Google Compute Engine is an infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) product from Google Cloud. It provides virtual machines with carbon-neutral infrastructure which run on the same data centers that Google itself uses.
$0
per month GB
IBM Power Virtual Server
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
IBM presents their Power Systems Virtual Server as a scalable, cost-effective way to run IBM AIX, IBM i and Linux workloads​.
N/A
Pricing
Google Compute Engine
IBM Power Virtual Server
Editions & Modules
Preemptible Price - Predefined Memory
0.000892 / GB
Hour
Three-year commitment price - Predefined Memory
$0.001907 / GB
Hour
One-year commitment price - Predefined Memory
$0.002669 / GB
Hour
On-demand price - Predefined Memory
$0.004237 / GB
Hour
Preemptible Price - Predefined vCPUs
0.006655 / vCPU
Hour
Three-year commitment price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.014225 / CPU
Hour
One-year commitment price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.019915 / vCPU
Hour
On-demand price - Predefined vCPUS
$0.031611 / vCPU
Hour
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Compute Engine
IBM Power Virtual Server
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
Prices vary according to region (i.e US central, east, & west time zones). Google Compute Engine also offers a discounted rate for a 1 & 3 year commitment.
IBM Power System components are more reliable and have longer uptimes than those of competing systems. The IBM Power System Virtual Server setup and configuration process was simple. To now, no errors have been made in terms of placing an unreasonable burden on the server, …
One of the greatest alternatives to IBM Power System Virtual Server is Microsoft Azure. First, I'd want to point out that it's a lot more expensive than the competition. Because it is less expensive than other virtual servers, even small and medium-sized businesses may afford …
IBM is very competitive and has most of the same features as the other products. The other products did not have a cost-competitive hybrid cloud model and primarily were cloud-based.
Google Compute Engine is so easy to implement and run. It doesn't require much knowledge to build an app since they provide multiple options to choose from with their prebuilt sample list. We can easily make customization on any website app we built for our client according to their needs and make changes if required.
Due to its reliability, it is well-suited for mission-critical applications. It is also well suited for running multiple applications on a single server and fully utilizing the server's full capacity. However, it is not well suited for servers that require dedicated IO resources.
Scaling - whether it's traffic spikes or just steady growth, Google Compute Engine's auto-scaling makes sure we've got the compute power we need without any manual juggling acts
Load balancing - Keeping things smooth with that load balancing across multiple VMs, so our users don't have to deal with slow load times or downtime even when things get crazy busy
Customizability - Mix and match configs for CPU, RAM, storage and whatnot to suit our specific app needs
At the moment we are 100% satisfied with the performance and our support team is well used to the process involved. So unless we have some major issues in adopting, we are sure to be with IBM itself.
Having interacted with several cloud services, GCE stands out to me as more usable than most. The naming and locating of features is a little more intuitive than most I've interacted with, and hinting is also quite helpful. Getting staff up to speed has proven to be overall less painful than others.
Power Systems Virtual Server on IBM Cloud for IBMi's overall usability is good, but it can be difficult for new users, some learning is needed, but there are tonns of online documentation.
GCE is highly available system. So far we have not experienced any planned or unplanned outages. We do experience application errors however they are not GCE reated. GCE provides us with wide ranges of option to make systems highly available like block storage, global load balancing, GPU accelerators and Machine Managers which manages different VMs.
It's good in terms of Performance, as compared to other VMs or Compute Engine Services by other providers. Google Compute Engine integrates seamlessly with other Google Cloud Platform services, allowing users to leverage a wide range of tools and services without significant performance degradation.
The documentation needs to be better for intermediate users - There are first steps that one can easily follow, but after that, the documentation is often spotty or not in a form where one can follow the steps and accomplish the task. Also, the documentation and the product often go out of sync, where the commands from the documentation do not work with the current version of the product.
Google support was great and their presence on site was very helpful in dealing with various issues.
As with most IBM products the ongoing support for IBM Power Virtual Server is solid and consistent. IBM provides a clear roadmap for receiving support of their products. Both voice and online response is offered. It is obvious that IBM has the internal systems and culture to maintain support functions. This starts from the initial support call to the problem analysis and continues through the problem resolution. Documentation and communication are consistent within this process.
Google Compute Engine provides a one stop solution for all the complex features and the UI is better than Amazon's EC2 and Azure Machine Learning for ease of usability. It's always good to have an eco-system of products from Google as it's one of the most used search engine and IoT services provider, which helps with ease of integration and updates in the future.
They both have their own ups and downs and it totally depends on the team which suits them best. IBM Power Virtual Server has Performance, Scalability, Reliability and Availability, Compatibility, and Good Vendor Support. The specific use case and workload requirements played a significant role. Some workloads may benefit from IBM Power Systems' architecture, while others may perform equally well on alternative platforms.
There have also been 80% fewer application crashes due to a lack of resources that previously ran on the X86 platform.
Administration management has been simplified and staff can dedicate themselves to the development of applications, instead of providing support to users when the applications do not respond efficiently, this made staff 45% more productive.
