IBM Announces Strategic Collaboration with Arm

(newsroom.ibm.com)

93 points | by bonzini 2 hours ago

14 comments

  • mcbridematt 1 hour ago
    Ah, that explains this patchset that was submitted to the Linux kernel today

    "KVM: s390: Introduce arm64 KVM"

    "By introducing a novel virtualization acceleration for the ARM architecture on s390 architecture, we aim to expand the platform's software ecosystem. This initial patch series lays the groundwork by enabling KVM-accelerated ARM CPU virtualization on s390....."

    https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/cover/...

    • trebligdivad 12 minutes ago
      Oh that's a weird way to do it; they used to have an x86 add on block for mainframes which was just a pile of x86 blades with some integration.
    • rbanffy 43 minutes ago
      Z/OS for ARM then? ;-)

      I’ve been running VM/370 and MVS on my RPi cluster for a long time now.

  • mykowebhn 1 hour ago
    This is a serious question. What does IBM, in fact, do? I'm surprised they are still around and apparently relevant. Are they more or less a services and consulting company now?
    • roncesvalles 24 minutes ago
      Putting consumer grade (aka "commodity") hardware in a datacenter and running your infra on it is a bit of a meme, in the sense that it's not the only way of doing things. It was probably pioneered/popularized by Google but that's because writing great software was their "hammer", ie they framed every computing problem as a software problem. It was probably easier for them (= Jeff Dean) to take mediocre hardware and write a robust distributed system on top instead of the other way around.

      There is, however, a completely different vision for how web infrastructure should be and that is to have extremely resilient hardware and simple software. That's what a mainframe is. You can write a simple and easy to maintain single process backend program, run it on a mainframe and be fairly confident that it can run without stopping for decades. Everything from the power supply to the CPU is redundant and can be hot swapped without booting the OS. Credit card transactions and banking software run on this model for example (just think about how insanely reliable credit card transactions are).

      IBM has a monopoly in the second world. You could say the entire field of distributed systems is one big indie effort to break free of IBM's monopoly on computing.

    • Cthulhu_ 38 minutes ago
      A better question would probably what they don't do; just going off the wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM) for recent history, they're in health care (imaging), weather, video streaming, cloud services, Red Hat, managed infrastructure (which branched off into a company called Kyndryl, which has 90.000 employees in 115 countries), warfare ("In June 2025, IBM was named by a UN expert report as one of several companies "central to Israel's surveillance apparatus and the ongoing Gaza destruction.""), etc etc etc.

      Basically they do a lot, but they're not showy about it.

    • Frieren 1 hour ago
      IBM has more revenue than Oracle even if we hear way less about it. 5 times smaller than Apple, thou. It also has more employees than Microsoft or Alphabet. But it has tighter profit margins than other tech companies.

      IBM is not in consumer products nor services so we do not hear about it.

      • lotsofpulp 20 minutes ago
        Oracle/TSMC/SpaceX isn’t in consumer products/services, but they are heard about.

        IBM was declining for 10 years while the rest of the tech related businesses were blowing up, plus IBM does not pay well, so other than it being a business in decline, there wasn’t much to talk about. No one expects anything new from IBM.

        Also, they had quite a few big boondoggles where they were the bad guys helping swindle taxpayers due to the goodwill from their brand’s legacy, so being a dying rent seeking business as opposed to a growing innovative business was the assumption I had.

    • bargainbin 48 minutes ago
      I work for a big international corp. We pay IBM a blankest sum annually because it’s that hard to quantify just how much we rely on their services and licensing costs.

      Licensing of course just being typical rent seeking behaviour but their services are valuable given the financial impact if one of their solutions goes down on us (which is very rarely)

    • pjmlp 32 minutes ago
      Own Red-Hat, thus major contributions to Wayland, GNOME, GCC and Java, at very least.

      Have their own Java implementation, with capabilities like AOT before OpenJDK got started on Leyden, or even Graal existed, for years had extensions for value types (nowadays dropped), and alongside Azul, cluster based JIT compiler that shares code across JVM instances.

      IBM i and z/OS are still heavely deployed in many organisations, alongside Aix, and LinuxONE (Linux running on mainframes and micros).

      Research in quantum computing, AI, design processes, one of the companies that does huge amounts of patents per year across various fields.

