This TCO calculator compares Kemp perpetual ADC licensing, Kemp metered consumption and competitive models available from F5. The calculator allows for you to size your environment and estimate TCO by inputting the number and capacity range of load balancers needed to support your application infrastructure. Based on this input, the calculator provides insight on estimated TCO for your ADC requirements comparing the 3 approaches mentioned above. For environments where the flexibility and elasticity of per-application ADC deployments are required, Kemp's metered licensing model will typically provide the most competitive 3 year TCO advantage.
Benefits of Application ADC Deployments
With metered licensing, the focus is on overall usage instead of the number of size of ADC instances so that the problem of over provisioning is not an issue and capacity is available on demand. Metered licensing delivers maximum benefit where there are many ADC instances, where high availability is a requirement and where usage is variable as costs are only related to usage avoiding the complexities of ‘how many’ and ‘how big’.
TCO Calculator helps you understand your costs
Kemp's metered licensing enables flexibility to deploy ADCs on a per-application basis. This reduces single points of failure that can impact multiple applications. Since this consumption model is based on usage as opposed to instances and their maximum performance, it also provides scalability without the need to pre-invest in capacity prior to it actually being needed.
This calculator provides load balancer TCO insight based on 3 common application usage patterns
This models a scenario where there are variable peaks above a baseline of traffic. You define how many peaks occur over the period and the maximum value of the peaks. The model will size the ADC requirements to accommodate these peaks.
This scenario reflects the traffic profile of organizations that have busy periods such as a holiday season sale or student registration where traffic levels are significantly above normal. The model will size and cost perpetual ADCs for the peak traffic while metered licensing will be sized and costed on the baseline with peaks being treated as overage. Metering of traffic is ideal for this scenario as it avoids the over-provisioning cost associated with perpetual licenses.
To model a scenario where ADC traffic is growing, the model will size requirements based on the growth rate entered and the capacity required in month 36 of the 3 year model. The model assumes that growth will be steady and not follow a ‘hockey stick’ type pattern.
This is a common usage model where an organization is experiencing steady traffic growth as their business expands and/or deploys new applications. When modelling this scenario, the metered licensing subscription cost is optimized by moving up subscription tiers as traffic grows. Traditional ADCs are modelled to deliver the final capacity from day 1.
Metered licensing protects against the cost of overprovisioning of resources to meet anticipated growth. In addition to the results produced by the model, you should consider the implications of a faster growth rate where perpetual licensed ADCs cannot provide the capacity required.
With this on-off scenario, we model usage based on a requirement to go from zero to the capacity defined. The model used the on-demand peak provided and the frequency to calculate usage.
The use cases for this temporary ADC capacity scenario are many. It could be a requirement to provide a temporary test environment to support a software release every three months or to support a cloud migration which requires temporary ADC capacity in multiple locations during the transition.
Rather than having idle ADC resources with a perpetual model, an on-demand metered licensing approach provides capacity when needed without any idle capacity costs.