IBM i Modernization Decisions in Context
Introduction: Power9 vs. Power10 vs. Power11 vs. PowerVS
IBM i customers approaching Power9 end of support are not simply choosing a new server. They are deciding between licensing models, operating cost structures, and how much infrastructure responsibility their organization can realistically support. The attached 3-year TCO analysis compares four viable paths—staying on S914, moving to S1014, moving to S1122, or adopting PowerVS.
Review of Power9 and S914 IBM i Workloads
Power9 systems such as the S914 continue to run stable production workloads and represent the last generation where perpetual IBM i licensing feels familiar and predictable. While this provides short-term financial stability, the analysis highlights growing constraints.
Key considerations:
Power9 reaches end of standard support in early 2026, increasing operational risk
Performance efficiency lags newer generations, requiring more cores to deliver the same workload
Perpetual licenses tied to Power9 limit forward flexibility
Deferring migration increases the likelihood of a compressed and more disruptive transition later
From a planning standpoint, remaining on S914 preserves the status quo but narrows future options.
Review of S1014, S1122, and PowerVS
The Power10-based S1014 occupies a transitional position. It delivers materially better performance per core than Power9 while still allowing customers to retain perpetual IBM i licensing. This combination makes it attractive for organizations seeking efficiency gains without immediately committing to subscription-only licensing.
Key characteristics of the S1014:
Supports perpetual IBM i licensing
Improves performance density, often reducing required licensed cores
Extends on-prem viability without forcing an immediate licensing model change
Offers a lower-risk migration path off Power9
The Power11-based S1122 represents a more definitive shift. IBM i on Power11 is subscription-only, and the S1122 requires a move from the P05 tier to P10 regardless of workload size. While it provides longer platform runway and higher performance ceilings, the higher software tier materially changes the cost profile for smaller environments.
PowerVS shifts the decision away from hardware entirely:
Eliminates on-prem infrastructure ownership and lifecycle management
Reduces personnel and unplanned downtime costs
Can be more expensive for steady, always-on production workloads
Aligns well with organizations with limited IT staffing or a preference for operational offload
Each option addresses Power9 end-of-life differently, with distinct trade-offs across cost, control, and operational responsibility.
Facing Your Own Organizational Reality: Power10 Today or S1112/PowerVS Tomorrow
When viewed strictly through the current three-year TCO lens, Power10—particularly via the S1014—often represents the most balanced and economical on-prem path. That conclusion can change as the planning horizon extends and future Power11 options become available.
The upcoming S1112 is important because it is expected to introduce a P05, on-prem Power11 option. This would allow smaller IBM i environments to adopt Power11 longevity without being forced into P10 pricing, potentially making the S1112 the best long-term TCO option for organizations capable of maintaining their own infrastructure.
In practice, many IBM i workloads run in small and mid-sized companies with limited IT resources. For these organizations, the operational burden of owning and managing infrastructure can outweigh pure licensing savings. In those cases, PowerVS becomes the more practical choice, even if it is not the lowest theoretical TCO.
The optimal decision ultimately depends not just on hardware and licensing, but on whether the organization is better positioned to operate infrastructure—or to eliminate it entirely.
Download Full Analysis Below: IBM i S914 vs. S1014 vs. S1122 vs. PowerVS
Simplify your cloud, datacenter, and software decisions with analytics that optimize your costs, time, and resources.
