IBM Power Systems Reviews

We use the solution as a database server. The core banking database runs on IBM Power LAPR with terabytes of memory (20 TB of database size). Performance and availability is top-notch. With database clustering, we ensure the high availability of our database. Runtime resource allocation made life easy when required.

It can be used as an application server as well. With the application server's HA (IBM Power HA) clustering, we ensure the high availability of our application.

We also used IBM power for CBS application for banks and for IBM MQ for Messaging.

IBM Power system is the most reliable server in terms of RAS (Reliability, Availability, Sustainability). These features give us a boost of performance in our application which in terms runs our business. 

Performance, uptime, manageability, runtime resources allocation (Using Power VM), and longevity are other key features that ensure our business application runs smoothly.  

Also, Power VM gives us the flexibility to increase or decrease machine resources when required. this gives us the benefit of growing or shrinking in terms of scalability over time, ensuring ROI.

The most valuable features include:

• RAS (Reliability, Availability, Sustainability)
• Reliability (Reliable on performance, uptime, and  longevity)
• Availability (Available for applications running on it)
• Sustainability (Sustainable for backward compatibility of application growth and parts availability)
• Accessibility (The server gives performance even if the CPU is 100%. No new user can connect, however, the existing user will not understand that the server CPU is 100% full)
• Machine Performance, Uptime, manageability, and runtime resource allocation (Using Power VM) are highly beneficial.

Feature-wise, the power system is great, however, IBM should work on pricing. No available price list is on the web. Due to this, the customer cannot compare pricing and have a perception that IBM Power server price is high. Also customer wants to have a comparison with RICS server with INTEL server which never should be done we can not compare Mango with Apple. So in my opinion price transparency should be there, so people can understand. No new feature is not in my mind which may be add in IBM Power.

I've used the solution for 13 years. I've used it from IBM Power 5 to IBM Power 10.

The stability is great.

The scalability is great.

We did not use a different solution. 

The initial setup is complex for the machine setup potion. 

We implemented the solution with the vendor. They were good.

We have witnessed an ROI of 130%.

The setup cost, pricing, and licensing are high. That said, you will get your ROI if you are in a CAPEX model operation. If your operation runs on an OPEX model, this is not an ideal option.

We did not evaluate other options. 

We are running two of our ERPs with IBM Power Systems.

The best features of the solution are its robustness and service level.

The solution is highly-priced. The first thing for me in terms of improvement is reducing the price.

I have been using IBM Power Systems for ten years. I am a customer of the solution.

Breakdowns are there in the solution, but since their service level is high, such issues get taken care of within 24 to 48 hours maximum.

In my company, we have around 250 or 300 end users.

The support team of IBM is good. I rate the technical support a seven or eight out of ten.

Positive

I also have experience with IBM iSeries.

The initial setup is easy. There's nothing great in it. With the help of IBM, one can do the setup.

The price of the solution depends upon the configuration part of it. Based on what configuration you want to go for it, there is a range like IBM Power Systems POWER9 and IBM Power Systems Power10. The price depends on what you want to have and what configuration you want for yourself, which varies.

Without a doubt, I can say that IBM Power Systems are strong. They are also good at processing. However, we do not have actual experience with Intel servers since it is only used as an entry-level system.

The disadvantage of the solution is its price. Also, the database is paid. Regarding the subscription for the OS, there are different AMCs. Based on robustness, service level, and stability, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use the solution for Oracle databases mostly. We are trying to bring in some new workloads, like Open Shift and Linux. 

It's been very reliable for Oracle databases. The performance has been very good. 

The reliability and availability are both excellent.

It offers very good security.

The performance and stability are great.

Technical support is helpful.

The solution can scale well. 

They simply need to promote or provide more support to open applications like .NET.

We'd like to see the solution support skill servers. 

The pricing is high.

I've used the solution since 1990.

I'd rate the stability ten out of ten. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is very reliable and offers very good performance.

I'd rate the scalability ten out of ten. 

We do have plans to increase usage in the future. 

Technical support has been excellent so far.

Positive

The initial setup was very easy to set up. It's not a complex process. 

