)
(Adobe PDF, 440kb)

Hope this is useful for you.  If you would like the actual Visio diagram I used for this, contact me via email with your info.

(UPDATED 10/28/09 with new links to full article)

I received a Tweet from @HPITOps linked to Gartner’s first ever “Magic Quadrant” for blade servers.  The Magic Quadrant is a tool that Gartner put together to help people easily where manufacturers rank, based on certain criteria.  As the success of blade servers continues to grow, the demand for blades increases.  You can read the complete Gartner paper at http://h20195.www2.hp.com/v2/getdocument.aspx?docname=4AA3-0100ENW.pdf, but I wanted to touch on a few highlights.

Key Points

• *Blades are less than 15% of the server marketplace today.
• *HP and IBM make up 70% of the blade market share
• *HP, IBM and Dell are classified as “Leaders” in the blade market place and Cisco is listed as a “Visionary” 

What Gartner Says About Cisco, Dell, HP and IBM

Cisco
Cisco announced their entry into the blade server market place in early 2009 and as of the past few weeks began shipping their first product.  Gartner’s report says, “Cisco’s Unified Computing System (UCS) is highly innovative and is particularly targeted at highly integrated and virtualized enterprise requirements.”  Gartner currently views Cisco as being in the “visionaries” quadrant.  The report comments that Cisco’s strengths are:

• they have a  global presence in “most data centers”
• differentiated blade design
• they have a cross-selling opportunity across their huge install base
• they have strong relationships with virtualization and integration vendors

As part of the report, Gartner also mentions some negative points (aka “Cautions”) about Cisco to consider:

• Lack of blade server install base
• limited blade portfolio
• limited hardware certification by operating system and application software vendors

Obviously these Cautions are based on Cisco’s newness to the marketplace, so let’s wait 6 months and check back on what Gartner thinks.

Dell
No stranger to the blade marketplace, Dell continues to produce new servers and new designs.  While Dell has a fantastic marketing department, they still are not anywhere close to the market share that IBM and HP split.  In spite of this, Gartner still classifies Dell in the “leaders” quadrant.  According to the report, “Dell offers Intel and AMD Opteron blade servers that are well-engineered, enterprise-class platforms that fit well alongside the rest of DelI’s x86 server portfolio, which has seen the company grow its market share steadily through the past 18 months.”

The report views that Dell’s strengths are:

• having a cross-selling opportunity to sell blades to their existing server, desktop and notebook customers
• aggressive pricing policies
• focused in innovating areas like cooling and virtual I/O

Dell’s “cautions” are reported as:

• having a limited portfolio that is targeted toward enterprise needs
• bad history of “patchy committment” to their blade platforms

It will be interesting to see where Dell takes their blade model.  It’s easy to have a low price model on entry level rack servers, but in a blade server infrastructure where standardization is key and integrated switches are a necessity having the lowest pricing may get tough.

IBM
Since 2002, IBM has ventured into the blade server marketplace with an wide variety of server and chassis offerings.  Gartner placed IBM in the “leaders” quadrant as well, although they place IBM much higher and to the right signifying a “greater ability to execute” and a “more complete vision.”  While IBM once had the lead in blade server market share, they’ve since handed that over to HP.  Gartner reports, “IBM is putting new initiatives in place to regain market share, including supply chain enhancements, dedicated sales resources and new channel programs.“ 

The report views that IBM’ strengths are:

• strong global market share
• cross selling opportunities to sell into existing IBM System x, System i, System p and System z customers
• broad set of chassis options that address specialized needs (like DC power & NEBS compliance for Telco) as well as Departmental / Enterprise
• blade server offerings for x86 and Power Processors
• strong record of management tools
• innovation around cooling and specialized workloads

Gartner only lists one “caution” for IBM and that is their loss of market share to HP since 2007.

HP
Gartner identifies HP as being in the farthest right in the October 2009 Magic Quadrant, therefore I’ll classify HP as being the #1 “leader.”  Gartner’s report says, “Since the 2006 introduction of its latest blade generation, HP has recaptured market leadership and now sells more blade servers than the rest of the market combined.”  Ironically, Gartner list of HP’s strengths is nearly identical to IBM:

• global blade market leader
• cross selling opportunities to sell into existing HP server, laptop and desktop customers
• broad set of chassis options that address Departmental and Enterprise needs
• blade server offerings for x86 and Itanium Processors
• strong record of management tools
• innovation around cooling and virtual I/O

Gartner only lists one “caution” for HP and that is their portfolio, as extensive as it may be, could be considered too complex and it could be too close to HP’s alternative, modular, rack-based offering.

Gartner’s report continues to discuss other niche players like Fujitsu, NEC and Hitachi, so if you are interesting in reading about them, check out the full report at 

http://h20195.www2.hp.com/v2/getdocument.aspx?docname=4AA3-0100ENW.pdf.  All-in-all, Gartner’s report reaffirms that HP, IBM and Dell are the market leaders, for now, with Cisco coming up behind them.

Feel free to comment on this post and let me know what you think.