White Paper Consolidation of a
Table 1.. ESL standard native hardware deployment metrics (“Before”) vs.. virtualized deployment
| Before | After |
|
|
|
Server | 1P Intel® Core™2 Duo processor | 4P Intel® Xeon® processor 7400 |
|
|
|
Cores | 2 | 24 |
|
|
|
Game server processes | 3 per CPU core | 3 per VM; 4.5 per CPU core |
|
|
|
VMs per box | N/A | 36 |
|
|
|
Game server per box | 6 | 108 |
|
|
|
Total users per box | 72 | 1,296 |
|
|
|
CPU utilization | 75% | |
|
|
|
Power utilized per server | 350 W | 710 W |
|
|
|
Consolidation ratio | 18 | 1 |
|
|
|
Annual direct power cost | $731,000 per 1,000 servers | $83,000 per 56 servers |
|
|
|
Power savings
Using the optimal number of virtual machines, which is 36, a simple calculation of direct power costs was done comparing the before (native) and after (virtualized).
Table 1 shows that with 36 virtual machines, with each virtual machine having three game servers and each game server supporting 12 players, we can see a consolidation ration of 18:1. This means we can consolidate 18 of ESL’s existing Intel® Core™2 Duo
latency and gaming experience. This translates to direct power- cost savings of $648,000 annually for every 1,000 Intel Core
2 Duo
Other savings
The above savings are only direct power savings. We did not take into account other savings like cooling, datacenter space, network hardware, and manageability.
12