We have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing is a little high. Some models have a good price. However, many are expensive. We do have a lot of taxes in our company, and that adds to the cost.

I would rate the solution ten out of ten. 

I'm using a variety of versions of the solution. I use Power nine, six, five, ten, et cetera.

I'd recommend the solution to others. The performance is great, and it offers excellent reliability. It is a very good platform. However, it is expensive. 

Using IBM Power Systems, one of our latest resolutions was with POWER9. In our organization, we use IBM Power Systems S922 and S924. S924 is a basic database server with 5200 storage. So, that's the server acting as a database server. S922 is for IBM Spectrum Protect and backup. In the solution, an identical product means hardware production, and DR. HA is then implemented.

IBM's pricing and distribution policies differ from those of Dell, making it challenging for partners to adjust. IBM's approach to managing its partners and securing deals is looser than Dell's. As a result, IBM's partners find it challenging to navigate their policies. Although our company also has a partnership with Dell, there is a significant difference in how the two companies manage their respective partners. Nowadays, we are convinced that when we work on a particular opportunity or a deal, IBM pushes it away from us and presents it to a different partner.

The number of times IBM refreshes its operating system appears to be very slow. This case is true when compared to other tools like VMware, Red Hat, or any other Linux products. In general, the updates or the latest versions of other products are much faster than IBM Power Systems, creating an impression in the market that AIX will perish. Even though IBM might be spending time and money on the products, when it comes to the implementation part involving products from IBM or Oracle, they usually don't have a compatible version that works well with Power Linux. Also, compatible versions are mostly available in AIX. From 2017 to 2023, there has been no significant increase in the number of updates or versions from IBM.

I have experience with IBM Power Systems for eleven to twelve years. My company has a partnership with IBM.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It was not me but one of my customers who used a different solution before choosing IBM Power Systems.

Price-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten. It's a costly solution that needs a lot of effort to convince the customer to choose it.

Our company did compare Intel with IBM during our internal evaluation process.

Speaking about the stability of the solution's system once we configure it, if the system goes down, then it takes time for us to bring it back to normalcy is minimal compared to any other enterprise product we've seen in the market. Also, the features in the solution work well. The number of crashes we experience with IBM is minimal. We anticipate that the rest of the features in the solution will work in the background.

Owing to IBM's pricing and lack of support for their partners, particularly their weak partner support policies, we often encounter difficulties, especially when dealing with larger customers. When navigating through their policies, it can feel like we hit a brick wall. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Most of our landscape is on IBM Power Systems.

IBM Power Systems' best features are its reliability, resilience, and performance per rack unit. IBM Power Systems gives a 75% reduction compared to Intel.

One of the main challenges with IBM Power Systems is the functionality of live partnership mobility. When you're running an L4 on one physical machine, and you want to migrate to another physical machine running live, it's very cost-intensive. In addition, IBM Power Systems is less user-friendly than competitors like VMware or Hyper-V. With IBM Power, you have to go to a command line and configure things one by one. In the next release, I would like IBM Power Systems to include a visual operational management console where I can manage all my IBM Power machines end-to-end. I would also like to see hyperconverged systems with their own storage.

I've been using IBM Power Systems for a year and a half.

IBM Power is pretty stable - I would rate its stability at 4.5 out of 5.

IBM Power is scalable - the amount of memory and number of CPU codes that one system can host is twice that of an Intel machine.

IBM takes its support very seriously - whenever you contact them for support, the people who onboard will know how to resolve the issue smoothly. Also, because IBM owns all the hardware in its machines, they don't refer you anywhere else, they take care of everything themselves.

Positive

IBM Power is a bit complicated to set up compared to Intel-based hypervisors. 

Everything that is available on the cloud version is available on-prem as well. IBM Power is more expensive than other rack-mount servers, and you have to have a license for everything, including cores and memory.

I would give IBM Power a rating of nine out of ten.

We use it to run our current infrastructure and its core and resource planning applications.

The uptime feature is great, and their availability is very high. Since we have been using it, we have not experienced any downtime.

We have been using this solution for more than ten years and are using the Power8 version. It is deployed on-premises.

