Blade Servers and How They Effect Your TCO

Welcome to Blade Server 101, where we will teachblade server with a traditional rack server. The
you the ins and outs of what a blade server is andtraditional rack server requires cables, network
how its use can lower the total cost of ownershipswitches, management software, operating system
(TCO) for any business.First of all, what is a bladesoftware, storage area network (SAN) infrastructure
server? The best way to answer that question is tocomponents, a keyboard, mouse and monitor.Blade
compare it to a traditional low-profile dual-processor 1Uservers provide these components as part of an
(one rack unit) rack-mount server. An Intel blade serverintegrated system, unlike rack servers. When
chassis houses up to 14 dual Xeon servers or 7 Quadcomparing the server solutions, blade servers offer the
Xeon Servers in just 7U of data center rackbest value. When one adds up the cost of the
space.Because the individual blade servers are allindividual components needed to build a traditional rack
housed in that shared blade chassis, the cost persystem and then compare that to the price of an
server reduces with each blade added. This isintegrated blade system with the same features and
because the resources of the chassis (power, cooling,functionality, the savings become apparent.When you
cabling, etc.) are shared, and only the core cost of thecompare server solutions on this basis, blade servers
server is added to the TCO each time a new bladeprovide the most value for a business.Deployment
server is added. Compare this to the old method ofcosts: We'll give you a hint as to which is easier to
adding a whole new 1U or 2U rack-mount server fordeploy between the blade server and the rack-mount
each new application, and savings are obvious. In fact,server. Blade servers typically use 87 percent less
on average the break-even cost point for a newcabling than rack servers.Studies show that adding
server is 6.5 blades compared to full 1U Dual Xeonservers to a blade environment is easier and takes
servers and 1.8 blades for 2U Quad Xeonless time than expanding a typical rack environment.
servers.These are the main ingredients of a traditionalAdding a blade server can take as little as 30 minutes,
1U server: Ethernet controllers, hard-disk controller andwhile adding a comparable rack server can take as
drivers, main logic board with chipset, memory, twomuch as 12 hours. And the old adage is true: Time is
processors, support hardware (including powermoney.A traditional rack server requires a certain
supplies), cooling fans and other components that takeamount of assembly, including unpacking the server,
up space, generate heat and cost a lot.Even with allinstalling rails, mounting the server into the rack which
these infrastructure components, the traditionalmay require more than one person due to the size
rack-mount server does not contribute to processing,and weight, and then connect all the cables. With a
storage or connectivity.The basics of a blade serverblade server, the blade simply slides into the chassis. If
include no support hardware, power supplies, or coolinga large number of servers is to be installed, this can
fans. Those ingredients are all included in a box calledadd up to many hours of time and many resources
the chassis. The shared chassis provides built-insaved.Troubleshooting/repair costs: If a component
network connectivity, including switches that reducefailure occurs in a blade server, advanced diagnostics
cabling, and a centralized management system for thecan lead the technician directly to the failing part, thus
blade server.With these ingredients in the sharedrestoring full redundancy sooner rather than later.Some
chassis, the server - the processors, memory, logiccomponents will even alert a systems management
board, storage and connectivity - becomes muchprocessor of impending failure, hours or days before
smaller in size and perfect to place in a centralizedthe failure occurs.Facilities costs: Because of the
data center.The blade server slides into a bay in theincreased density of the blade server, only half of the
chassis and plugs into a mid- or backplane, sharingfloor space is taken that would be needed for a
power, fans, floppy drives, switches, and ports withtraditional rack server. That not only reduces tenant
other blade servers. The benefits of the blade servercosts by using a smaller building or smaller area, it can
include eliminating using hundreds of cables strungalso increases space for other business needs (office
through racks just to add and remove servers. Witharea, for example) that improve productivity.In a large
switches and power units shared, space is freed up,data center that utilizes a traditional rack-mounted
so blade servers also enable higher density withserver, a couple of failures can happen each day. By
greater ease.Intel conducted an extensive study inreducing the number of components in a rack - by
2004 into the potential benefits of blade servers -using a blade server - the chance for potential failure is
which were only three years in the making at the timereduced as well.In summary, Blade servers offer
- and determined that blade servers lower acquisitionbenefits of horizontal scalability in a very small space;
costs and operational costs for deployment,they have the versatility to mix and match the types
troubleshooting and repair.Intel enlisted a company-wideof blades within a single chassis, and a performance
team of experts in areas such as storage areaspectrum ranging from low cost to high performance
network (SAN), networking, systems management,and high availability.Learning all the aspects of the blade
platform and data center technologies to conduct itsserver is beneficial to any company that needs to be
study. The team further learned that blade serverscreative in keeping its TCO under control. Blade Server
also reduce power, cooling, space and cable101 should have taught you that using blade servers is
requirements.Intel's total cost of ownership (TCO)more beneficial than the traditional rack-mounted
analysis indicated potential reductions of 10 to 20server in four important categories: Acquisition costs,
percent for acquisition costs, 3.8 to 10.6 percent fordeployment costs, troubleshooting and repair, and
deployment and troubleshooting costs, , and 8.5 to 25.3facilities costs.A study by Intel indicates total savings of
percent for facilities costs.Let's break these categories15 to 20 percent in these four categories. With
down further:Acquisition costs: Again, let's compare anumbers like that, what else is there to know?