      And yes a services company, that is actually a consortium of IBM owned companies many of each under a different brand (which is followed by "an IBM company").

    • jeswin 44 minutes ago
      They design their own CPUs, and they sold $15b of hardware last year. Tellum ii in the z17 mainframe is a Samsung 5nm part.

      What I don't get however is who'd use their custom accelerators for AI inference.

      • eru 26 minutes ago
        Anyone who can't get any better AI accelerators elsewhere? Last I heard, these things were sold out for years on end. And anyone who can make one, can sell them.
    • ghaff 57 minutes ago
      So they had $30 billion in software revenue last year and $15 billion in infrastructure against $20 billion in consulting.
    • shrimppersimmon 44 minutes ago
      They design and build not one but two CPU architectures, s390/Z and POWER.

      Both have been around for many years, but neither is obsolete, they're just not designed for consumer applications.

      They still generate $10-15 billion per year in revenue.

      • eru 25 minutes ago
        Power was used in customer applications a long time ago? I think Apple used them for a while and so did some game consoles?
        • shrimppersimmon 3 minutes ago
          Yes. Apple used PowerPC, and PowerPC was also in the Xbox 360, PS3, Wii, and Wii U. It was also widespread in embedded sectors like networking, automotive, and aerospace.

          IBM eventually stepped away from the embedded market and eventually lost their foothold in consoles as well. While Raptor did offer Power9 systems at a somewhat accessible price point, the IBM-produced CPUs were still fundamentally enterprise-grade hardware, meaning they retained the high costs and "big iron" features of server tech.

    • itake 22 minutes ago
      I own their shares due to their Quantum Computing group

      You can see their roadmap here:

      https://www.ibm.com/roadmaps/

    • lmpdev 52 minutes ago
      I was surprised to find out they still have hardware repair technicians (extremely expensive but reliable: ~$400 per computer around 2022 iirc)

      But yes they’re mostly enterprise/services/mainframes not anything overly consumer

      • quietsegfault 37 minutes ago
        No, IBM has Unisys contractors, not employees. All the techs I’ve worked with from IBM have been a nightmare. One dropped an entire drive array on the ground, and tried to install it despite it being bent and no longer fitting on the rack. I have been acquired by IBM twice. They are a nightmare, horrible company.
    • dgellow 45 minutes ago
      When you’re that large and established it’s very hard to die. I expect IBM to exist in some form pretty much forever
    • dogma1138 1 hour ago
      Mainframes and consulting.
    • quietsegfault 39 minutes ago
      They exist to swallow up profitable companies, extract any “unnecessary” overhead (like benefits, PTO, pay that isn’t rock bottom), and package into large enterprise licensing agreements.
      • eru 24 minutes ago
        Sounds like a pretty good deal for those people who keep starting these 'profitable' companies.

        If IBM runs them into the ground, there's a niche for a copy-cat of the original company that you can just found again. Rinse and repeat.

    • p-e-w 1 hour ago
      I was shocked when IBM acquired Red Hat a few years ago. I had silently assumed at the time that Red Hat was far bigger than IBM nowadays, so the reverse would have made more sense to me.
  • silvestrov 2 hours ago
    > dual‑architecture hardware that helps enterprises run future AI and data intensive workloads with greater flexibility, reliability, and security

    I think we can ignore the "AI" word here as its presence is only because everything currently has to be AI.

    So why would IBM add ARM?

    > As enterprises scale AI and modernize their infrastructure, the breadth of the Arm software ecosystem is enabling these workloads to run across a broader range of environments

    I think it has become too expensive for IBM to develop their own CPU architecture and that ARM64 is starting to catch up in performance for a much lower price.

    So IBM wants to switch to ARM without making a too big fuzz about it.

    • rzerowan 1 hour ago
      Im thinking maybe as a compliment to x86 offerings and eventual displacement as a primary offering , i do not see them ditching POWER.

      The architecture might be non-standard and not very widespread however for what it does and workloads that are suited to it. I dont think any ARM design comes close , maybe Fujitsu's A64FX.

      • silvestrov 47 minutes ago
        Marketingwise I think it is difficult for IBM to sell x86 systems as it is too easy for customers to compare performance to a standard Wintel server.