It is stable, and it has 100% uptime.

It is scalable, and we have a process on demand. Whenever we need additional resources, we pay for the activation. We have close to 10,000 users, and we do not have any plans to increase our users.

The technical support is a direct line, and they are responsive.

We found IBM to be more robust and able to meet our use cases.

The initial setup took us time because we migrated from a legacy to a power system. The migration took us about one week. The OEM IBM provided the consultant that did the installation.

The solution is quite expensive, and deploying it was also expensive. The pricing could be lower.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use it to run our important systems and applications.

I think the performance is good.

I think the cost should be cheaper.

I've been using this solution for more than five years.

We've been using it for a long time, and it's stable.

It is scalable. We have about 1000 users.

There is a yearly licensing cost, and it's an expensive solution.

I recommend IBM Power Systems to those who are interested in having the hardware. I would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We've used IBM Power Systems in our passport and immigration department. It's a government-run department. 

We've also used it with a few SMEs. They required smaller versions offsite with our systems. We did sell an IBM system to a couple of universities where they had about 20,000 students. It's used in a variety of instances and environments.

I'm working for an IT company and our work is to sell the products, I'm not really a direct user of it. I can't really say much about the features as I'm not an end-user.

The product does offer co-marketing services to their partners.

The solution is the best product on the market.

The technical support that clients get from IBM is excellent.

Overall, IBM actually does restrict us, the sellers, at a limited percentage of margin when you're selling the product. We cannot go above 8%. That's something as a business that can be difficult, as we do suffer because at times. We don't have the option of quoting more and making more money out of it. We can't due to the IBM compliance.

In terms of features, as a salesperson and not an end-user, I haven't really explored the product and can't say exactly what might be lacking.

IBM does have a market presence here in Pakistan, however, the kind of penetration that Huawei has is a lot more. They have a larger enterprise team that sells products here and they have a direct relationship with the customers. IBM relies a lot more on the partners rather than going to the customers directly. Due to their approach, Huawei has captured about 70-80% of the server and storage industry and market in Pakistan.

I do understand that IBM does offer co-marketing funds for us to actually promote IBM and its products. We have actually utilized them in the past as well, maybe three, four years ago. However, IBM does have a very, very, strict kind of compliance. When it comes to us providing documentation, there is cross-questioning. Our finance team may even back out not because of the misuse of money, but because of the amount of documentation required. It's not worth it for our marketing and finance team to utilize the offer. It's too rigorous and it takes them off dealing with other aspects of their jobs.

IBM should be more flexible with marketing or offer marketing events themselves and invite the partners to attend. That might be far more productive.

We've been dealing with the solution for five or six years at least at this point. It may even be a bit longer. It's been a while.

We've sold this product to a variety of organizations, from SMEs to government departments to universities, and the sizing suits them all.

We do plan to continue to offer the product to other clients in the future.

Our team has never escalated any issues when it comes to getting support directly from IBM. In that sense, they are pretty much satisfied. It's my understanding that support is something that IBM is really good at. That's the reason why IBM does have the type of customers who do have the appropriate budget and who really value the services and the after-sales services and support that IBM offers.

We have our own installation and deployment team for IBM. They handle all aspects of it so that the client doesn't have to worry about the technical side.

We handle the implementation for our clients.

The solution is relatively expensive if you compare it with any competitors of IBM. I would say you need to compare this price with the Huawei or with HPE and probably with Dell EMC. 

Their products are relatively cheaper compared to IBM. I do understand that IBM does offer the best product, however, in terms of pricing, that's something that does limit us. Usually, when we participate in opportunities we do qualify when it comes to the technical side of things. Financially we are looking at the highest or maybe the second-highest price. That's something that actually makes us not want to sell IBM if we can avoid it.

We typically use the latest versions of the solution. We tend to follow whatever the customer requirement is. They are inclined to work by night in the office on the latest product that IBM is offering.

We work with on-premise as, over here at least, people are not too inclined towards the cloud. They prefer having hardware of their own in their own data centers.

I'd recommend this solution to other organizations.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it at an eight.

Better pricing would be one thing that may convince me to give it higher marks.