        Sun had the same problem after 2001 dotcom when standard PC servers became reliable enough to run web servers on.

        It's easier to sell "our special sauce" when building using a custom ARM platform. Then you have no easy comparison with standard servers.

        • rzerowan 22 minutes ago
          Yep i think thats why even POWER isnt sold standalone but as part of the Z/i series packages as a unit.

          They will probably market the ARM inclusion similarly - as something that the package provides.

          As far as POWER i think only Raptor[1] does direct marketingof the power(hehe) and capabilities

          [1]https://www.raptorcs.com/

        • ghaff 28 minutes ago
          IBM sold off XSeries, x86, to Lenovo years ago along with spinning off various other things that they considered commodity.
    • tempay 1 hour ago
      > ARM64 is starting to catch up in performance for a much lower price

      Why do you say "starting to"? arm64 has been competitive with ppc64le for a fairly long time at this point

    • homarp 1 hour ago
      AI= Arm Ibm in that case
  • chrsw 11 minutes ago
    Maybe I don't know enough technical details about these CPU architectures or IP agreements, but I don't see why IBM couldn't have done what Arm did but with PowerPC.
  • iSnow 16 minutes ago
    It is wild how ARM - which was kind of a niche company and ISA - has taken the world by storm since the modern smartphone was born. Now their designs make their way upwards to big iron and AI datacenters.
    • graemep 10 minutes ago
      Smartphones were a big boost, but they were already growing very rapidly before that.
  • nxobject 1 hour ago
    Once you parse the marketing speak, looks like there may be ARM ISA silicon in future System Z.

    But, what are their legacy finance-sector customers asking for here? Are they trying to add ARM to LinuxONE, while maintaining the IBM hardware-based nine nines uptime strategy/sweet support contract paradigm?

    If so, why don't the Visas of the world just buy 0xide, for example?

    > develop new dual‑architecture hardware that helps enterprises run future AI and data intensive workloads with greater flexibility, reliability, and security.

    > "This moment marks the latest step in our innovation journey for future generations of our IBM Z and LinuxONE systems, reinforcing our end-to-end system design as a powerful advantage."

  • jlawer 2 hours ago
    I wonder if we end up with z series running on arm long term.

    The value in z series is in the system design and ecosystem, IBM could engineer an architecture migration to custom CPUs based on ARM cores. They would still be mainframe processors, but likely able to be able to reduce investment in silicon and supporting software.

    • themafia 1 hour ago
      You can run 1960s System/360 binaries unmodified on modern z/OS. The system also uses a lot of "high level assembler" and "system provided assembly macros" making a complete architecture switch extremely painful and complicated.

      They called their new architecture "ESAME" for a while for a pretty obvious reason.

  • bob1029 51 minutes ago
    I think the #1 use case here is allowing AI/cloud workloads the ability to execute against the mainframe's data without ever leaving the secure bubble. I.e., bring the applications to the data rather than the data to the applications.

    IBM could put an entire 1k core ARM mini-cloud inside a Z series configuration and it could easily be missed upon visual inspection. Imagine being able to run banking apps with direct synchronous SQL access to core and callbacks for things like real-time fraud detection. Today, you'd have to do this with networked access into another machine or a partner's cloud which kills a lot of use cases.

    If I were IBM, I would set up some kind of platform/framework/marketplace where B2B vendors publish ARM-based apps that can run on Z. Apple has already demonstrated that we can make this sort of thing work quite well with regard to security and how locked down everything can be.

  • nubinetwork 1 hour ago
    April fools day was yesterday, IBM.
  • rbanffy 43 minutes ago
    AIX for ARM? ;-)
  • christkv 56 minutes ago
    Arm co processors for main frames?
  • shevy-java 57 minutes ago
    Is that good or bad?

    My gut feeling says to lean more on the bad side. I am very skeptic when corporations announce "this is for the win". Then I slowly walk over to the Google Graveyard and nod my head wisely in sadness ... https://killedbygoogle.com/

  • jonkoops 2 hours ago
    TLDR; “fine, we’ll support Arm too because customers want it.”
    • ghaff 2 hours ago
      Is that such a silly notion?
  • mafzal9 2 hours ago
    Arm is trying to expend it's horizons every where as in the previous year ARM acquired the Arduino.